La radiologia medica

, Volume 123, Issue 3, pp 217–226 | Cite as

Comparison of intensity modulated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) and a 3-dimensional conformal parotid gland-sparing radiotherapy (ConPas 3D-CRT) in treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a mono-institutional experience

  • Vesna Bišof
  • Zoran Rakušić
  • Juraj Bibić
  • Timor Grego
  • Majana Soče



To compare intensity modulated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB) and a 3-dimensional conformal parotid gland-sparing radiotherapy (ConPas 3D-CRT) in treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with regard to outcomes and dose distribution to the planning target volumes (PTVs) and to the organs at risk (OARs).


The treatment records of 24 patients with histologically proven carcinoma of the nasopharynx treated with ConPas 3D-CRT or IMRT-SIB technique between May 2009 and December 2016 were assessed.


The mean dose and dose to 50% parotid glands volume as well as the maximal dose to the spinal cord were significantly lower in the IMRT-SIB than in the ConPas 3-CRT group (p < 0.05; p < 0.05; p < 0.01, respectively). IMRT-SIB was also superior in coverage of PTVs. The 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients in the IMRT-SIB and ConPas 3D-CRT groups were 77 and 81% (p = 0.93), 51.9 and 70.7% (p = 0.83), respectively.


IMRT-SIB provided additional spearing to parotid glands and spinal cord in comparison to ConPas 3D-CRT technique but without improvement of OS and DFS.


Nasopharyngeal cancer Radiotherapy Treatment techniques Organs at risk 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedure performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Zagreb.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C et al (2013) GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 11. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. Accessed 6 May 2017
  2. 2.
    Tang LL, Chen WQ, Xue WQ, He YQ, Zheng RS, Zeng YX et al (2016) Global trends in incidence and mortality of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Lett 374:22–30CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Lastrucci L, Bertocci S, Bini V, Borghesi S, De Majo R, Rampini A et al (2017) Late toxicity, evolving radiotherapy techniques, and quality of life in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Radiol Med 122:303–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peng G, Wang T, Yang KY, Zhang S, Zhang T, Li Q et al (2012) A prospective, randomized study comparing outcomes and toxicities of intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs. conventional two-dimensional radiotherapy for the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 104:286–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kam MK, Chau RM, Suen J, Choi PH, Teo PM (2003) Intensity-modulated radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: dosimetric advantage over conventional plans and feasibility of dose escalation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56:145–157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kam MK, Leung SF, Zee B, Chau RM, Suen JJ, Mo F et al (2007) Prospective randomized study of intensity-modulated radiotherapy on salivary gland function in early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. J Clin Oncol 25:4873–4879CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pow EH, Kwong DL, McMillan AS, Wong MC, Sham JS, Leung LH et al (2006) Xerostomia and quality of life after intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs. conventional radiotherapy for early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma: initial report on a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66:981–991CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leibel SA, Kutcher GJ, Harrison LB, Fass DE, Burman CM, Hunt MA et al (1991) Improved dose distributions for 3D conformal boost treatments in carcinoma of the nasopharynx. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 20:823–833CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sultanem K, Shu HK, Xia P, Akazawa C, Quivey JM, Verhey LJ et al (2000) Three-dimensional intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: the University of California-San Francisco experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48:711–722CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fang FM, Chien CY, Tsai WL, Chen HC, Hsu HC, Lui CC et al (2008) Quality of life and survival outcome for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma receiving three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy vs. intensity-modulated radiotherapy—a longitudinal study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 72:356–364CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuang WL, Zhou Q, Shen LF (2012) Outcomes and prognostic factors of conformal radiotherapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Clin Transl Oncol 14:783–790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moretto F, Rampino M, Munoz F, Ruo Redda MG, Reali A, Balcet V et al (2014) Conventional 2D (2DRT) and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal cancer treatment. Radiol Med 119:634–641CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Spiotto MT, Weichselbaum RR (2014) Comparison of 3D conformal radiotherapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy with or without simultaneous integrated boost during concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced head and neck cancers. PLoS ONE 9:e94456CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wiggenraad R, Mast M, van Santvoort J, Hoogendoorn M, Struikmans H (2005) ConPas: a 3-D conformal parotid gland-sparing irradiation technique for bilateral neck treatment as an alternative to IMRT. Strahlenther Onkol 181:673–682CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ICRU (2010) Report no 83. Prescribing, recording and reporting photon-beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). J ICRU 10:1473–6691Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee N, Harris J, Garden AS, Straube W, Glisson B, Xia P et al (2009) Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: radiation therapy oncology group phase II trial 0225. J Clin Oncol 27:3684–3690CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grégoire V, Levendag P, Ang KK, Bernier J, Braaksma M, Budach V et al (2003) CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC, RTOG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol 69:227–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grégoire V, Eisbruch A, Hamoir M, Levendag P (2006) Proposal for the delineation of the nodal CTV in the node-positive and the post-operative neck. Radiother Oncol 79:15–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grégoire V, Ang K, Budach W, Grau C, Hamoir M, Langendijk JA et al (2014) Delineation of the neck node levels for head and neck tumors: a 2013 update. DAHANCA, EORTC, HKNPCSG, NCIC CTG, NCRI, RTOG, TROG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol 110:172–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun Y, Yu XL, Luo W, Lee AW, Wee JT, Lee N et al (2014) Recommendation for a contouring method and atlas of organs at risk in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients receiving intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 110:390–397CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brouwer CL, Steenbakkers RJ, Bourhis J, Budach W, Grau C et al (2015) CT-based delineation of organs at risk in the head and neck region: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, HKNPCSG, NCIC CTG, NCRI, NRG Oncology and TROG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol 117:83–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marks LB, Yorke ED, Jackson A, Ten Haken RK, Constine LS, Eisbruch A et al (2010) Use of normal tissue complication probability models in the clinic. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76(3 Suppl):S10–S19CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    R Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, FranceGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Therneau T (2015) A Package for Survival Analysis in S. Version 2.38. Accessed 13 Apr 2017
  26. 26.
    Kassambara A, Kosinski M (2017) Survimner: drawing survival curves using “ggplot2”. R package version 0.3.1Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wickam H (2009) Ggplots2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dogan N, King S, Emami B, Mohideen N, Mirkovic N, Leybovich LB et al (2003) Assessment of different IMRT boost delivery methods on target coverage and normal-tissue sparing. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57:1480–1491CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Herrassi MY, Bentayeb F, Malisan MR (2013) Comparative study of four advanced 3D-conformal radiation therapy treatment planning techniques for head and neck cancer. J Med Phys 38:98–105CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee AW, Ng WT, Chan LL, Hung WM, Chan CC, Sze HC et al (2014) Evolution of treatment for nasopharyngeal cancer–success and setback in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy era. Radiother Oncol 110:377–384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fareed MM, AlAmro AS, Bayoumi Y, Tunio MA, Ismail AS, Akasha R et al (2013) Intensity-modulated radiotherapy with simultaneous modulated accelerated boost technique and chemotherapy in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. BMC Cancer 13:318CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gomez-Millan J, Fernández JR, Medina Carmona JA (2013) Current status of IMRT in head and neck cancer. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 18:371–375CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Haberer-Guillerm S, Touboul E, Huguet F (2015) Intensity modulated radiation therapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 132:147–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Xu L, Yao JJ, Zhou GQ, Zhang WJ, Liu GL, Liu LZ et al (2016) The impact of clinical stage on radiation doses to organs at risk following intensity-modulated radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a prospective analysis. J Cancer 7:2157–2164CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yao JJ, Chen FP, Zhou GQ, Zhang WJ, Xu L, Wang XJ et al (2016) A prospective study on radiation doses to organs at risk (OARs) during intensity-modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. Oncotarget 7:2142–2152Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eisbruch A, Ten Haken RK, Kim HM, Marsh LH, Ship JA (1999) Dose, volume, and function relationships in parotid salivary glands following conformal and intensity-modulated irradiation of head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 45:577–587CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nutting CM, Morden JP, Harrington KJ, Urbano TG, Bhide SA, Clark C et al (2011) Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 12(2):127–136CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mazzola R, Ferrera G, Alongi F, Mannino M, Abbate B, Cucchiara T et al (2015) Organ sparing and clinical outcome with step-and-shoot IMRT for head and neck cancer: a mono-institutional experience. Radiol Med 120:753–758CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lee N, Harris J, Garden AS, Straube W, Glisson B, Xia P et al (2009) Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: radiation therapy oncology group phase II trial 0225. J Clin Oncol 27:3684–3690CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gulliford SL, Miah AB, Brennan S, McQuaid D, Clark CH, Partridge M et al (2012) Dosimetric explanations of fatigue in head and neck radiotherapy: an analysis from the PARSPORT Phase III trial. Radiother Oncol 104:205–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Powell C, Schick U, Morden JP, Gulliford SL, Miah AB, Bhide S et al (2014) Fatigue during chemoradiotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer and its relationship to radiation dose distribution in the brain. Radiother Oncol 110:416–421CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Medical Radiology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OncologyUniversity Hospital Centre ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.School of MedicineUniversity of OsijekOsijekCroatia
  3. 3.School of MedicineUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations