Dosimetric comparison of volumetric-arc therapy versus sliding window intensity-modulated radiotherapy in postoperative treatment for primary soft tissue sarcoma of the thigh.

Aim Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has demonstrated improved local control in extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS) after limb-sparing surgery compared with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. Our purpose was to evaluate sliding-window IMRT (SW-IMRT) and volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) in planning target volume (PTV) coverage and dose to organs-at-risk (OAR). Methods Sixteen patients undergoing postoperative RT for lower extremity STS were included. For each patient, one VMAT plan and one SW-IMRT plan were proposed. Both were evaluated using cumulative dose-volume histogram data for OAR and PTVs. Prescribed dose was 66 Gy (2 Gy/fraction) to PTV1 and 56 Gy (1.69 Gy/fraction) to PTV2. OARs contoured were femur, neurovascular bundle, minimum tissue corridor, normal tissue outside PTV2, joint and genitalia. T-Student test was performed. Results Eleven male (69%) and five female patients (31%) were analyzed. Mean age was 60 years. Both techniques showed optimal target coverage, conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI). VMAT PTV2 CI was 1.13 (mean) +/- 0.08 (standard deviation) versus 1.19 +/- 0.10 SW-IMRT PTV2 CI (P < 0.05). VMAT PTV1 HI was 0.09 +/- 0.01 versus 0.08 +/- 0.01 SW-IMRT PTV1 HI (P < 0.05). Regarding OARs, VMAT delivered lower dose to femur, genitalia, normal tissue outside PTV2 and joints. SW-IMRT spared tissue corridor mean dose (10.4 Gy +/- 6.8 Gy) versus (14.7 +/- 6.5 Gy) VMAT (P < 0.05). Conclusions Both techniques achieved great conformity, homogeneity and coverage of PTV. VMAT produced lower dose to OARS and SW-IMRT was superior in sparing dose to normal-tissue-corridor, which could reduce risk of lymphedema.