3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT for flank irradiation due to pediatric Wilms tumor: A comparative planning study with XCAT phantoms

Published:October 15, 2022DOI:


      • 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT plans for Wilms tumor were made on hybrid pediatric phantoms.
      • Organ- and age-specific radiation risk data were estimated based on treatment plans.
      • IMRT/VMAT led to better target coverage, dose homogeneity and conformity than 3DCRT.
      • Flank 3D-CRT provided a superior organ sparing in respect to IMRT/VMAT.
      • Flank and paraaortic lymph node IMRT/VMAT improved organ sparing compared to 3D-CRT.



      To compare the dosimetric parameters and radiogenic risks from 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT for flank irradiation due to pediatric Wilms tumor.


      Two computational XCAT phantoms simulating an average 5- and 10-year-old patient were used. Four different planning target volumes (PTVs) for right flank (RF) and left flank (LF) irradiation with or without paraaortic lymph nodes (LNs) and eight surrounding organs-at-risk (OARs) were contoured on the phantoms’ CT sections. Forty-eight 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT plans were created using 6 and 10-MV photons on the two phantoms. The target coverage index (TCI), homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), conformation number (CN) and OAR exposure were determined through dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis. Second cancer risks were estimated using a non-linear model and DVH data.


      The IMRT and VMAT for LF + LN and RF + LN irradiation reduced the radiation dose to four to six out of the eight OARs compared to 3D-CRT. Conventional treatment provided a better organ sparing for RF and LF irradiation. The IMRT and VMAT led to superior planning parameters in respect to 3D-CRT for all PTVs and both patient’s ages (3D-CRT: TCI = 59.80 % - 82.26 %, CI = 0.55–0.81, CN = 0.40–0.64, HI = 1.11–1.15; IMRT: TCI = 96.04 % - 99.72 %, CI = 0.85–0.91, CN = 0.85–0.88, HI = 1.03–1.05; VMAT: TCI = 96.02 % - 99.69 %, CI = 0.86–0.91, CN = 0.85–0.89, HI = 1.03–1.06). The excess-absolute-risk for developing secondary small intestine, liver and stomach malignancies from 3D-CRT were (7.99–19.32) × 10-4, (0.29–3.83) × 10-4 and (0.37–4.50) × 10-4 persons-year, respectively. The corresponding risks from intensity modulated techniques reached to 22.26 × 10-4, 4.58 × 10-4 and 5.42 × 10-4 persons-year.


      This dataset related to plan quality, radiation dose and risks to OARs allows the selection of the proper treatment technique for flank irradiation based on the patient’s age and target site.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


      1. PDQ Pediatric Treatment Editorial Board. PDQ Wilms tumor and other childhood kidney tumor treatment. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Available at ; 2022 [accessed 5 April 2022].

      2. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Wilms tumor (nephroblastoma), version 2.2021, ; 2021 [accessed 17 June 2021].

        • Dome JS
        • Graf N
        • Geller JI
        • Fernandez CV
        • Mullen EA
        • Spreafico F
        • et al.
        Advances in Wilms tumor treatment and biology: Progress through international collaboration.
        J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33: 2999-3007
      3. Kalapurakal JA.Wilms tumor. In: Halperin EC, Wazer DE, Perez CA, Brady LW,editors. Principles and practice of radiation oncology. 7thed. Philadelphia, WoltersKluver; 2019, p 2006-27.

        • Paulino AC
        • Wen BC
        • Brown C K
        • Tannous R
        • Mayr NA
        • Zhen WK
        Late effects in children treated with radiation therapy for Wilms’ tumor.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000; 46: 1239-1246
        • Van Dijk IWEM
        • Oldenburger F
        • Cardous-Ubbink MC
        • Geenen MM
        • Heinen RC
        • De Kraker J
        • et al.
        Evaluation of late adverse events in long-term Wilms’ tumor survivors.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 78: 370-378
        • Sasso G
        • Greco N
        • Murino P
        • Sasso FS.
        Late toxicity in Wilms tumor patients treated with radiotherapy at 15 years of median follow-up.
        J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2010; 32e264-e267
        • Taylor AJ
        • Winter DL
        • Pritchard-Jones K
        • Stiller CA
        • Frobisher C
        • Lancashire ER
        • et al.
        Second primary neoplasms in survivors of Wilms’ tumour-A population-based cohort study from the British Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.
        Int J Cancer. 2008; 122: 2085-2093
        • Janssens GO
        • Melchior P
        • Mul J
        • Saunders D
        • Bolle S
        • Cameron AL
        • et al.
        The SIOP-renal tumour study group consensus statement on flank target volume delineation for highly conformal radiotherapy.
        Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020; 4: 846-852
        • Kalapurakal JA
        • Pokhrel D
        • Gopalakrishnan M
        • Zhang Y.
        Advantages of whole-liver intensity modulated radiation therapy in children with Wilms tumor and liver metastasis.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 85: 754-760
        • Kalapurakal JA
        • Zhang Y
        • Kepka A
        • Zawislak B
        • Sathiaseelan V
        • Rigsby C
        • et al.
        Cardiac-sparing whole lung IMRT in children with lung metastasis.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013; 85: 761-767
        • Papachristofilou A
        • Hottinger AL
        • Weinhold O
        • Avcu YK
        • Finazzi T
        • Diesch T
        • et al.
        Heart-sparing volumetric modulated arc therapy for whole lung irradiation..
        Strahlenther Onkol. 2019; 195: 77-82
        • Suzuki G
        • Ogata T
        • Aibe N
        • Yamazaki H
        • Yagyu S
        • Iehara T
        • et al.
        Effective heart-sparing whole lung irradiation using volumetric modulated arc therapy: a case report.
        J Med Case Rep. 2019; 13: 277
        • Chen MJ
        • Leao CR
        • Simoes RCP
        • Belletti FS
        • Figueiredo MLS
        • Cypriano MS.
        Kidney-sparing whole abdominal irradiation in Wilms tumor: Potential advantages of VMAT technique.
        Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2020; 67: e28223
        • Mul J
        • Seravalli E
        • Bosman ME
        • Van de Ven CP
        • Littooij AS
        • Van Grotel M
        • et al.
        Estimated clinical benefit of combining highly conformal target volumeswith Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) versus conventional flank irradiation in pediatric renal tumors.
        Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2021; 29: 20-26
        • Hillbrand M
        • Georg D
        • Gadner H
        • Potter R
        • Dieckmann K.
        Abdominal cancer during early childhood: A dosimetric comparison of proton beams to standard and advanced photon radiotherapy.
        Radiother Oncol. 2008; 89: 141-149
        • Norris H
        • Zhang Y
        • Bond J
        • Sturgeon GM
        • Minhas A
        • Tward DJ
        • et al.
        A set of 4D pediatric XCAT reference phantoms for multimodality research.
        Med Phys. 2014; 1033701
      4. Valentin J. Basic anatomical and physiological data for use in radiological protection: Reference values. ICRP Publication 89. Ann ICRP 2002;32(3-4):1-277.

        • Guerreiro F
        • Seravalli E
        • Janssens GO
        • Van den Heuvel-Eibrink MM
        • Lagendijk JJW
        • Raaymakers BW.
        Potential benefit of MRI-guided IMRT for flankradiation in pediatric patients with Wilms’ tumor.
        Acta Oncol. 2019; 58: 243-250
        • Feuvret L
        • Noel G
        • Mazeron JJ
        • Bey P.
        Conformity index: a review.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 64: 333-342
        • Lomax NJ
        • Scheib SG.
        Qunatifying the degree of conformity inradiosurgery treatment planning.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 55: 1409-1419
        • Kaplan LP
        • Korreman SS.
        A systematically compiled set of quantitative metrics to describe spatial characteristics of radiotherapy dose distributions and aid in treatment planning.
        Phys Med. 2021; 90: 164-175
        • Van’tRiet A
        • Mak ACA
        • Moerland MA
        • Elders LH
        • Van der Zee W.
        A conformation number to quantify the degree of conformality in brachytherapy and external beam irradiation: Application to the prostate.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997; 37: 731-736
        • Sung W
        • Kim J
        • Kim HS
        • Kim HJ
        • Lee YH
        • Ye SJ.
        Performance of the irregular surface compensator with four-field box and intensity modulated radiation therapy for gynecologic cancer.
        Phys Med. 2016; 32: 1537-1542
        • Schneider U
        • Sumila M
        • Robotka J.
        Site-specific dose-response relationships for cancer induction from the combined Japanese A-bomb and Hodgkin cohorts for doses relevant to radiotherapy.
        Theor Biol Med Model. 2011; 8: 27
        • Preston DL
        • Pierce DA
        • Shimizu Y
        • Cullings HM
        • Fujita S
        • Funamoto S
        • et al.
        Effect of recent changes in atomic bomb survivor dosimetry on cancer mortality risk estimates.
        Radiat Res. 2004; 162: 377-389
        • Dasu A
        • Toma-Dasu I.
        Models for the risk of secondary cancers from radiation therapy.
        Phys Med. 2017; 42: 232-238
        • Mazonakis M
        • Damilakis J.
        Out-of-field organ doses and associated risk of cancer development following radiation therapy with photons.
        Phys Med. 2021; 90: 73-82
        • Geng C
        • Moteabbed M
        • Xie Y
        • Schuemann J
        • Yock T
        • Paganetti H.
        Assessing the radiation-induced cancer risk in proton therapy for pediatric brain tumors: the impact of employing a patient-specific aperture in pencil beam scanning.
        Phys Med Biol. 2016; 61: 12-22
        • Mazonakis M
        • Stratakis J
        • Lyraraki E
        • Damilakis J.
        Risk of contralateral and ipsilateral lung cancer induction from forward-planned IMRT for breast carcinoma.
        Phys Med. 2019; 60: 44-49
        • Sanchez-Nietto B
        • Romero-Exposito M
        • Terron JA
        • Irazola L
        • Garcia Hernandez MT
        • Mateos JC
        • et al.
        External photon radiation treatment for prostate cancer: Uncomplicated cancer-free control probability assessment of 36 plans.
        Phys Med. 2019; 66: 88-96
        • Mazonakis M
        • Tzedakis A
        • Lyraraki E
        • Damilakis J.
        Radiation dose and cancer risk to out-of-field and partially in-field organs from radiotherapy for symptomatic vertebral hemangiomas.
        Med Phys. 2016; 43: 1841-1848
        • Hansen CR
        • Crijns W
        • Hussein M
        • Rossi L
        • Gallego P
        • Verbakel W
        • et al.
        Radiotherapy Treatment planning study Guidelines (RATING): A framework for setting up and reporting on scientific treatment planning studies.
        Radiother Oncol. 2020; 153: 67-78
        • Weber DC
        • Habrand JL
        • Hoppe BS
        • Kayser CH
        • Laack NN
        • Langendijk JA
        • et al.
        Proton therapy for pediatric malignancies: Fact, figures and costs. A joint consensus statement from the pediatric subcommittee of PTCOG, PROS and EPTN.
        Radiother Oncol. 2018; 128: 44-55
        • Nguyen J
        • Moteabbed M
        • Paganetti H.
        Assessment of uncertainties in radiation-induced cancer risk predictions at clinically relevant doses.
        Med Phys. 2015; 42: 81-89