Effect of radiotherapy techniques (IMRT vs. 3D-CRT) on outcome in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled in COG D9803 - A report from the children's oncology group

Chi Lin, Sarah S. Donaldson, Jane L Meza, James R. Anderson, Elizabeth R. Lyden, Christopher K. Brown, Karen Morano, Fran Laurie, Carola A. Arndt, Charles Arthur Enke, John C. Breneman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the dosimetric parameters of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma and to analyze their effect on locoregional control and failure-free survival (FFS). Methods and Materials: The study population consisted of 375 patients enrolled in the Children's Oncology Group protocol D9803 study, receiving IMRT or 3D-CRT. Dosimetric data were collected from 179 patients with an available composite plan. The chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the patient characteristics and radiotherapy parameters between the two groups. The interval-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to examine the effect of the treatment technique on FFS after adjusting for primary site and risk group. Results: The median follow-up time was 5.7 and 4.2 years for patients receiving 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. No differences in the 5-year failure of locoregional control (18% vs. 15%) or FFS (72% vs. 76%) rates were noted between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no association between the two techniques and FFS. Patients with primary tumors in parameningeal sites were more likely to receive IMRT than 3D-CRT. IMRT became more common during the later years of the study. Patients receiving IMRT were more likely to receive >50 Gy, photon energy of ≤6 MV, and >5 radiation fields than those who received 3D-CRT. The coverage of the IMRT planning target volume by the prescription dose was improved compared with the coverage using 3D-CRT with similar target dose heterogeneity. Conclusions: IMRT improved the target dose coverage compared with 3D-CRT, although an improvement in locoregional control or FFS could not be demonstrated in this population. Future studies comparing the integral dose to nontarget tissue and late radiation toxicity between the two groups are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1764-1770
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume82
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2012

Fingerprint

Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy
Rhabdomyosarcoma
radiation therapy
Radiotherapy
Survival
dosage
Radiation
Conformal Radiotherapy
rank tests
Chi-Square Distribution
Photons
Population
Prescriptions
Multivariate Analysis
toxicity
radiation distribution
Regression Analysis
hazards
planning
regression analysis

Keywords

  • 3D-CRT
  • IMRT
  • Intensity-modulated radiotherapy
  • Intermediate risk
  • Rhabdomyosarcoma
  • Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiation
  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Effect of radiotherapy techniques (IMRT vs. 3D-CRT) on outcome in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled in COG D9803 - A report from the children's oncology group. / Lin, Chi; Donaldson, Sarah S.; Meza, Jane L; Anderson, James R.; Lyden, Elizabeth R.; Brown, Christopher K.; Morano, Karen; Laurie, Fran; Arndt, Carola A.; Enke, Charles Arthur; Breneman, John C.

In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, Vol. 82, No. 5, 01.04.2012, p. 1764-1770.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lin, Chi ; Donaldson, Sarah S. ; Meza, Jane L ; Anderson, James R. ; Lyden, Elizabeth R. ; Brown, Christopher K. ; Morano, Karen ; Laurie, Fran ; Arndt, Carola A. ; Enke, Charles Arthur ; Breneman, John C. / Effect of radiotherapy techniques (IMRT vs. 3D-CRT) on outcome in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled in COG D9803 - A report from the children's oncology group. In: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2012 ; Vol. 82, No. 5. pp. 1764-1770.
@article{e9a0e1b8cf7f4f07ad9f852e343cc194,
title = "Effect of radiotherapy techniques (IMRT vs. 3D-CRT) on outcome in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled in COG D9803 - A report from the children's oncology group",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare the dosimetric parameters of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma and to analyze their effect on locoregional control and failure-free survival (FFS). Methods and Materials: The study population consisted of 375 patients enrolled in the Children's Oncology Group protocol D9803 study, receiving IMRT or 3D-CRT. Dosimetric data were collected from 179 patients with an available composite plan. The chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the patient characteristics and radiotherapy parameters between the two groups. The interval-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to examine the effect of the treatment technique on FFS after adjusting for primary site and risk group. Results: The median follow-up time was 5.7 and 4.2 years for patients receiving 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. No differences in the 5-year failure of locoregional control (18{\%} vs. 15{\%}) or FFS (72{\%} vs. 76{\%}) rates were noted between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no association between the two techniques and FFS. Patients with primary tumors in parameningeal sites were more likely to receive IMRT than 3D-CRT. IMRT became more common during the later years of the study. Patients receiving IMRT were more likely to receive >50 Gy, photon energy of ≤6 MV, and >5 radiation fields than those who received 3D-CRT. The coverage of the IMRT planning target volume by the prescription dose was improved compared with the coverage using 3D-CRT with similar target dose heterogeneity. Conclusions: IMRT improved the target dose coverage compared with 3D-CRT, although an improvement in locoregional control or FFS could not be demonstrated in this population. Future studies comparing the integral dose to nontarget tissue and late radiation toxicity between the two groups are warranted.",
keywords = "3D-CRT, IMRT, Intensity-modulated radiotherapy, Intermediate risk, Rhabdomyosarcoma, Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy",
author = "Chi Lin and Donaldson, {Sarah S.} and Meza, {Jane L} and Anderson, {James R.} and Lyden, {Elizabeth R.} and Brown, {Christopher K.} and Karen Morano and Fran Laurie and Arndt, {Carola A.} and Enke, {Charles Arthur} and Breneman, {John C.}",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.036",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "1764--1770",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of radiotherapy techniques (IMRT vs. 3D-CRT) on outcome in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled in COG D9803 - A report from the children's oncology group

AU - Lin, Chi

AU - Donaldson, Sarah S.

AU - Meza, Jane L

AU - Anderson, James R.

AU - Lyden, Elizabeth R.

AU - Brown, Christopher K.

AU - Morano, Karen

AU - Laurie, Fran

AU - Arndt, Carola A.

AU - Enke, Charles Arthur

AU - Breneman, John C.

PY - 2012/4/1

Y1 - 2012/4/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare the dosimetric parameters of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma and to analyze their effect on locoregional control and failure-free survival (FFS). Methods and Materials: The study population consisted of 375 patients enrolled in the Children's Oncology Group protocol D9803 study, receiving IMRT or 3D-CRT. Dosimetric data were collected from 179 patients with an available composite plan. The chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the patient characteristics and radiotherapy parameters between the two groups. The interval-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to examine the effect of the treatment technique on FFS after adjusting for primary site and risk group. Results: The median follow-up time was 5.7 and 4.2 years for patients receiving 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. No differences in the 5-year failure of locoregional control (18% vs. 15%) or FFS (72% vs. 76%) rates were noted between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no association between the two techniques and FFS. Patients with primary tumors in parameningeal sites were more likely to receive IMRT than 3D-CRT. IMRT became more common during the later years of the study. Patients receiving IMRT were more likely to receive >50 Gy, photon energy of ≤6 MV, and >5 radiation fields than those who received 3D-CRT. The coverage of the IMRT planning target volume by the prescription dose was improved compared with the coverage using 3D-CRT with similar target dose heterogeneity. Conclusions: IMRT improved the target dose coverage compared with 3D-CRT, although an improvement in locoregional control or FFS could not be demonstrated in this population. Future studies comparing the integral dose to nontarget tissue and late radiation toxicity between the two groups are warranted.

AB - Purpose: To compare the dosimetric parameters of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma and to analyze their effect on locoregional control and failure-free survival (FFS). Methods and Materials: The study population consisted of 375 patients enrolled in the Children's Oncology Group protocol D9803 study, receiving IMRT or 3D-CRT. Dosimetric data were collected from 179 patients with an available composite plan. The chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the patient characteristics and radiotherapy parameters between the two groups. The interval-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to examine the effect of the treatment technique on FFS after adjusting for primary site and risk group. Results: The median follow-up time was 5.7 and 4.2 years for patients receiving 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. No differences in the 5-year failure of locoregional control (18% vs. 15%) or FFS (72% vs. 76%) rates were noted between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed no association between the two techniques and FFS. Patients with primary tumors in parameningeal sites were more likely to receive IMRT than 3D-CRT. IMRT became more common during the later years of the study. Patients receiving IMRT were more likely to receive >50 Gy, photon energy of ≤6 MV, and >5 radiation fields than those who received 3D-CRT. The coverage of the IMRT planning target volume by the prescription dose was improved compared with the coverage using 3D-CRT with similar target dose heterogeneity. Conclusions: IMRT improved the target dose coverage compared with 3D-CRT, although an improvement in locoregional control or FFS could not be demonstrated in this population. Future studies comparing the integral dose to nontarget tissue and late radiation toxicity between the two groups are warranted.

KW - 3D-CRT

KW - IMRT

KW - Intensity-modulated radiotherapy

KW - Intermediate risk

KW - Rhabdomyosarcoma

KW - Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84858700119&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84858700119&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.036

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.036

M3 - Article

C2 - 21470795

AN - SCOPUS:84858700119

VL - 82

SP - 1764

EP - 1770

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 5

ER -