What is the Best Way to Plan Rectum Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy in Prone Position—Classic Anatomical Landmark, Three Dimensional Fitting the Planning Target Volume, or Volumetric Modulated Arc?

Background Traditionally, rectal cancer radiation therapy uses bony landmark fields to cover common lymphatic drainage sites, including the internal iliac, presacral, and perirectal lymph nodes. We aimed to investigate if bony landmark borders sufficiently cover the internal iliac nodes and to compare tumor volume and normal tissue avoidance using classic bony landmarks (c3DCRT), contoured elective clinical target volume (f3DCRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning in locally advanced rectal cancer. Methods Computed tomography datasets of 11 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who had completed treatment in the prone position on a bellyboard in c3DCRT technique. The elective clinical target volumes and organs at risk were contoured, and a f3DCRT VMAT plan generated for all patients. Planning target volume, gross tumor volume, and normal tissue dose limits were evaluated. Results The mean planning target volume 95% coverages were significantly lower for c3DCRT plans, and the lymph node coverage was better for f3DCRT. No differences were found in PTV coverages between f3DCRT and volumetric modulated arc therapy plans. No significant differences among all techniques were found for organs-at-risk constraints. The bladder dosage was higher in the VMAT plan. The c3DCRT technique missed coverage of the internal iliac lymph nodes and exposed smaller bowel, compared with the other methods. Discussion and Conclusion Tumor volume coverage was improved by f3DCRT planning, without significant differences in doses to critical structures compared with c3DCRT and was noninferior to VMAT planning. It is recommended that f3DCRT be used in routine clinical practice in radiotherapy treatments for locally advanced rectal cancer.