Dosimetric Comparison and Feasibility of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) in Treatment of Malignant Gliomas Using Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) or Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT)

Rapole, Pragna Sagar; Karunanithi, Gunaseelan; Kandasamy, Saravanan; Prabhu, Sathiya; Kumar, Ram; Vivekanandam, S

doi:10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.9.2499

Dosimetric Comparison and Feasibility of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) in Treatment of Malignant Gliomas Using Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) or Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT)

Document Type : Research Articles

Authors

Jawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), India.

10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.9.2499

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the dosimetric parameters of Simultaneous Integrated Boost in the treatment of malignant
gliomas and compare the SIB plans of VMAT and IMRT. Methodology: CT and MRI of 28 patients were used for
generating SIB plans with VMAT and IMRT. A dose of 2Gy per fraction was prescribed to the CPTV and 2.4Gy to
the GPTV for a total of 25 fractions. The plans were accepted only if they met the set of planning objectives defined
in the protocol. Results: We could achieve the planning objectives in all the SIB plans. Although GPTV coverage was
statistically better in VMAT (98.67% vs 98.19% ;p=0.024) the difference is not clinically meaningful. The conformity
index for GPTV was higher in IMRT (0.83 vs 0.76; p=0.001). The coverage of CPTV was better in IMRT
(97.88% vs 96.87%; p=0.021). But the conformity index of CPTVannulus was higher in VMAT (0.72 vs 0.67; p=0.01).
There was no difference in homogeneity index of GPTV and CPTV annulus between the plans. The mean dose received
by normal brain was higher in IMRT (28Gy vs 24.2Gy; p<0.001). Ipsilateral optic nerve has received lesser Dmax in
IMRT (44.2Gy vs 46.95Gy; p=0.02). No difference was seen in Dmax of brainstem, optic chiasm, contralateral optic
nerve. The treatment times and monitor units were significantly less in VMAT. Conclusion: SIB is dosimetrically
feasible for hypofractionation in malignant gliomas using IMRT and VMAT. IMRT plans had better boost conformity,
lower ipsilateral optic nerve and brainstem maximum doses compared to VMAT. Whereas, VMAT had better coverage,
better overall PTV conformity, lower normal brain mean dose, lower monitor units and lesser treatment times. Although
planning of VMAT is cumbersome and time consuming, the advantage of reducing treatment time is beneficial to
the patients’ comfort and better managing of patient load in high volume centres.

Keywords