[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
IJRR Information::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Subscription::
News & Events::
Web Mail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
ISSN
Hard Copy 2322-3243
Online 2345-4229
..
Online Submission
Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.
..

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE

:: Volume 20, Issue 3 (7-2022) ::
Int J Radiat Res 2022, 20(3): 593-600 Back to browse issues page
Dosimetric comparison of perineal and intra-vaginal interstitial template in image guided high dose rate brachytherapy for carcinoma cervix
V. Kaliyaperumal , S. Banerjee , T. Kataria , S.K. Abraham , M. Veni S , S. Tamilselvan , D. Gupta , K. Dayanithi , D. Manigandan , S.R. Mishra , S.S. Bisht
Division Of Radiation Oncology, Medanta Cancer Institute, Medanta The Medicity, Gurgaon, Haryana, India , venkphysics@gmail.com
Abstract:   (917 Views)
Background: The purpose of this study is to introduce a novel brachytherapy template called the Medanta anterior oblique‑lateral oblique template (MAOLOT), which has been designed for carcinoma cervix, and conduct its dosimetric comparison with Martinez universal perineal interstitial template (MUPIT). Materials and Methods: Ten patients were chosen for this study with twelve intracavitary (IC) and/or interstitial (IS) applications. Plans were generated with basal points (BP), target points (TP), and inverse plan simulated annealing (IPSA) along with local graphical optimization (LGrO). Dosimetric and volumetric quantifiers including conformal index (COIN), dose non-uniformity ratio (DNR), dose homogeneity index (DHI), target dose homogeneity index (TDHI), and overdose volume index (OVI) were evaluated. Results: IPSA provided a better solution for DNR (range 0.25-0.48, p=0.04) in MUPIT and BP+LGrO method was appreciable (p=0.08) in OVI. Mean doses of D90, D95, and D98 of targets of LGrO plan were greater than their respective counterparts. Dose to 1cc and 2cc bladder was the highest for IPSA+LGrO plans as compared to forward optimization plans. Better COIN values were obtained for BP and TP plans with LGrO (p=0.043 (BP+LGrO), p=0.022 (TP+LGrO)). Mean EQD2 dose of 1cc and 2cc bladder was the highest for the IPSA plan as compared to other forward optimization plans. Conclusion: In IC+IS application, small adjustments using LGrO improves the target coverage and reduces the normal structure dose. IPSA provides better results if plan evaluation is performed carefully. MAOLOT creates the intracavitary and interstitial dose distribution, which is comparable to MUPIT.
Keywords: Image guided brachytherapy, optimization, intracavitary, interstitial, cervical cancer.
Full-Text [PDF 2068 kb]   (541 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
References
1. Torre LA, Islami F, Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A (2017) Global cancer in women: Burden and Trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 26(4): 444-457. [DOI:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0858] [PMID]
2. Cihoric N, Tsikkinis A, Tapia C, Aebersold DM, Zlobec I, Lössl K (2015) Dose escalated intensity modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of cervical cancer. Radiat Oncol, 24(10): 240. [DOI:10.1186/s13014-015-0551-0] [PMID] []
3. Baltas D (2006) The physics of modern brachytherapy for oncoloogy. 1st ed. New York: Taylor & Francis. [DOI:10.1201/9781420012422]
4. Murakami N, Kobayashi K, Kato T, Nakamura S, Wakita A, Okamoto H, et al. (2016) The role of interstitial brachytherapy in the management of primary radiation therapy for uterine cervical cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 8(5): 391-398. [DOI:10.5114/jcb.2016.62938] [PMID] []
5. Goyal MK, Rai DV, Manjhi J, Barker JL, Heintz BH, Shide KL, et al. (2017) Study of dosimetric and spatial variations due to applicator positioning during inter-fraction high-dose rate brachytherapy in the treatment of carcinoma of the cervix: A three dimensional dosimetric analysis. Int J Radiat Res, 15(4): 377-382.
6. Martinez A, Cox RS, Edmundson GK (1984) A multiple-site perineal applicator (MUPIT) for treatment of prostatic, anorectal, and gynecologic malignancies, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 10(2): 297-305. [DOI:10.1016/0360-3016(84)90016-6] [PMID]
7. Nandwani PK, Vyas RK, Neema JP, Suryanarayan UK, Bhavsar DC, Jani KR (2007) Retrospective analysis of role of interstitial brachytherapy using template (MUPIT) in locally advanced gynecological malignancies. J Cancer Res Ther, 3(2): 111-5. [DOI:10.4103/0973-1482.34692] [PMID]
8. Sharma PK, Swamidas JV, Mahantshetty U, Deshpande DD, Manjhi J, Rai DV (2014) Dose optimization in gynecological 3D image based interstitial brachytherapy using martinez universal perineal interstitial template (MUPIT) -an institutional experience. J Med Phys, 39(3): 197-202. [DOI:10.4103/0971-6203.139015] [PMID] []
9. Jamema SV, Sharma S, Mahantshetty U, Engineer R, Shrivastava SK, Deshpande DD (2011) Comparison of IPSA with dose-point optimization and manual optimization for interstitial template brachytherapy for gynecologic cancers. Brachytherapy, 10(4): 306-12. [DOI:10.1016/j.brachy.2010.08.011] [PMID]
10. Palled SR, Radhakrishna NK, Manikantan S, Khanum H, Venugopal BK, Vishwanath L (2020) Dosimetric comparison of manual forward planning with uniform dwell times versus volume-based inverse planning in interstitial brachytherapy of cervical malignancies. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 25(6): 851-855. [DOI:10.1016/j.rpor.2020.08.005] [PMID] []
11. Shwetha B, Ravikumar M, Katke A, Supe SS, Venkatagiri G, Ramanand N, et al. (2010) Dosimetric comparison of various optimization techniques for high dose rate brachytherapy of interstitial cervix implants. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 11(3): 3227. [DOI:10.1120/jacmp.v11i3.3227] [PMID] []
12. Banerjee S, Kaliyaperumal V, Kataria T, Kamaraj D (2022) The Medanta AOLO template for locally advanced cancer cervix brachytherapy: design and clinical implementation. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 12(1): 44-47. [DOI:10.5114/jcb.2020.92528] [PMID] []
13. Meigooni AS (2004) Recent developments in brachytherapy source dosimetry. Int J Radiat Res, 2(3): 97-105.
14. Rivard MJ, Coursey BM, DeWerd LA, Hanson WF, Huq MS, Ibbott GS, et al. (2004) Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations. Med Phys, 31(3): 633-74. [DOI:10.1118/1.1646040] [PMID]
15. Viswanathan AN, Beriwal S, De Los Santos JF, Demanes DJ, Gaffney D, Hansen J, et al. (2012) American Brachytherapy Society. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for locally advanced carcinoma of the cervix. Part II: high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy, 11(1): 47-52. [DOI:10.1016/j.brachy.2011.07.002] [PMID] []
16. Haie-Meder C, Pötter R, Van Limbergen E, Briot E, De Brabandere M, Dimopoulos J, et al. (2005) Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group. Recommendations from Gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO Working Group (I): concepts and terms in 3D image based 3D treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy with emphasis on MRI assessment of GTV and CTV. Radiother Oncol, 74(3): 235-45. [DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2004.12.015] [PMID]
17. Wu A, Ulin K, Sternick ES (1988) A dose homogeneity index for evaluating 192Ir interstitial breast implants. Med Phys, 15(1): 104-7. [DOI:10.1118/1.596152] [PMID]
18. Major T, Polgár C, Fodor J, Somogyi A, Németh G (2002) Conformality and homogeneity of dose distributions in interstitial implants at idealized target volumes: a comparison between the Paris and dose-point optimized systems. Radiother Oncol, 62(1): 103-11. [DOI:10.1016/S0167-8140(01)00447-9]
19. Fröhlich G, Geszti G, Vízkeleti J, Ágoston P, Polgár C, Major T. (2019) Dosimetric comparison of inverse optimisation methods versus forward optimisation in HDR brachytherapy of breast, cervical and prostate cancer. Strahlenther Onkol, 195(11): 991-1000. [DOI:10.1007/s00066-019-01513-x] [PMID] []
20. Chakrabarti B, Basu-Roy S, Kar SK, Das S, Lahiri A (2017) Comparison of dose volume parameters evaluated using three forward planning - optimization techniques in cervical cancer brachytherapy involving two applicators. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 9(5): 431-445. [DOI:10.5114/jcb.2017.70677] [PMID] []
21. Jamema SV, Kirisits C, Mahantshetty U, Trnkova P, Deshpande DD, Shrivastava SK, et al. (2010) Comparison of DVH parameters and loading patterns of standard loading, manual and inverse optimization for intracavitary brachytherapy on a subset of tandem/ovoid cases. Radiother Oncol, 97(3): 501-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2010.08.011] [PMID]
22. Yoshio K, Murakami N, Morota M, Harada K, Kitaguchi M, Yamagishi K, et al. (2013) Inverse planning for combination of intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. J Radiat Res, 54(6): 1146-52. [DOI:10.1093/jrr/rrt072] [PMID] []
23. Kubicky CD, Yeh BM, Lessard E, Joe BN, Speight JL, Pouliot J, et al. (2008) Inverse planning simulated annealing for magnetic resonance imaging-based intracavitary high-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer. Brachytherapy, 7(3): 242-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.brachy.2008.01.003] [PMID]
24. Kumar M, Thangaraj R, Alva RC, Koushik K, Ponni A, Achar JM (2019) Impact of different dose prescription schedules on EQD2 in high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy of carcinoma cervix. J Contemp Brachytherapy, 11(2):189-193. [DOI:10.5114/jcb.2019.84586] [PMID] []
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Kaliyaperumal V, Banerjee S, Kataria T, Abraham S, Veni S M, Tamilselvan S, et al . Dosimetric comparison of perineal and intra-vaginal interstitial template in image guided high dose rate brachytherapy for carcinoma cervix. Int J Radiat Res 2022; 20 (3) :593-600
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-4345-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 20, Issue 3 (7-2022) Back to browse issues page
International Journal of Radiation Research
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.07 seconds with 50 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645