Comparing Treatment Plans for Bladder Cancer: FIF, IMRT and SIB: A Dosimetric Study
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this study is to compare plans for bladder cancer using field-in-field (FIF), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique.
Method: FIF, IMRT and SIB treatment plans were created using tomography images of 20 patients diagnosed with bladder cancer. Two separate planning target volume (PTV) were defined for each patient: PTV1 and PTV2. For the FIF and IMRT plans, PTV1 and PTV2 received treatment doses of 50.4 Gray (Gy) and 60 Gy in 33 fractions, respectively. In 28 daily fractions, the SIB method was used in which different doses were delivered simultaneously in the target volumes. In the SIB technique, the daily treatment dose was determined as 2.14 Gy. The plans were compared in terms of PTV, organs at risk (OARs) such as rectum, bowel, femoral heads, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) and monitor unit values (MU).
Results: All plans were designed to cover 95% of the dose in the target volume. The CI for SIB plans showed significantly favourable results compared to FIF and IMRT plans. The V45 and V30 doses for the rectum in the SIB plans were statistically significantly lower compared to the FIF (p<0.05). The biologically effective doses (BED) values of rectum V30 were found to be 57.01±11.94 in SIB plans and 56.37±10.95 in IMRT plans. MU counts were significantly lower in FIF plans (p<0.05).
Conclusion: The SIB technique demonstrated better sparing of critical organs compared with FIF and IMRT in bladder radiotherapy. BED analysis, however, indicated higher doses with SIB. Overall, SIB appears to be a feasible option for appropriate patients, provided that dose to critical organs is carefully monitored.
Keywords
Kaynakça
- 1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay C, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61(2):69-90. doi: 10.3322/caac.20107.
- 2. Martin-Doyle W, Kwiatkowski DJ. Molecular biology of bladder cancer. Hematol. Oncol Clin North Am. 2015;29:191–203. doi: 10.1016/j.hoc.2014.10.002.
- 3. Lee ST, Lawrentschuk N, Scott AM. PET on prostate and bladder tumors. Semin Nucl Med. 2012;42:231-46.
- 4. Stenzl A, Cowan NC, De Santis M, et al. The updated EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;55(4):815-25.
- 5. Chavan S, Bray F, Lortet-Tieulent J, Goodman M, Jemal A. International variations in bladder cancer incidence and mortality. Eur Urol. 2014;66(1):59–73.
- 6. Edward CH, Carlos AP, Luther WB. Perez and Brady’s Principles and Practice of Radiation Oncology. Lippincott Williams&Wilkins (ed.), 5. New York, USA. 2007
- 7. Agulnik M. Puataweepong P. Advanced Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A New Standard of Practise. 1st Edition. Thailand Intech Press. 2012;232-235.
- 8. Chao S, Apisarnthanarax S, Ozyigit G. Practical Essentials of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2005.
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
İngilizce
Konular
Tıp Fiziği
Bölüm
Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar
Gökçen İnan
*
0000-0003-2995-0256
Türkiye
Osman Vefa Gül
0000-0002-6773-3132
Türkiye
Hamit Başaran
0000-0002-2122-8720
Türkiye
Erken Görünüm Tarihi
29 Nisan 2026
Yayımlanma Tarihi
29 Nisan 2026
Gönderilme Tarihi
28 Ocak 2025
Kabul Tarihi
11 Mart 2026
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 2026 Sayı: 28