{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.040419161676646706, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017964071856287425, 'mean_word_length': 4.967261904761905, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The feasibility of dose escalation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) with FDG PET/CT guided in esophageal cancer

Context: Previous studies show that dose escalation for gross tumor volume (GTV) improves local control of esophageal cancer (EC). However, optimal boosting remains uncertain. Recently, functional imaging guidance to achieve dose escalation in high-risk areas of tumors has been proposed. Aims: This study evaluated the feasibility of dose escalation in tumor regions with high fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Settings and Design: GTVPET was defined as a high FDG uptake region with 50% SUVmax threshold for dose escalation. IMRT and IMPT plans were generated for three boosting modes: plan 50.4 (50.4 Gy in clinical target volume, CTV), plan 63 (50.4 Gy in CTV, 63 Gy in GTV), plan 70 (50.4 Gy in CTV, 63 Gy in GTV, and 70 Gy in GTVPET). Methods and Material: Eleven patients with squamous cell carcinoma were evaluated. Dose parameters for heart, lung, and spinal cord were compared based on the dose-volume histogram (DVH). Statistical Analysis Used: Paired t-test was performed on the doses to organs-at-risk (OARs) among plan 50.4, plan 63, and plan 70 for IMRT and IMPT. Results: Dosimetric parameters for IMRT for heart, lung, and spinal cord increased significantly for plan 63 and some parameters even exceeded dose limits for OARs. Further dose escalation in GTV-PET did not increase dosimetric parameters significantly. Most dosimetric parameters of OARs in IMPT exhibited no statistical change compared with plan 50.4, and doses to OARs were far less than dose constraints. Conclusions: Dose escalation by IMRT may lead to increased risk of radiation-related injury. Further dose escalation in high FDG uptake regions did not increase doses to OARs. This dose escalation is ideal for achieving better outcomes for EC treatment.