Radiobiological comparison of two radiotherapy treatment techniques for high-risk prostate cancer

Abstract Background To make a radiobiological comparison, for high risk prostate cancer (T3a, PSA > 20 ng/ml or Gleason > 7) of two radiotherapy treatment techniques. One technique consists of a treatment in three phases of the pelvic nodes, vesicles and prostate using a conventional fractiona...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy 2013, Vol.18 (5), p.265-271
Main Authors: Hernández, Trinitat García, González, Aurora Vicedo, Peidro, Jorge Pastor, Ferrando, Juan V. Roselló, González, Luis Brualla, Cabañero, Domingo Granero, Torrecilla, José López
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Equivalent dose at fractionation of 2 Gy (EQD2)
Hematology, Oncology and Palliative Medicine
NTCP
Original
Prostate
Radiobiology
Radiology
Simultaneous integrated boost
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background To make a radiobiological comparison, for high risk prostate cancer (T3a, PSA > 20 ng/ml or Gleason > 7) of two radiotherapy treatment techniques. One technique consists of a treatment in three phases of the pelvic nodes, vesicles and prostate using a conventional fractionation scheme of 2 Gy/fraction (SIMRT). The other technique consists of a treatment in two phases that gives simultaneously different dose levels in each phase, 2 Gy/fraction, 2.25 Gy/fraction and 2.5 Gy/fraction to the pelvic nodes, vesicles and prostate, respectively (SIBIMRT). Materials and methods The equivalent dose at fractionation of 2 Gy (EQD2 ), calculated using the linear quadratic model with α / βprostate = 1.5 Gy, was the same for both treatment strategies. For comparison the parameters employed were D95, mean dose and Tumour Control Probabilities for prostate PTV and D15, D25, D35, D50, mean dose and Normal Tissue Complication Probabilities for the rectum and bladder, with physical doses converted to EQD2 . Parameters were obtained for α / βprostate = 1.5, 3 and 10 Gy and for α / βoar = 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8. Results For prostate PTV, both treatment strategies are equivalent for α / βprostate = 1.5 Gy but for higher α / βprostate , EQD2 and TCP, decrease for the SIBIMRT technique. For the rectum and bladder when α / βoar ≤ 2 Gy, EQD2 and NTCP are lower for the SIMRT technique or equal in both techniques. For α / βoar ≥ 2–3 Gy, EQD2 and NTCP increase for the SIMRT treatment. Conclusions A comparison between two radiotherapy techniques is presented. The SIBIMRT technique reduces EQD2 and NTCP for α / βoar from 2 to 8 Gy.
ISSN:1507-1367
2083-4640
DOI:10.1016/j.rpor.2012.12.006