[Effect if 3D compared with 2D radiotherapy planning within a conventional treatment schedule of advanced lung cancer].
BACKGROUND
The effect of 3D radiotherapy planning (3D RTP) in comparison to 2D radiotherapy planning (2D RTP) was evaluated in a usually practiced treatment schedule (starting by v./d. opposing portals, continued with computer-planned portals) for non-small-cell lung cancer.


METHODS
In 20 patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer the computer-planned part of the treatment schedule was calculated 2- and 3-dimensionally. Target volume were the primary tumor, the involved and the electively irradiated mediastinal lymph nodes. The results of the 2D RTP were recalculated 3-dimensionally and the mean doses to target volume and organs at risk were defined. Further the normal tissue complications were calculated.


RESULTS
Under the prerequisite of 44 Gy maximally allowed to the spinal cord and a dose to the reference point of 50 Gy a small, but significant advantage with 2.1 Gy to the target (p = 0.004) and a reduction of 3.6 Gy to the heart (p = 0.05) was achievable for 3D RTP. The dose to the lungs did not differ significantly (19.7 Gy for 2D RTP, 20.3 Gy for 3D RTP). The dose to the heart was not estimated critical by NTCP (normal tissue complication probability). The NTCP for the ipsilateral lung was 16.1 and 18.7% for 2D RTP and 3D RTP, respectively. Regarding the simulator-planned ap/pa fields at the start of the radiotherapy the advantage of 3D RTP was further reduced but remained significant. Favorable with respect to the mean lung dose and the NTCP (18.7% NTCP ipsilateral lung for early onset of 3D planned radiotherapy vs 31.7% for late onset of 3D planned radiotherapy) but not significantly measurable is the early start of the treatment by computerized RTP.


CONCLUSIONS
The main advantage of 3D RTP in treatment of advanced lung cancer is the better coverage of the target volume. A reduction of the mean lung dose cannot be expected. A dose escalation by 3D RTP to target volumes as described here seems not to be possible because of unchanged high lung exposure.
Schraube
P
P
Klinik für Radioonkologie, Klinikum Ludwigsburg. PeterSchraube@aol.com
Spahn
U
U
Oetzel
D
D
Wannenmacher
M
M
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002289:Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D005260:Female; D006321:Heart / Q000528:radiation effects; D006801:Humans; D007091:Image Processing, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D011878:Radiotherapy / Q000009:adverse effects; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; D012044:Regression Analysis; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed