ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the neck skin dose between fixed-field dynamic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (dlMRT),volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT),and helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma.Methods A total of 16 early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients undergoing radiotherapy were enrolled as subjects.The neck skin was delineated by contraction of the outer edge of neck by 3 mm.Dose planning was made by the traditional method (TP group)and a new method (NP group),in which the neck skin was considered as the organ at risk.Dmean and V5-V70 for the neck skin were recorded.The paired t-test was used to analyze the differences between two plans in each radiotherapy method.An analysis of variance was used to compare the same plan between the three radiotherapy methods.Results The HT group had significantly higher Dmean and V5-V70 for the neck skin than the dIMRT group and the VMAT group (P=0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.02).Using dIMRT,the D and V10-V60 for the neck skin were reduced by 7％,8％,22％,25％,38％,59％,and 85％ in the NP group than in the TP group (P=0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00).Using VMAT,the D and V20-V40 for the neck skin were reduced by 4％,19％,29％,and 34％ in the NP group than in the TP group (P=0.02,0.01,0.02,0.01).Using HT,the V30-V60 for the neck skin were reduced by 20％,29％,50％,and 67％ in the NP group than in the TP group (P=0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.03).Conclusions In the treatment of early-stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma,HT causes a higher radiation dose to the neck skin than dIMRT and VMAT,while dIMRT and VMAT have similar neck skin doses.The neck skin dose can be significantly reduced with the neck skin as the organ at risk.
ABSTRACT
Objective To study the effects of using jaw tracking technique with Smart LMC algorithm on the absorbing dose of planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) in dynamic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).Methods Field fluencies of 10 cases of NPC patients were optimized using DVO algorithm on Eclipse TPS (11.0),and according to the same optimal fluence,MLC operation files were calculated using jaw tracking technique and jaw fixing technique respectively,dose distribution was calculated with AAA algorithm and jaw tracking IMRT plan (JT-IMRT) and jaw fixing IMRT plan (JF-IMRT) were generated respectively.Collimators' position at the plan implementation was observed,and the total number of plans' monitor units (MU),the dose of PTV,the absorb dose of OARs,and the actual fluence verification pass rate were compared.Results The collimators' opening gap distances in 166 control points of the JT-IMRT reduced in both X and Y directions in the field,compared to that of the JF-IMRT.Total number of the JT-IMRT's MU increased by 3.59％-11.63％.There was no statistical significant difference between the doses of the PTV.Statistical significance was found in the differences between maximum dose (Dmax) of brainstem,spinal cord,crystal,optic nerve,the mean dose (Dmean) and D50％ of parotid and their decreased values after therapy (t=5.70-8.66,P＜0.05).The actual fluence verification pass rate of the JT-IMRT was higher than that of the JF-IMRT.There was a significant difference between the results (t=5.18,P＜0.05).Conclusions The JT-IMRT plan of the smart LMC algorithm is more tolerant to the radiation leakage between inter-and intra-leaf.The dose of OARs is lower,while the dose calculation precision and the verification pass rate are higher,the actual radiation dose is more accurate and reliable.Therefore it is more suitable for clinical applications.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the planning quality and acute toxicity between RapidArc and fixed gantry angle dynamic intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the postoperative radiotherapy for cervical cancer patients.Methods All 35 patients with cervical cancer who had received postoperative radiotherapy were studied,including 17 patients with RapidArc and 18 patients with IMRT.All plans were prescribed 50 Gy in 25 fractions.The dose-volume histogram data,the conformity index and homogeneity index of the targets,the monitor units (MUs) and delivery time were compared.During the treatment,the incidence of acute intestinal and bladder side effects were also compared.Results Compared to IMRT,the conformity index of RapidArc was better(t =3.13,P ＜ 0.05),but the homogeneity index was slightly worse (t =-4.25,P ＜ 0.05).The V20 and V30 of femoral head planned by RapidArc was significantly lower than that by IMRT (t =2.56,2.34,P ＜ 0.05).The mean MU for RapidArc was reduced by 52.1％ compared with IMRT.The mean treatment time for RapidArc was decreased by 46.8％ compared with IMRT.There was no difference in the incidence of acute intestinal and bladder toxicity between the two groups.Conclusion For patients with cervical cancer who need prophylactic postoperative radiotherapy,both RapidArc and IMRT plan can achieve equal target coverage and organs at risk(OAR) sparing.There is no significant difference in dosimetric parameters and acute toxicity between the two groups.Compared with IMRT,RapidArc plan has fewer MUs and less treatment time and significantly improves the treatment efficiency.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the dosimetric difference between RapidArc and fixed gantry angle dynamic intensity modulated radiotherapy (dIMRT) in developing the pre-operative radiotherapy for rectal cancer patients.Methods Two techniques,RapidArc and dIMRT,were used respectively to develop the synchronous intensity modulated plans for 10 stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer patients at the dose of gross tumor volume (GTV) of 50.6 Gy divided into 22 fractions and planning target volume (PTV) of 41.8 Gy divided into 22 fractions.Both plans satisfied the condition of 95% of PTV covered by 41.8 Gy.The dose-volume histogram data,isodose distribution,monitor units,and treatment time were compared.Results The two kinds of dose volume histogram (DVH) developed by these two techniques were almost the same.The conformal indexes of GTV and PTV by RapidArc were better than those by dIMRT (t =7.643,8.226 ,P < 0.05),while the homogeneity of target volume by dIMRT was better (t =-10.065,-4.235 ,P <0.05).The dose of rectum and small bowel planned by RapidArc was significantly lower than that by dIMRT (t =2.781 ,P <0.05).There were no significant differences in the mean doses of bladder and femoral head between these two techniques.The mean monitor units of RapidArc was 475.5,fewer by 48.5% in comparison with that by the dIMRT (924.6).The treatment mean time by RapidArc was 1.2min,shorter by 79.5% in comparison with that by dIMRT (5.58 min).Conclusions There is no significant dosimetric difference between the two plans of RapidArc and dIMRT.Compared with dIMRT,RapidArc achieves equal target coverage and organs at risk(OAR) sparing while using fewer monitor units and less time during radiotherapy for patient with rectal cancer.