TY - JOUR
T1 - Secondary cancer risk from modern external-beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer patients
T2 - Impact of fractionation and dose distribution
AU - Sitathanee, Chomporn
AU - Tangboonduangjit, Puangpen
AU - Dhanachai, Mantana
AU - Suntiwong, Sawanee
AU - Yongvithisatid, Pornpan
AU - Rutchantuk, Sukanya
AU - Changkaew, Pimolpun
AU - Watjiranon, Rattana
AU - Khachonkham, Suphalak
AU - Boonkitticharoen, Vipa
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Japanese Radiation Research Society and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/7/1
Y1 - 2021/7/1
N2 - Modern radiotherapy (RT) uses altered fractionation, long beam-on time and image-guided procedure. This study aimed to compare secondary cancer risk (SCR) associated with primary field, scatter/leakage radiations and image-guided procedure in prostate treatment using intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), CyberKnife stereotactic body RT (CK-SBRT) in relative to 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT). Prostate plans were generated for 3D-CRT, IMRT (39 fractions of 2 Gy), and CK-SBRT (five fractions of 7.25 Gy). Excess absolute risk (EAR) was calculated for organs in the primary field using Schneider's mechanistic model and concept of organ equivalent dose (OED) to account for dose inhomogeneity. Doses from image-guided procedure and scatter/leakage radiations were determined by phantom measurements. The results showed that hypofractionation relative to conventional fractionation yielded lower SCR for organs in primary field (p ≤ 0.0001). SCR was further modulated by dose-volume distribution. For organs near the field edge, like the rectum and pelvic bone, CK-SBRT plan rendered better risk profiles than IMRT and 3D-CRT because of the absence of volume peak in high dose region (relative risk [RR]: 0.65, 0.22, respectively, p ≤ 0.0004). CK-SBRT and IMRT generated more scatter/leakage and imaging doses than 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). But primary field was the major contributor to SCR. EAR estimates (risk contributions, primary field: Scatter/leakage radiations: Imaging procedure) were 7.1 excess cases per 104 person-year (PY; 3.64:2.25:1) for CK-SBRT, 9.93 (7.32:2.33:1) for IMRT and 8.24 (15.99:2.35:1) for 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). We conclude that modern RT added more but small SCR from scatter/leakage and imaging doses. The primary field is a major contributor of risk which can be mitigated by the use of hypofractionation.
AB - Modern radiotherapy (RT) uses altered fractionation, long beam-on time and image-guided procedure. This study aimed to compare secondary cancer risk (SCR) associated with primary field, scatter/leakage radiations and image-guided procedure in prostate treatment using intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), CyberKnife stereotactic body RT (CK-SBRT) in relative to 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT). Prostate plans were generated for 3D-CRT, IMRT (39 fractions of 2 Gy), and CK-SBRT (five fractions of 7.25 Gy). Excess absolute risk (EAR) was calculated for organs in the primary field using Schneider's mechanistic model and concept of organ equivalent dose (OED) to account for dose inhomogeneity. Doses from image-guided procedure and scatter/leakage radiations were determined by phantom measurements. The results showed that hypofractionation relative to conventional fractionation yielded lower SCR for organs in primary field (p ≤ 0.0001). SCR was further modulated by dose-volume distribution. For organs near the field edge, like the rectum and pelvic bone, CK-SBRT plan rendered better risk profiles than IMRT and 3D-CRT because of the absence of volume peak in high dose region (relative risk [RR]: 0.65, 0.22, respectively, p ≤ 0.0004). CK-SBRT and IMRT generated more scatter/leakage and imaging doses than 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). But primary field was the major contributor to SCR. EAR estimates (risk contributions, primary field: Scatter/leakage radiations: Imaging procedure) were 7.1 excess cases per 104 person-year (PY; 3.64:2.25:1) for CK-SBRT, 9.93 (7.32:2.33:1) for IMRT and 8.24 (15.99:2.35:1) for 3D-CRT (p ≤ 0.0002). We conclude that modern RT added more but small SCR from scatter/leakage and imaging doses. The primary field is a major contributor of risk which can be mitigated by the use of hypofractionation.
KW - CyberKnife stereotactic body radiotherapy (CK-SBRT)
KW - imaging dose
KW - intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)
KW - primary field
KW - scatter/leakage radiations
KW - secondary cancer risk (SCR)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85112124764&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/jrr/rrab038
DO - 10.1093/jrr/rrab038
M3 - Article
C2 - 33993271
AN - SCOPUS:85112124764
SN - 0449-3060
VL - 62
SP - 707
EP - 717
JO - Journal of Radiation Research
JF - Journal of Radiation Research
IS - 4
ER -