Baumann Brian C, Noa Kate, Wileyto E Paul, Bekelman Justin E, Deville Curtiland, Vapiwala Neha, Kirk Maura, Both Stefan, Dolney Derek, Kassaee Ali, Christodouleas John P
Department of Radiation Oncology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Med Dosim. 2015 Winter;40(4):372-7. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2015.06.001. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
Trials of adjuvant radiation after cystectomy are under development. There are no studies comparing radiation techniques to inform trial design. This study assesses the effect on bowel and rectal dose of 3 different modalities treating 2 proposed alternative clinical target volumes (CTVs). Contours of the bowel, rectum, CTV-pelvic sidewall (common/internal/external iliac and obturator nodes), and CTV-comprehensive (CTV-pelvic sidewall plus cystectomy bed and presacral regions) were drawn on simulation images of 7 post-cystectomy patients. We optimized 3-dimensional conformal radiation (3-D), intensity-modulated radiation (IMRT), and single-field uniform dose (SFUD) scanning proton plans for each CTV. Mixed models regression was used to compare plans for bowel and rectal volumes exposed to 35% (V35%), 65% (V65%), and 95% (V95%) of the prescribed dose. For any given treatment modality, treating the larger CTV-comprehensive volume compared with treating only the CTV-pelvic sidewall nodes significantly increased rectal dose (V35% rectum, V65% rectum, and V95% rectum; p < 0.001 for all comparisons), but it did not produce significant differences in bowel dose (V95% bowel, V65% bowel, or V35% bowel). The 3-D plans, compared with both the IMRT and the SFUD plans, had a significantly greater V65% bowel and V95% bowel for each proposed CTV (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The effect of treatment modality on rectal dosimetry differed by CTV, but it generally favored the IMRT and the SFUD plans over the 3-D plans. Comparison of the IMRT plan vs the SFUD plan yielded mixed results with no consistent advantage for the SFUD plan over the IMRT plan. Targeting a CTV that spares the cystectomy bed and presacral region may marginally improve rectal toxicity but would not be expected to improve the bowel toxicity associated with any given modality of adjuvant radiation. Using the IMRT or the SFUD plans instead of the 3-D conformal plan may improve both bowel and rectal toxicity.
膀胱切除术后辅助放疗的试验正在开展中。目前尚无比较放疗技术以指导试验设计的研究。本研究评估了3种不同放疗方式对2种拟议的替代临床靶区(CTV)进行治疗时对肠道和直肠剂量的影响。在7例膀胱切除术后患者的模拟图像上勾勒出肠道、直肠、CTV-盆腔侧壁(髂总/内/外动脉及闭孔淋巴结)以及CTV-综合靶区(CTV-盆腔侧壁加膀胱切除床和骶前区域)的轮廓。针对每个CTV优化了三维适形放疗(3-D)、调强放疗(IMRT)和单野均匀剂量(SFUD)扫描质子计划。采用混合模型回归比较接受35%(V35%)、65%(V65%)和95%(V95%)处方剂量照射的肠道和直肠体积的计划。对于任何给定的治疗方式,与仅治疗CTV-盆腔侧壁淋巴结相比,治疗更大的CTV-综合靶区体积会显著增加直肠剂量(直肠V35%、直肠V65%和直肠V95%;所有比较p<0.001),但对肠道剂量无显著差异(肠道V95%、肠道V65%或肠道V35%)。与IMRT计划和SFUD计划相比,3-D计划对于每个拟议的CTV均有显著更大的肠道V65%和肠道V95%(所有比较p<0.001)。治疗方式对直肠剂量测定的影响因CTV而异,但总体上IMRT计划和SFUD计划优于3-D计划。IMRT计划与SFUD计划的比较结果不一,SFUD计划并不始终优于IMRT计划。靶向不包括膀胱切除床和骶前区域的CTV可能会在一定程度上改善直肠毒性,但预计不会改善与任何给定辅助放疗方式相关的肠道毒性。使用IMRT计划或SFUD计划而非三维适形计划可能会改善肠道和直肠毒性。