Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A quantitative treatment planning study evaluating the potential of dose escalation in conformal radiotherapy of the oesophagus.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the reduction in radiation dose to normal thoracic structures through the use of conformal radiotherapy techniques in the treatment of oesophageal cancer, and to quantify the resultant potential for dose escalation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three different CT-derived treatment plans were created and compared for each of ten patients. A two-phase treatment with conventional straight-edged fields and standard blocks (CV2), a two-phase conformal plan (CF2), and a three-phase conformal plan where the third phase was delivered to the gross tumour only (CF3), were considered for each patient. Escalated dose levels were determined for techniques CF2 and CF3, which by virtue of the conformal field shaping, did not increase the mean lung dose. The resulting increase in tumour control probability (TCP) was estimated.

RESULTS: A two-phase conformal technique (CF2) reduced the volume of lung irradiated to 18 Gy from 19.7+/-11.8 (1 SD) to 17.1+/-12.3% (P=0.004), and reduced the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) from 2.4+/-4.0 to 0.7+/-1.6% (P=0.02) for a standard prescribed dose of 55 Gy. Consequently, technique CF2 permitted a target dose of 59.1+/-3.2 Gy without increasing the mean lung dose. Technique CF3 facilitated a prescribed dose of 60.7+/-4.3 Gy to the target, the additional 5 Gy increasing the TCP from 53. 1+/-5.5 to 68.9+/-4.1%. When the spinal cord tolerance was raised from 45 to 48 Gy, technique CF3 allowed 63.6+/-4.l Gy to be delivered to the target, thereby increasing the TCP to 78.1+/-3.2%.

CONCLUSIONS: Conformal radiotherapy techniques offer the potential for a 5-10 Gy escalation in dose delivered to the oesophagus, without increasing the mean lung dose. This is expected to increase local tumour control by 15-25%.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app