• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.166-176
• /
• 2010

Purpose: To determine the appropriate prostate planning target volume (PTV) margins for 3-dimensitional (3D) conformal radiotherapy (CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) patients treated with an endorectal balloon (ERB) under our institutional treatment condition. Materials and Methods: Patients were treated in the supine position. An ERB was inserted into the rectum with 70 cc air prior to planning a CT scan and then each treatment fraction. Electronic portal images (EPIs) and digital reconstructed radiographs (DRR) of planning CT images were used to evaluate inter-fractional patient's setup and ERB errors. To register both image sets, we developed an in-house program written in visual $C^{++}$. A new method to determine prostate PTV margins with an ERB was developed by using the common method. Results: The mean value of patient setup errors was within 1 mm in all directions. The ERB inter-fractional errors in the superior-inferior (SI) and anterior-posterior (AP) directions were larger than in the left-right (LR) direction. The calculated 1D symmetric PTV margins were 3.0 mm, 8.2 mm, and 8.5 mm for 3D CRT and 4.1 mm, 7.9 mm, and 10.3 mm for IMRT in LR, SI, and AP, respectively according to the new method including ERB random errors. Conclusion: The ERB random error contributes to the deformation of the prostate, which affects the original treatment planning. Thus, a new PTV margin method includes dose blurring effects of ERB. The correction of ERB systematic error is a prerequisite since the new method only accounts for ERB random error.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.199-205
• /
• 2013

Purpose: To assess the clinical efficacy and toxicity of whole pelvic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (WP-IMRT) for high-risk prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Patients with high-risk prostate cancer treated between 2008 and 2013 were reviewed. The study included patients who had undergone WP-IMRT with image guidance using electronic portal imaging devices and/or cone-beam computed tomography. The endorectal balloon was used in 93% of patients. Patients received either 46 Gy to the whole pelvis plus a boost of up to 76 Gy to the prostate in 2 Gy daily fractions, or 44 Gy to the whole pelvis plus a boost of up to 72.6 Gy to the prostate in 2.2 Gy fractions. Results: The study cohort included 70 patients, of whom 55 (78%) had a Gleason score of 8 to 10 and 50 (71%) had a prostate-specific antigen level > 20 ng/mL. The androgen deprivation therapy was combined in 62 patients. The biochemical failure-free survival rate was 86.7% at 2 years. Acute any grade gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity rates were 47% and 73%, respectively. The actuarial rate of late grade 2 or worse toxicity at 2 years was 12.9% for GI, and 5.7% for GU with no late grade 4 toxicity. Conclusion: WP-IMRT was well tolerated with no severe acute or late toxicities, resulting in at least similar biochemical control to that of the historic control group with a small field. The long-term efficacy and toxicity will be assessed in the future, and a prospective randomized trial is needed to verify these findings.