Intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy have distinct clinical advantages in non-small cell lung cancer treatment

• Published in: Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) London, England), 2015-04, Vol.32 (4), p.94-94, Article 94
• Main Authors: Zhang, Jun, Yu, Xiao-Ling, Zheng, Guo-Feng, Zhao, Fei
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - pathology; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung - radiotherapy; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Hematology; Humans; Internal Medicine; Lung cancer; Lung Neoplasms - pathology; Lung Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Oncology; Original Paper; Pathology; Prognosis; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated - methods
• ISSN: 1357-0560; 1559-131X
• DOI: 10.1007/s12032-015-0546-6

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in delivering the planned dosage in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Between September 2013 and March 2014, 125 NSCLC patients were randomly chosen and allocated to the IMRT group ( n  = 65) and VMAT group ( n  = 60). We compared multiple parameters such as target dose, organ dosimetry, monitor unit (MU) and time of therapy between IMRT and VMAT groups. The prescribed dose coverage of both planning techniques was 95 % of the planning target volumes (PTVs). PTV 95 % and homogeneous index in IMRT plan were greater than those in VMAT plan (both P   0.05). The mean total lung V5 and V10 in VMAT group were markedly higher than those in IMRT group, but the V20, V30, and V40 in VMAT group were significantly lower (all P   0.05). Furthermore, the planning spine and esophagus at risk volume showed no statistical significances in both groups ( P  > 0.05). MU of IMRT plan was about 4.2 % less than that of VMAT plan, which was statistically significant ( P