Abstract:Background/purpose: To access the comparative dosimetric and radiobiological advantages of two methods of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-based hybrid radiotherapy planning for stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Two hybrid planning methods were respectively characterized by conventional fraction radiotherapy (CFRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and CFRT and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) planning. All plans were retrospectively completed using the 2 methods for 20 patients with stage III NSCLC. CFRT and SBRT dose regimes 2 Gy × 30 f and 12.5 Gy × 4 f were, respectively, used for planning target volume of lymph node (PTVLN) and planning target volume of the primary tumor (PTVPT), while dose regimes 2 Gy × 26 f for PTVLN and sequential 2 Gy × 4 f for PTVLN combined with 12.5 Gy × 4 f for PTVPT were adopted for CFRT and SIB plans. SBRT and SIB EQD2 dose were calculated voxel by voxel, and then, respectively, superimposed with 30-fraction and 26-fraction CFRT plan dose to achieve biological equivalent dose (BED) dosimetric parameters of CFRT and SBRT and CFRT and SIB plans. Tumor control probability (TCP)/normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) was, respectively, calculated by equivalent uniform dose/Lyman–Kutcher–Burman models. BED plan parameters and TCP/NTCP were analyzed between 2 methods of hybrid planning. Primary tumor/lymph node (LN)/total TCP values were, respectively, evaluated as a function of the radiation dose needed to control 50% of tumor (TCD50) for 20 patients. Dosimetric errors were analyzed by nontransit electronic portal imaging device dosimetry measurement during hybrid plan delivery. Results: Statistically lower BED plan parameters of PTVLN D2 and homogeneity index resulted in slightly lower averaged LN/total TCP curves by CFRT and SIB planning. The gaps between Max and Min LN/total TCP curves were significantly closer for CFRT and SIB planning, which indicated better robustness of LN/total TCPs. A lower esophagus dose resulted in a lower esophagus NTCP by CFRT and SIB planning, which may be compromised by 1 week shorter overall treatment time by CFRT and SIB irradiation. Spinal cord Dmax was significantly reduced by CFRT and SIB plans. The dose verification results of the subplans involved in hybrid plans were acceptable, which showed that the 2 methods of hybrid planning could be delivered accurately in our center. Conclusion: CFRT and SIB plannings have more advantages on BED plan parameters and TCP/NTCP than CFRT and SBRT planning, and both methods of IMRT-based hybrid planning could be executed accurately for stage III NSCLC. The effectiveness of the results needs to be validated in the hybrid trial.

A Novel Integrated Vmat/Imrt Technique for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

EP-1567: A Hybrid IMRT/VMAT Technique for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Volumetric-modulated Arc Therapy Using Multicriteria Optimization for Body and Extremity Sarcoma.

SU‐E‐T‐16: A Hybrid VMAT/IMRT Technique for the Treatment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

The Therapeutic Value of Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy In Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Primary Tumors: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis Based On Propensity Score Matching And Comparison With Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy

SU-E-T-810: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Conventional Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer with Simultaneously Integrated Boost Radiation Therapy: A Planning Comparison Study

Cardiac Dose Control and Optimization Strategy for Left Breast Cancer Radiotherapy With Non-Uniform VMAT Technology

Sparing Organs at Risk with Simultaneous Integrated Boost Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: an Automatic Treatment Planning Study

Evaluation of Hybrid VMAT Advantages and Robustness Considering Setup Errors Using Surface Guided Dose Accumulation for Internal Lymph Mammary Nodes Irradiation of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy

Voxel-Level BED Corrected Dosimetric and Radiobiological Assessment of 2 Kinds of Hybrid Radiotherapy Planning Methods for Stage III NSCLC

Feasibility of implementing stereotactic body radiation therapy using a non-commercial volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment planning system for early stage lung cancer

Comprehensive dosimetric planning comparison for early-stage, non-small cell lung cancer with SABR: fixed-beam IMRT versus VMAT versus TomoTherapy

Dosimetric Comparisons of VMAT, IMRT and 3DCRT for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer with Simultaneous Integrated Boost.

Dosimetric Evaluation of Different IMRT Treatment Plans for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Comparative dosimetric study of h-IMRT and VMAT plans for breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery

Dosimetric Comparison for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy on the Left-Sided Chest Wall and Internal Mammary Nodes Irradiation in Treating Post-Mastectomy Breast Cancer

Dosimetric Comparison of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Hybrid Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy/Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Techniques for Right Breast Cancer

WE-C-M100F-05: Methodology and Guidelines in Treatment Planning of IMRT for Lung Cancers

Dosimetric comparison of commonly used volumetric modulated arc therapy field arrangements based on flattening filter-free beams for synchronous bilateral breast carcinoma radiotherapy

Hypofractionated Volumetric-Modulated Arc Radiotherapy for Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Not Suitable for Surgery or Conventional Chemoradiotherapy or SBRT

Volumetric modulated arc therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A dosimetric comparison with TomoTherapy and step-and-shoot IMRT