Dosimetric impact of gastrointestinal air column in radiation treatment of pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Dosimetric evaluation of air column in gastrointestinal (GI) structures in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Nine sequential patients were retrospectively chosen for dosimetric analysis of air column in the GI apparatus in pancreatic cancer using cone beam CT (CBCT). The four-dimensional CT (4DCT) was used for target and organs at risk (OARs) and non-coplanar IMRT was used for treatment. Once a week, these patients underwent CBCT for air filling, isocentre verification and dose calculations retrospectively. RESULTS: Abdominal air column variation was as great as ±80% between weekly CBCT and 4DCT. Even with such a large air column in the treatment path for pancreatic cancer, changes in anteroposterior dimension were minimal (2.8%). Using IMRT, variations in air column did not correlate dosimetrically with large changes in target volume. An average dosimetric deviation of mere -3.3% and a maximum of -5.5% was observed. CONCLUSION: CBCT revealed large air column in GI structures; however, its impact is minimal for target coverage. Because of the inherent advantage of segmentation in IMRT, where only a small fraction of a given beam passes through the air column, this technique might have an advantage over 3DCRT in treating upper GI malignancies where the daily air column can have significant impact. Advances in knowledge: Radiation treatment of pancreatic cancer has significant challenges due to positioning, imaging of soft tissues and variability of air column in bowels. The dosimetric impact of variable air column is retrospectively studied using CBCT. Even though, the volume of air column changes by ± 80%, its dosimetric impact in IMRT is minimum.

A dosimetric comparison of whole-lung treatment techniques in the pediatric population.

To demonstrate the dosimetric advantages and disadvantages of standard anteroposterior-posteroanterior (S-AP/PAAAA), inverse-planned AP/PA (IP-AP/PA) and volumetry-modulated arc (VMAT) radiotherapies in the treatment of children undergoing whole-lung irradiation. Each technique was evaluated by means of target coverage and normal tissue sparing, including data regarding low doses. A historical approach with and without tissue heterogeneity corrections is also demonstrated. Computed tomography (CT) scans of 10 children scanned from the neck to the reproductive organs were used. For each scan, 6 plans were created: (1) S-AP/PAAAA using the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), (2) IP-AP/PA, (3) VMAT, (4) S-AP/PANONE without heterogeneity corrections, (5) S-AP/PAPB using the Pencil-Beam algorithm and enforcing monitor units from technique 4, and (6) S-AP/PAAAA[FM] using AAA and forcing fixed monitor units. The first 3 plans compare modern methods and were evaluated based on target coverage and normal tissue sparing. Body maximum and lower body doses (50% and 30%) were also analyzed. Plans 4 to 6 provide a historic view on the progression of heterogeneity algorithms and elucidate what was actually delivered in the past. Averages of each comparison parameter were calculated for all techniques. The S-AP/PAAAA technique resulted in superior target coverage but had the highest maximum dose to every normal tissue structure. The IP-AP/PA technique provided the lowest dose to the esophagus, stomach, and lower body doses. VMAT excelled at body maximum dose and maximum doses to the heart, spine, and spleen, but resulted in the highest dose in the 30% body range. It was, however, superior to the S-AP/PAAAA approach in the 50% range. Each approach has strengths and weaknesses thus associated. Techniques may be selected on a case-by-case basis and by physician preference of target coverage vs normal tissue sparing.

Dosimetric comparison of metastatic spinal photon treatment techniques.

Traditional palliative treatment of metastatic cancer to the vertebral bodies often results in doses to the spinal cord that are higher than the dose prescribed to the target, or gross tumor volume (GTV). This study compares traditional techniques of spine palliation with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The purpose of the study is 2-fold: first, the study demonstrates the benefits of using IMRT to lower the dose to the organs at risk (OAR), particularly for the spinal cord and other nonspecified normal tissues; second, the article provides information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of commonly used conventional techniques for treating the vertebral bodies based on patient anatomy. Because the use of IMRT or other advanced techniques may be prohibitive because of insurance issues, treatment plans were created that compared optimal coverage vs. optimal sparing for single-field, wedged-pair, and opposed-beam arrangements. Fifty-five patients were selected and divided by location of target (cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine) and also by the measured separation between the anterior and posterior surface of the patient at the level of mid-GTV. Within each anatomic category the patients again were divided into the categories of small, medium, and large based on separation. The patient dataset that most closely represented the average separation within each category was selected, resulting in a total of 9 patients, and the appropriate treatment plan techniques were calculated for each of the 9 patients. The results of the study do show that the use of IMRT is far superior when compared with other techniques, both for coverage and for sparing of the surrounding tissue, regardless of patient size and the section of spine being treated. Based on a combination of both target coverage and sparing of normal tissues, the conventional plan of choice may vary by both the section of spine to be treated and by the size of the patient.

Conformality study for stereotactic radiosurgery of the lung.

The purpose of this study is to compare two techniques of developing highly conformal plans for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) that target a high ablative dose to the center of the tumor while dropping off rapidly in normal tissues to determine which technique produced a more desirable treatment plan. The techniques used for comparison are "field in field" (FIF) and "non field in field" (NFIF). Twelve case studies were used, all of which had been treated using the FIF technique. Each FIF plan was edited, maintaining the same geometry for each field but reducing the total number of fields to one half by deleting all of the fields that were inside another field; this edited plan was the NFIF plan. Normalization was made to the isodose line (NFIF-I) and to the target volume (NFIF-V) and both plans were compared with the standard FIF plan independently. Dose-ratio comparisons were made of the 80% and 50% isodose volumes, as well as maximum doses outside of the planning target volume, mean dose to the gross tumor volume (GTV), minimum dose coverage on the GTV, maximum dose to the spinal cord, and the dose to the volume of noninvolved lung receiving 2000 cGy (V20). The FIF plans resulted in the best sparing of normal tissue. The NFIF-I had the best target coverage but also resulted in the highest doses to normal tissues. The NFIF-V was not significantly different from the FIF in doses to normal tissue but had the lowest coverage to targets of any of the techniques. Overall, in our department, we have chosen to use the FIF technique for SBRT conformality to obtain optimal coverage while minimizing the dose to normal tissue.