Background. Irradiation of a larger volume of the target may lead to an increase of the doses delivered to the surrounding organs at risk (OAR) for post-prostatectomy patients with a higher risk of nodal involvement. It was anticipated that IMRT significantly improved OAR sparing. The aim of this study was to provide a dosimetric comparison between conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment plans for patients with prostate cancer irradiated to the prostate bed and pelvic lymph-nodal area. Materials and methods. The 3D-CRT and IMRT plans were created for ten patients after prostatectomy. The treatment plans were generated for the prostate bed (PTV1) and the pelvic lymph nodes (PTV2). The sum of PTV1 and PTV2 was irradiated to a mean dose of 46 Gy in 23 fractions, and additionally PTV1 was irradiated to a mean dose of 18 Gy in 9 fractions. Target coverage and the doses delivered to the pelvic bones, the rectum, the bladder, the bowel bag, and the femurs, were compared between techniques. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the dosimetric parameters. Results. The dosimetric quality of 3D-CRT and IMRT plans were comparable for target coverage (the mean value of PTV1 V95%, the mean value of PTV2 V95% all > 99%). The IMRT plans resulted in significant reductions in the pelvic bones Conclusions. The analysis presented in this paper demonstrates that the IMRT technique reduces the delivered dose to the OARs. Most interesting was the possibility of reducing the delivered dose to the pelvic bones and the bowel bag. This allowed us to expect a decreased risk of acute hematologic toxicity and acute gastrointestinal toxicity. NOWOTWORY J Oncol 2016; 66, 6: 440-444
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.