Journal of Radiation Protection and Research

The Korean Association for Radiation Protection (대한방사선방어학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fetal dose from Head and Neck Tomotherapy Versus 3D Conformal Radiotherapy

  • Park, So Hyun (Department of Radiation Oncology, Jeju National University Hospital) ;
  • Choi, Won Hoon (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Jinhyun (Department of Radiation Oncology, Jeju National University Hospital)
  • Received : 2019.08.06
  • Accepted : 2019.12.09
  • Published : 2019.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: To compare the dose of radiation received by the fetus in a pregnant patient irradiated for head and neck cancer using helical tomotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT). Materials and Methods: The patient was modeled with a humanoid phantom to mimic a gestation of 26 weeks. Radiotherapy with a total dose of 2 Gy was delivered with both tomotherapy (2.5 and 5.0 cm jaw size) and 3DCRT. The position of the fetus was predicted to be 45 cm from the field edge at the time of treatment. The delivered dose was measured according to the distance from the field edge and the fetus. Results and Discussion: The accumulated dose to the fetus was 1.6 cGy by 3DCRT and 2 and 2.3 cGy by the 2.5 and 5 cm jaw tomotherapy plans. For tomotherapy, the fetal dose with the 2.5 cm jaw was lower than that with the 5 cm jaw, although the radiation leakage was greater for 2.5 cm jaw plan due to the 1.5 fold longer beam-on time. At the uterine fundus, tomotherapy with a 5 cm jaw delivered the highest dose of 2.4 cGy. When the fetus moves up to 35 cm at the 29th week of gestation, the resultant fetal doses for 3DCRT and tomotherapy with 2.5 and 5 cm jaws were estimated as 2.1, 2.7, and 3.9 cGy, respectively. Conclusion: For tomotherapy, scattering radiation was more important due to the high monitor unit values. Therefore, selecting a smaller jaw size for tomotherapy may reduce the fetal dose. however, evaluation of risk should be individually performed for each patient.

Keywords

References

  1. Ruben JD, Lancaster CM, Jones P, Smith RL. A comparison of out-of-field dose and its constituent components for intensitymodulated radiation therapy versus conformal radiation therapy: implications for carcinogenesis. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011;81(5):1458-1464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.08.008
  2. Prado KL, Nelson SJ, Nuyttens JJ, Williams TE, Vanek KN. Clinical implementation of the AAPM Task Group 36 recommendations on fetal dose from radiotherapy with photon beams: a head and neck irradiation case report. J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 2000;1(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1120/1.308245
  3. Sneed PK, Albright NW, Wara WM, Prados MD, Wilson CB. Fetal dose estimates for radiotherapy of brain tumors during pregnancy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1995;32(3):823-830. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-3016(94)00456-U
  4. Strauss KJ, Kaste SC. The ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept in pediatric interventional and fluoroscopic imaging: striving to keep radiation doses as low as possible during fluoroscopy of pediatric patients--a white paper executive summary. Radiology. 2006;240(3):621-622. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2403060698
  5. Fiorino C, Dell'Oca I, Pierelli A, Broggi S, Martin ED, Muzio ND, Longobardi B, Fazio F, Calandrino R. Significant improvement in normal tissue sparing and target coverage for head and neck cancer by means of helical tomotherapy. Radiother. Oncol. 2006;78(3):276-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2006.02.009
  6. van Vulpen M, Field C, Raaijmakers CP, Parliament MB, Tergaard CHJ, MacKenzie MA, Scrimger RS, Lagendijk JJW, Fallone BG. Comparing step-and-shoot IMRT with dynamic helical tomotherapy IMRT plans for head-and-neck cancer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2005;62(5):1535-1539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.04.011
  7. Mazonakis M, Tzedakis A, Damilakis J. Monte Carlo Simulation of Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in Pregnant Patients: How to Reduce the Radiation Dose and Risks to Fetus? Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry. 2017;175(1):10-16.
  8. Mianji FA, Diba JK, Babakhani A. Fetus dose estimation in thyroid cancer post-surgical radioiodine therapy. Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry. 2015;163(1):27-36. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncu051
  9. Hall EJ, Wuu CS. Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2003;56(1):83-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00073-7
  10. Fogliata A, Nicolini G, Alber M et al. IMRT for breast. a planning study. Radiother. Oncol. 2005;76(3):300-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2005.08.004
  11. Macklis R. In regards to Hall: intensity-modulated radiation therapy, protons, and the risk of second cancers (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:1-7). Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2006;66(5):1593-1594;author reply 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.06.058
  12. Podgorsak MB, Meiler RJ, Kowal H, Kishel SP, Orner JB. Technical management of a pregnant patient undergoing radiation therapy to the head and neck. Med. Dosim. 1999;24(2):121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-3947(99)00010-2