Use of benchmark dose-volume histograms for selection of the optimal technique between three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in prostate cancer

Chunhui Luo, Claus Chunli Yang, Samir Narayan, Robin L Stern, Julian R Perks, Zelanna Goldberg, Janice Ryu, James A. Purdy, Srinivasan Vijayakumar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate our own benchmark dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of bladder and rectum for both conventional three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and to evaluate quantitatively the benefits of using IMRT vs. 3D-CRT in treating localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: During the implementation of IMRT for prostate cancer, our policy was to plan each patient with both 3D-CRT and IMRT. This study included 31 patients with T1b to T2c localized prostate cancer, for whom we completed double-planning using both 3D-CRT and IMRT techniques. The target volumes included prostate, either with or without proximal seminal vesicles. Bladder and rectum DVH data were summarized to obtain an average DVH for each technique and then compared using two-tailed paired t test analysis. Results: For 3D-CRT our bladder doses were as follows: mean 28.8 Gy, v60 16.4%, v70 10.9%; rectal doses were: mean 39.3 Gy, v60 21.8%, v70 13.6%. IMRT plans resulted in similar mean dose values: bladder 26.4 Gy, rectum 34.9 Gy, but lower values of v70 for the bladder (7.8%) and rectum (9.3%). These benchmark DVHs have resulted in a critical evaluation of our 3D-CRT techniques over time. Conclusion: Our institution has developed benchmark DVHs for bladder and rectum based on our clinical experience with 3D-CRT and IMRT. We use these standards as well as differences in individual cases to make decisions on whether patients may benefit from IMRT treatment rather than 3D-CRT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1253-1262
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume66
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 15 2006

Fingerprint

Benchmarking
histograms
radiant flux density
radiation therapy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Radiotherapy
bladder
cancer
rectum
dosage
Rectum
Urinary Bladder
Seminal Vesicles
Individuality
planning
Prostate

Keywords

  • Benchmark
  • Dose-volume histogram
  • Intensity-modulated radiation therapy
  • Prostate cancer
  • Three-dimensional-conformal radiation therapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation

Cite this

Use of benchmark dose-volume histograms for selection of the optimal technique between three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in prostate cancer. / Luo, Chunhui; Yang, Claus Chunli; Narayan, Samir; Stern, Robin L; Perks, Julian R; Goldberg, Zelanna; Ryu, Janice; Purdy, James A.; Vijayakumar, Srinivasan.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, Vol. 66, No. 4, 15.11.2006, p. 1253-1262.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b5127b06a2fd44408a45fadb6eb27535,
title = "Use of benchmark dose-volume histograms for selection of the optimal technique between three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in prostate cancer",
abstract = "Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate our own benchmark dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of bladder and rectum for both conventional three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and to evaluate quantitatively the benefits of using IMRT vs. 3D-CRT in treating localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: During the implementation of IMRT for prostate cancer, our policy was to plan each patient with both 3D-CRT and IMRT. This study included 31 patients with T1b to T2c localized prostate cancer, for whom we completed double-planning using both 3D-CRT and IMRT techniques. The target volumes included prostate, either with or without proximal seminal vesicles. Bladder and rectum DVH data were summarized to obtain an average DVH for each technique and then compared using two-tailed paired t test analysis. Results: For 3D-CRT our bladder doses were as follows: mean 28.8 Gy, v60 16.4{\%}, v70 10.9{\%}; rectal doses were: mean 39.3 Gy, v60 21.8{\%}, v70 13.6{\%}. IMRT plans resulted in similar mean dose values: bladder 26.4 Gy, rectum 34.9 Gy, but lower values of v70 for the bladder (7.8{\%}) and rectum (9.3{\%}). These benchmark DVHs have resulted in a critical evaluation of our 3D-CRT techniques over time. Conclusion: Our institution has developed benchmark DVHs for bladder and rectum based on our clinical experience with 3D-CRT and IMRT. We use these standards as well as differences in individual cases to make decisions on whether patients may benefit from IMRT treatment rather than 3D-CRT.",
keywords = "Benchmark, Dose-volume histogram, Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, Prostate cancer, Three-dimensional-conformal radiation therapy",
author = "Chunhui Luo and Yang, {Claus Chunli} and Samir Narayan and Stern, {Robin L} and Perks, {Julian R} and Zelanna Goldberg and Janice Ryu and Purdy, {James A.} and Srinivasan Vijayakumar",
year = "2006",
month = "11",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.06.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "66",
pages = "1253--1262",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of benchmark dose-volume histograms for selection of the optimal technique between three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in prostate cancer

AU - Luo, Chunhui

AU - Yang, Claus Chunli

AU - Narayan, Samir

AU - Stern, Robin L

AU - Perks, Julian R

AU - Goldberg, Zelanna

AU - Ryu, Janice

AU - Purdy, James A.

AU - Vijayakumar, Srinivasan

PY - 2006/11/15

Y1 - 2006/11/15

N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate our own benchmark dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of bladder and rectum for both conventional three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and to evaluate quantitatively the benefits of using IMRT vs. 3D-CRT in treating localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: During the implementation of IMRT for prostate cancer, our policy was to plan each patient with both 3D-CRT and IMRT. This study included 31 patients with T1b to T2c localized prostate cancer, for whom we completed double-planning using both 3D-CRT and IMRT techniques. The target volumes included prostate, either with or without proximal seminal vesicles. Bladder and rectum DVH data were summarized to obtain an average DVH for each technique and then compared using two-tailed paired t test analysis. Results: For 3D-CRT our bladder doses were as follows: mean 28.8 Gy, v60 16.4%, v70 10.9%; rectal doses were: mean 39.3 Gy, v60 21.8%, v70 13.6%. IMRT plans resulted in similar mean dose values: bladder 26.4 Gy, rectum 34.9 Gy, but lower values of v70 for the bladder (7.8%) and rectum (9.3%). These benchmark DVHs have resulted in a critical evaluation of our 3D-CRT techniques over time. Conclusion: Our institution has developed benchmark DVHs for bladder and rectum based on our clinical experience with 3D-CRT and IMRT. We use these standards as well as differences in individual cases to make decisions on whether patients may benefit from IMRT treatment rather than 3D-CRT.

AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate our own benchmark dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of bladder and rectum for both conventional three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and to evaluate quantitatively the benefits of using IMRT vs. 3D-CRT in treating localized prostate cancer. Methods and Materials: During the implementation of IMRT for prostate cancer, our policy was to plan each patient with both 3D-CRT and IMRT. This study included 31 patients with T1b to T2c localized prostate cancer, for whom we completed double-planning using both 3D-CRT and IMRT techniques. The target volumes included prostate, either with or without proximal seminal vesicles. Bladder and rectum DVH data were summarized to obtain an average DVH for each technique and then compared using two-tailed paired t test analysis. Results: For 3D-CRT our bladder doses were as follows: mean 28.8 Gy, v60 16.4%, v70 10.9%; rectal doses were: mean 39.3 Gy, v60 21.8%, v70 13.6%. IMRT plans resulted in similar mean dose values: bladder 26.4 Gy, rectum 34.9 Gy, but lower values of v70 for the bladder (7.8%) and rectum (9.3%). These benchmark DVHs have resulted in a critical evaluation of our 3D-CRT techniques over time. Conclusion: Our institution has developed benchmark DVHs for bladder and rectum based on our clinical experience with 3D-CRT and IMRT. We use these standards as well as differences in individual cases to make decisions on whether patients may benefit from IMRT treatment rather than 3D-CRT.

KW - Benchmark

KW - Dose-volume histogram

KW - Intensity-modulated radiation therapy

KW - Prostate cancer

KW - Three-dimensional-conformal radiation therapy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750420482&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750420482&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.06.010

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.06.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 17145540

AN - SCOPUS:33750420482

VL - 66

SP - 1253

EP - 1262

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 4

ER -