DC van Rooijen, MSc; JB van de Kamer, PhD; MCCM Hulshof, MD, PhD; CCE Koning, MD, PhD; A Bel, PhD.
Improving bladder cancer treatment with radiotherapy using separate intensity modulated radiotherapy plans for boost and elective fields
Article first published online: 9 JUN 2010
© 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists
Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology
Volume 54, Issue 3, pages 256–263, June 2010
How to Cite
Van Rooijen, D., Van De Kamer, J., Hulshof, M., Koning, C. and Bel, A. (2010), Improving bladder cancer treatment with radiotherapy using separate intensity modulated radiotherapy plans for boost and elective fields. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology, 54: 256–263. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2010.02169.x
Conflicts of interest: This research was partly financially supported Nucletron B.V., Veenendaal, The Netherlands.
- Issue published online: 9 JUN 2010
- Article first published online: 9 JUN 2010
- Submitted 25 September 2009; accepted: 14 March 2010.
- bladder cancer;
- intensity-modulated radiotherapy;
- pelvic lymph nodes;
- small intestines
The aim of this study is to investigate to what extent IMRT can decrease the dose to the organs at risk in bladder cancer treatment compared with conformal treatment while making separate treatment plans for the elective field and the boost. Special attention is paid to sparing small intestines. Twenty patients who were treated with the field-in-field technique (FiF) were re-planned with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using five and seven beams, respectively. Separate treatment plans were made for the elective field (including the pelvic lymph nodes) and the boost, which enables position correction for bone and tumour separately. The prescribed dose was 40 Gy to the elective field and 55 or 60 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV). For bladder and rectum, V45Gy and V55Gy were compared, and for small intestines, V25Gy and V40Gy. The dose distribution with IMRT conformed better to the shape of the target. There was no significant difference between the techniques in dose to the healthy bladder. The median V40Gy of the small intestines decreased from 114 to 66 cc (P = 0.001) with five beam IMRT, and to 55 cc (P = 0.001) with seven beam IMRT compared with FiF. V45Gy for rectum decreased from 34.2% to 17.5% (P = 0.004) for both five and seven beam plans, while V55Gy for rectum remained the same. With IMRT, a statistically significant dose decrease to the small intestines can be achieved while covering both tumour and elective PTV adequately.