Current Oncology (Mar 2023)

Adaptive Volumetric-Modulated Arc Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Evaluation of Benefit on Target Coverage and Sparing of Organs at Risk

  • Ciro Franzese,
  • Stefano Tomatis,
  • Sofia Paola Bianchi,
  • Marco Pelizzoli,
  • Maria Ausilia Teriaca,
  • Marco Badalamenti,
  • Tiziana Comito,
  • Elena Clerici,
  • Davide Franceschini,
  • Pierina Navarria,
  • Luciana Di Cristina,
  • Damiano Dei,
  • Carmela Galdieri,
  • Giacomo Reggiori,
  • Pietro Mancosu,
  • Marta Scorsetti

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol30030254
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 30, no. 3
pp. 3344 – 3354

Abstract

Read online

Background: Radiotherapy is essential in the management of head–neck cancer. During the course of radiotherapy, patients may develop significant anatomical changes. Re-planning with adaptive radiotherapy may ensure adequate dose coverage and sparing of organs at risk. We investigated the consequences of adaptive radiotherapy on head–neck cancer patients treated with volumetric-modulated arc radiation therapy compared to simulated non-adaptive plans: Materials and methods: We included in this retrospective dosimetric analysis 56 patients treated with adaptive radiotherapy. The primary aim of the study was to analyze the dosimetric differences with and without an adaptive approach for targets and organs at risk, particularly the spinal cord, parotid glands, oral cavity and larynx. The original plan (OPLAN) was compared to the adaptive plan (APLAN) and to a simulated non-adaptive dosimetric plan (DPLAN). Results: The non-adaptive DPLAN, when compared to OPLAN, showed an increased dose to all organs at risk. Spinal cord D2 increased from 27.91 (21.06–31.76) Gy to 31.39 (27.66–38.79) Gy (p = 0.00). V15, V30 and V45 of the DPLAN vs. the OPLAN increased by 20.6% (p = 0.00), 14.78% (p = 0.00) and 15.55% (p = 0.00) for right parotid; and 16.25% (p = 0.00), 18.7% (p = 0.00) and 20.19% (p = 0.00) for left parotid. A difference of 36.95% was observed in the oral cavity V40 (p = 0.00). Dose coverage was significantly reduced for both CTV (97.90% vs. 99.96%; p = 0.00) and PTV (94.70% vs. 98.72%; p = 0.00). The APLAN compared to the OPLAN had similar values for all organs at risk. Conclusions: The adaptive strategy with re-planning is able to avoid an increase in dose to organs at risk and better target coverage in head–neck cancer patients, with potential benefits in terms of side effects and disease control.

Keywords