Quantitative assessment of treatment planning dosimetric parameters in 3D-CRT with the mixed photon-electron beams versus IMRT for the nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Ahmadpour, H.; Mohammadkarim, A.; Kazemian, A.; Geraily, G.; Hejazi, P.; Yadollahi, M.; Najafi, M.; Gorjizadeh, N.

doi:10.61882/ijrr.23.3.38

[Home ] [Archive]

International Journal of Radiation Research

Main Menu

Home

IJRR Information

For Authors

For Reviewers

Subscription

News & Events

Web Mail

Search in website

Receive site information

ISSN

Hard Copy 2322-3243

Online 2345-4229

Online Submission

Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.

Volume 23, Issue 3 (7-2025) Int J Radiat Res 2025, 23(3): 809-812 | Back to browse issues page

‎ 10.61882/ijrr.23.3.38

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Ahmadpour H, Mohammadkarim A, Kazemian A, Geraily G, Hejazi P, Yadollahi M, et al . Quantitative assessment of treatment planning dosimetric parameters in 3D-CRT with the mixed photon-electron beams versus IMRT for the nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Res 2025; 23 (3) :809-812
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-6682-en.html

Quantitative assessment of treatment planning dosimetric parameters in 3D-CRT with the mixed photon-electron beams versus IMRT for the nasopharyngeal carcinoma

H. Ahmadpour

, P. Hejazi

, M. Najafi

Radiation Sciences Research Center (RSRC), Aja University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , mohammadkarim.medphys@gmail.com

Abstract: (167 Views)

Background: External radiotherapy procedures as an important tool for curing nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are commonly performed with one of the well-known techniques, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) or intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Materials and Methods: In this study, the therapeutically dosimetric parameters including conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and tumor control probability (TCP) were extracted from the dose volume histogram (DVH) curves of fifteen patients in two designed treatment plans including, 3D-CRT and IMRT. 3D-CRT plans were performed in three phases by considering the mixed photon-electron beams in the second phase with a total dose of 70 Gy in 35 fractions. The prescribed dose of IMRT plans was 70 Gy in 33 fractions by employing 9 fields of photon beams. Results: A significant statistical difference was observed in TCP and CI between 3D-CRT and IMRT plans. The average value of TCP in IMRT is 5.65 times that of 3D-CRT. Also, IMRT showed a 123% increase in the average value of CI compared with 3D-CRT.There were no significant statistical changes in HI between the two treatments. Conclusion: Although the IMRT procedure is more effective than 3D-CRT in the dose delivery process, 3D-CRT with mixed photon-electron beams can create dose homogeneity.

Keywords: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma, conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, tumor control probability.

Full-Text [PDF 834 kb] (101 Downloads)

Type of Study: Short Report | Subject: Radiation Biology

References

1. 1. Monadi N, Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Monadi S, Mahani L, Shams A, Akhavan A, et al. (2023) Dosimetric characteristics of tomotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. International Journal of Radiation Research, 21(3): 427-34. [DOI:10.61186/ijrr.21.3.427]

2. Ameri A, Khaledi N, Mohammadi M, Reynaert N, Sardari D (2018) Dosimetric evaluation of a novel electron-photon mixed beam, produced by a medical linear accelerator. Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice, 17(3): 319-31. [DOI:10.1017/S1460396917000711]

3. Hashemifard HR, Anbiaee R, Arbabi A, Bitarafan S, Soltani D, Pi rayesh E (2019) Comparison of "heart and lung volume absorbed dose" between electron and photon boost radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery. International Journal of Radiation Re search, 17(2): 363-7.

4. Khan FM, Gibbons JP. Khan's the Physics of Radiation Therapy: Lip pincott Williams & Wilkins; 2014.

5. Müller S. Treatment techniques for mixed beam radiotherapy with simultaneously optimized photon and electron beams: ETH Zurich; 2018.

6. Tai DT, Oanh LT, Phuong PH, Sulieman A, Abolaban FA, Omer H, et al. (2022) Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison in head-and-neck radiotherapy using JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT. Saudi Journal of Bio logical Sciences, 29(8): 103336. [DOI:10.1016/j.sjbs.2022.103336]

7. Mirzaeiyan M, Najafizadeh N, Saeb M, Shahbazi-Gahrouei D (2024) Dosiomics-based comparison of dose distributions in nasopharyn geal cancer patients: 3D-CRT versus Tomotherapy. International Journal of Radiation Research, 22(2): 419-25. [DOI:10.61186/ijrr.22.2.419]

8. van der Veen J, Gulyban A, Willems S, Maes F, Nuyts S (2021) In terobserver variability in organ at risk delineation in head and neck cancer. Radiat Oncol, 16(1): 120. [DOI:10.1186/s13014-020-01677-2]

9. Puzhakkal N, Kochunny A, Padannayil N, Singh N, Chalil J, Umer J (2016) Comparison of treatment plans: A retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation. Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering, 22: 61-68. [DOI:10.1515/pjmpe-2016-0011]

10. Feuvret L, Noel G, Mazeron JJ, Bey P (2006) Conformity index: a re view. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 64(2): 333-42. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.028]

11. Kataria T, Sharma K, Subramani V, Karrthick KP, Bisht SS (2012) Ho mogeneity Index: An objective tool for assessment of conformal ra diation treatments. J Med Phys, 37(4): 207-13. [DOI:10.4103/0971-6203.103606]

12. Gay HA and Niemierko A (2007) A free program for calculating EUD-based NTCP and TCP in external beam radiotherapy. Phys Med, 23(3-4): 115-25. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2007.07.001]

13. Luo M-S, Huang G-J, Liu H.B (2019) Oncologic outcomes of IMRT versus CRT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A meta-analysis. Medi cine, 98(24): e15951. [DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000015951]

14. Fogliata A, Cozzi L, Bieri S, Bernier J (1999) Critical appraisal of a conformal head and neck cancer irradiation avoiding electron beams and field matching. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 45(5): 1331-8. [DOI:10.1016/S0360-3016(99)00319-3]

15. Kristensen CA, Kjaer-Kristoffersen F, Sapru W, Berthelsen AK, Loft A, Specht L (2007) Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Treatment planning with IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy. Acta Oncol, 46(2): 214-20. [DOI:10.1080/02841860600635862]

16. Ibrahim M, Attalla E, Naggar M, Elshemey W (2018) Dosimetric comparison between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the treat ment of different stages of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice, 18: 1-6. [DOI:10.1017/S1460396918000377]

17. Shen Q, Ma X, Hu W, Chen L, Huang J, Guo Y (2013) Intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus three-dimensional conformal radi otherapy for stage I-II natural killer/T-cell lymphoma nasal type: dosimetric and clinical results. Radiation Oncology, 8(1): 152. [DOI:10.1186/1748-717X-8-152]

18. Vitolo V, Millender LE, Quivey JM, Yom SS, Schechter NR, Jereczek-Fossa BA, et al. (2009) Assessment of carotid artery dose in the treatment of nasopharyngeal cancer with IMRT versus convention al radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol, 90(2): 213-20. [DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2008.08.014]

19. Mesbahi A, Rasuli N, Nasiri B, Mohammadzadeh M (2017) Radiobi ological model-based comparison of three-dimensional conformal and intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans for nasopharyn geal carcinoma. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics, 14(4): 190-6.

20. Sharbo G, Hashemi B, Bakhshandeh M, Rakhsha A (2022) Assess ment of developed IMRT and 3D-CRT planning protocols for treating nasopharyngeal cancer patients based on the target and organs at risks common volumes. International Journal of Radia tion Research, 20: 307-15. [DOI:10.52547/ijrr.20.2.8]

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 50 queries by YEKTAWEB 4722