30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison in head-and-neck radiotherapy using JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Dosimetric and radiobiological evaluations for the Jaws-only Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (JO-IMRT) technique for head and neck jaws-only intensity-modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) and 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). To compare the head-and-neck therapeutic approaches utilizing JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT techniques, different radiation dose indices were calculated, including: conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and radiobiological variables like Niemierko's equivalent uniform dose based tumor control probability (TCP) of planning target volume (PTV), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of organs at risk (OAR) (brainstem, spinal cord, and parotid grand).

          Materials and methods

          Twenty-five nasopharynx patients were studied using the Prowess Panther Treatment Planning System (Prowess Inc). The results were compared with the dose distribution obtained using 3D-CRT.

          Results

          Regarding tumor coverage and CI, JO-IMRT showed better results than 3D-CRT. The average doses received by the PTVs were quite similar: 72.1 ± 0.8 Gy by 3D-CRT and 72.5 ± 0.6 Gy by JO-IMRT plans (p > 0.05). The mean doses received by the parotid gland were 56.7 ± 0.7 Gy by 3D-CRT and 26.8 ± 0.3 Gy by JO-IMRT (p > 0.05). The HI and CI were 0.13 ± 0.01 and 0.14 ± 0.05 and (p > 0.05) by 3D-CRT and 0.83 ± 0.05 and 0.73 ± 0.10 by JO-IMRT (p < 0.05). The average TCP of PTV was 0.82 ± 0.08 by 3D-CRT and 0.92 ± 0.02 by JO-IMRT. Moreover, the NTCP of the parotid glands, brain stem, and spinal cord were lower using the JO-IMRT than 3D-CRT plans. In comparison to the 3D-CRT approach, the JO-IMRT technique was able to boost dose coverage to the PTV, improve the target's CI and HI, and spare the parotid glands. This suggests the power of the JO-IMRT over 3D-CRT in head-and-neck radiotherapy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The ever‐increasing importance of cancer as a leading cause of premature death worldwide

            The relative importance of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer as leading causes of premature death are examined in this communication. CVD and cancer are now the leading causes in 127 countries, with CVD leading in 70 countries (including Brazil and India) and cancer leading in 57 countries (including China). Such observations can be seen as part of a late phase of an epidemiologic transition, taking place in the second half of the 20th century and the first half of the present one, in which the dominance of infectious diseases is progressively superseded by noncommunicable diseases. According to present ranks and recent trends, cancer may surpass CVD as the leading cause of premature death in most countries over the course of this century. Clearly, governments must factor in these transitions in developing cancer policies for the local disease profile.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Current Challenges in Cancer Treatment.

              In this review, we highlight the current concepts and discuss some of the current challenges and future prospects in cancer therapy. We frequently use the example of lung cancer.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Saudi J Biol Sci
                Saudi J Biol Sci
                Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences
                Elsevier
                1319-562X
                2213-7106
                02 June 2022
                August 2022
                02 June 2022
                : 29
                : 8
                : 103336
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, 298-300A Nguyen Tat Thanh Street, Ward 13, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam
                [b ]Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario, N6A 5K8, Canada
                [c ]Department of Radiation Technology, Ho Chi Minh City Oncology Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City 702000, Viet Nam
                [d ]VKTECH Research Center, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, 298-300A Nguyen Tat Thanh Street, Ward 13, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam
                [e ]Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Radiology and Medical Imaging Department, Alkharj, Saudi Arabia
                [f ]Department of Nuclear Engineering , Faculty of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University P. O. Box 80204, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
                [g ]K. A. CARE Energy Research and Innovation Center, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
                [h ]Department of Basic Sciences, Deanship of Preparatory Year and Supporting Studies, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O.Box 1982, Dammam 34212, Saudi Arabia
                [i ]Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 1A1, Canada
                [j ]Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, M5G 1X6, Canada
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding authors at: Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, 298-300A Nguyen Tat Thanh Street, Ward 13, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5T 1P5, Canada, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, P.O.Box 422, Alkharj, 11943, Saudi Arabia. dttai@ 123456ntt.edu.vn a.sulieman@ 123456psau.edu.sa James.Chow@ 123456rmp.uhn.ca
                Article
                S1319-562X(22)00252-2 103336
                10.1016/j.sjbs.2022.103336
                9213241
                35754762
                03bd4425-92b7-4ab2-a7ab-60d1f27ba499
                © 2022 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 24 February 2022
                : 26 April 2022
                : 29 May 2022
                Categories
                Original Article

                3d-crt technique,jo-imrt technique,dosimetric and radiobiological evaluation,equivalent uniform dose (eud),plan evaluation,jo-imrt, jaws-only intensity-modulated radiotherapy,3d-crt, 3d conformal radiation therapy,ci, conformity index,hi, homogeneity index,tcp, tumor control probability,ntcp, normal tissue complication probability,ptv, planning target volume,eud, equivalent uniform dose

                Comments

                Comment on this article