Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:09:48.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

3D conformal, IMRT and VMAT for the treatment of head and neck cancer: a brief literature review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 December 2020

Kazi T. Afrin  and
Salahuddin Ahmad Open the ORCID record for Salahuddin Ahmad [Opens in a new window]
Kazi T. Afrin
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Gono Bishwabidyalay, P.O. Mirzanagar, Savar, Dhaka, 1344, Bangladesh
Salahuddin Ahmad*
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Salahuddin Ahmad, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 800 NE 10th St, SCC L100, Oklahoma City, OK73104, USA. E-mail: Salahuddin-ahmad@ouhsc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aim:

The objective of this study has been to identify monitor unit (MU) and treatment time variations, volume coverage dissimilarity among 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans for head and neck cancer (HNC) based on literature review.

Methods:

A number of HNC cases were studied with the investigation of conformity and homogeneity index.

Results:

When high-dose modulation was required around small organs at risk (OARs), a clinically acceptable IMRT plan was achieved as VMAT usually required longer dose optimisation time. The greatest benefit of VMAT has been rapid treatment delivery allowing improved patient comfort, reduced intra-fraction motion and increased patient throughput. In some papers, 3D-CRT was shown not to meet well the requirements on parotid glands. One paper showed that cerebellum dose was lower for 3D-CRT than IMRT. However, it was found in other papers that OAR sparing with 3D-CRT was reasonable but in complex cases not enough.

Conclusions:

IMRT usually consists of several treatment fields with different directions, hundreds of beam lets with modulated intensity, an advantage over 3D-CRT, whereas VMAT has advantage over IMRT due to rotating beam utilisation. VMAT has lower total MU and treatment times than IMRT and 3D-CRT, while maintaining similar dosimetric endpoints.

Keywords

Dosimetric comparison3D-CRTIMRTVMATHead & Neck Cancer
Type
Literature Review
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , June 2022 , pp. 259 - 262
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Verbakel, W, Cuijpers, JP, Hoffmans, D, et al. Volumetric intensity modulated arc therapy vs. conventional IMRT in head-and-neck cancer: a comparative planning and dosimetric study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 74 (1): 252–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puri, DR, Chou, W, Lee, N. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy in head and neck cancers: dosimetric advantages and update of clinical results. Am J Clin Oncol 2005; 28 (4): 415–423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, X, Eisbruch, A. IMRT for head and neck cancer: reducing xerostomia and dysphagia. J Radiat Res 2016; 57 (S1): i69–i75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elith, C, Dempsey, SE, Findlay, N et al. An Introduction to the Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques, Tomotherapy, and VMAT. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2011; 42 (1): 37–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byungchul, C. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy: a review with a physics perspective. Radiat Oncol J 2018; 36 (1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Mann, AK, Indira, AP, David, MP. Recent advances in radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: a comprehensive review. Int J Contemp Med Res 2017; 4 (4): 927–932.Google Scholar
Gomez, D, Cahlon, O, Mechalakos, J et al. An investigation of intensity-modulated radiation therapy versus conventional two-dimensional and 3D-conformal radiation therapy for early stage larynx cancer. Radiat Oncol 2010; 5: 74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pfister, DG, Laurie, SA, Weinstein, GS et al. American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline for the use of larynx-preservation strategies in the treatment of laryngeal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3693–3704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teshima, T, Chatani, M, Inoue, T. Radiation therapy for early glottic cancer (T1N0M0): I. Results of conventional open field technique. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989; 17: 1199–1202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chera, BS, Amdur, RJ, Morris, CG et al. Carotid-sparing intensity- modulated radiotherapy for early stage squamous cell carcinoma of the true vocal cord. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 77 (5): 1380–1385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenthal, DI, Fuller, CD, Barker, JL et al. Simple carotid-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique and preliminary experience for T1–2 glottic cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 77 (2): 455–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dobbler, B, Weidner, K, Koelbl, O. Application of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in a dual vendor environment. Radiat Oncol 2010; 5: 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthiesen, C, Herman, TDLF, Singh, H et al. Dosimetric and radiobiologic comparison of 3D conformal, IMRT, VMAT and proton therapy for the treatment of early-stage glottic cancer. J Med Imag Radiat Oncol 2015; 59: 221–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curran, B. Where goes the Peacock? Med Dosim 2001; 26 (1): 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, TS, Ritter, MA, Tomé, WA et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy: emerging cancer treatment technology. Br J Cancer 2005; 92 (10): 1819–1824.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Studenski, MT, Bar-Ad, V, Siglin, J et al. Clinical experience transitioning from IMRT to VMAT for head and neck cancer. Med Dosim 2013; 38 (2): 171–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teoh, M, Clark, CH, Wood, K et al. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a review of current literature and clinical use in practice. Br J Radiol 2011; 84: 967–996.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holt, A, Gestel, DV, Arends, MP et al. Multi-institutional comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy vs. intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head-and-neck cancer: a planning study. Radiat Oncol 2013; 8: 26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peszynska-Piorun, M, Malicki, J, Golusinski, W. Doses in organs at risk during head and neck radiotherapy using IMRT and 3D-CRT. Radiol Oncol 2012; 46 (4): 328–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portakal, ZG, Tunali, C. A comparative treatment planning study of intensity modulated radiotherapy and 3-D conformal radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. In: Conference: RAD 2014. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2215.2168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankaralingam, M, Glegg, M, Smith, S et al. Quantitative comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy plan quality in sino-nasal cancer. J Med Phys 2012; 37 (1): 8–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnston, M, Clifford, S, Bromley, R et al. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy in head and neck radiotherapy: a planning comparison using simultaneous integrated boost for nasopharynx and oropharynx carcinoma. Clin Oncol 2011; 23 (8): 503–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, BC, Lopes, MC, Mateus, J et al. Radiobiological evaluation of forward and inverse IMRT using different fractionations for head and neck tumours. Radiat Oncol 2010; 5: 57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nithya, L, Raj, NA, Kumar, A et al. Comparative analysis of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for base of tongue cancer. J Med Phys 2014; 39 (2): 121–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, R, Rawat, S, Bhushan, M. RapidArc vs IMRT: our experience in head and neck cancers-a dosimetric study. J Radiol Radiat Ther 2017; 5 (1): 1067.Google Scholar