title: The advantage of 3D conformal treatment of lumbar spine metastases in comparison to traditional PA or AP-PA techniques: restoring an intermediate niche of therapeutic sophistication.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  To evaluate the effect of the 3D radiation field design on normal tissues compared with commonly used appositional fields in patients with lumbar spine metastases.
  
  
  METHODS
  Ten comparative treatment plans for radiation of lumbar spine metastases were compared for posterior and anterior- posterior fields with 3D plans.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The PTV coverage in all comparative plans was similar. V 15 of the bowel in 3D, AP-PA and PA plans was 6.7 Gy (SD 6.47), 39.8 Gy (SD 11.4) and 37.3 Gy (SD15.7), respectively (p < 0.0001). The mean dose to both kidneys was 9.6 Gy (SD 4.8), 4.1 Gy (SD 3.9) and 4.6 Gy (SD 4.4) for appropriate plans (p = 0.002). Maximal dose to the spinal cord was 30.6 Gy (SD 2.1), 33.1 Gy (SD 9.8) and 37.7 Gy (SD 2) for 3D, AP-PA and PA plans.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  3D conformal treatment planning of lumbar vertebral metastases was significantly better in term of bowel and spinal cord exposure compared to AP-PA and PA techniques. The exposure of the kidneys in 3D plans, while greater than in the comparative plans, did not violate accepted dose-volume thresholds.
authors: Radiation Oncology Department, Tel Aviv Souraskiy Medical Center, affiliated with Tel Aviv University School of Medicine, 6 Weizmann St,, Tel Aviv 64239, Israel. slavas2506@yahoo.com
authors: Viacheslav
authors: V
authors: Soyfer
authors: Benjamin W
authors: BW
authors: Corn
authors: Natan
authors: N
authors: Shtraus
authors: Dan
authors: D
authors: Schifter
authors: Haim
authors: H
authors: Tempelhof
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Q000379:methods*; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000528:radiation effects*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D011379:Prognosis; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods*; D050397:Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013125:Spinal Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy* / Q000556:secondary
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Apr 1;47(1):13-47
references: 10758303
references: BMC Cancer. 2004 Oct 04;4:71
references: 15461823
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Mar 15;79(4):965-76
references: 21277118
references: J Clin Oncol. 2007 Apr 10;25(11):1423-36
references: 17416863
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Jul 1;71(3):652-65
references: 18514775
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Jul 15;74(4):985-6
references: 19545783
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 1;76(3 Suppl):S101-7
references: 20171503
references: Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Oct 15;12(20 Pt 2):6243s-6249s
references: 17062708
references: J Palliat Med. 2008 Jun;11(5):723-8
references: 18588404
references: Radiother Oncol. 1997 Nov;45(2):109-16
references: 9423999
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jan 1;52(1):176-83
references: 11777636
references: J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Jan 07;28:2
references: 19128500
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Dec 1;75(5):1501-10
references: 19464820
references: Acta Oncol. 2007;46(7):937-44
references: 17851844
references: J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2005 Sep;3(5):711-9
references: 16194459
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Apr 1;82(5):1730-7
references: 21489705
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1990 Jan;15(1):1-4
references: 2326692
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 1;76(3 Suppl):S108-15
references: 20171504