• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.284-289
• /
• 2013

A study was performed comparing dosimetric characteristics of volumetric modulated arc and intensity modulated radiatio therapy on patients with bilateral breast cancer. For 5 patients, 3 plans were made for each patient; IMRT beams 8 and 12 of the beam intensity modulated radiation therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy plan. The average PTVs volumes and $D_{98}$ for 12-IMRT were $51.04{\pm}0.57$ Gy (right), $50.80{\pm}1.07$ Gy (left), $42.94{\pm}16.16$ Gy (right), $42.56{\pm}2.09$ Gy (left). HI ($D_5{\sim}D_{95}$) and $CI_{90,95}$, even 12-IMRT has shown excellent results. In OAR, 3 plans showed excellent results. But the lowest dose of 12-IMRT. 12-IMRT achieved similar PTV coverage and sparing of organs at risk than 8-IMRT and VMAT.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.351-356
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cancer incidence rate and provide basic data by measuring the photoneutron dose generated during intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy used in radiation therapy for prostate cancer. The optically stimulated luminescence albedo neutron dosimeter for neutron measurement was placed on the Rando phantom in the abdomen and thyroid and photoneutron dose generated was measured. As a result of the study, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (7 portal) was measured to be higher than volumetric rotational radiation therapy in both abdominal and thyroid locations. When the cancer incidence rate was evaluated using the nominal risk coefficient of ICRP 103, the cancer incidence rate due to exposure to the colon and thyroid during intensity-modulated radiation therapy was 9.9 per 1,000 people, and volumetric rotational radiation therapy for 1,000 people. It was 3.5 per person. Based on the principle of ALARA (As low as reasonably archievable), it is considered to be a guideline for minimizing the exposure dose to normal organs in the establishment of a radiation treatment plan.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.255-263
• /
• 2012

The aim of this study was to evaluate the patient specific quality assurance (QA) results of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) through the AAPM Task Group Report 119. Using the treatment planning system, both IMRT and VMAT treatment plans were established. The absolute dose and relative dose for the target and OAR were measured by using an ion chamber and the bi-planar diode array, respectively. The plan evaluation was used by the Dose volume histogram (DVH) and the dose verification was implemented by compare the measured value with the calculated value. For the evaluation of plan, in case of prostate, both IMRT and VMAT were closed the goal of target and OARs. In case of H&N and Multi-target, IMRT was not reached the goal of target, but VMAT was reached the goal of target and OARs. In case of C-shape(easy), both were reached the goal of target and OARs. In case of C-shape(hard), both were reached the goal of target but not reached the goal of OARs. For the evaluation of absolute dose, in case of IMRT, the mean of relative error (%) between measured and calculated value was $1.24{\pm}2.06%$ and $1.4{\pm}2.9%$ for target and OAR, respectively. The confidence limits were 3.65% and 4.39% for target and OAR, respectively. In case of VMAT the mean of relative error was $2.06{\pm}0.64%$ and $2.21{\pm}0.74%$ for target and OAR, respectively. The confidence limits were 4.09% and 3.04% for target and OAR, respectively. For the evaluation of relative dose, in case of IMRT, the average percentage of passing gamma criteria (3mm/3%) were $98.3{\pm}1.5%$ and the confidence limits were 3.78%. In case of VMAT, the average percentage were $98.2{\pm}1.1%$ and the confidence limits were 3.95%. We performed IMRT and VMAT patient specific QA using TG-119 based procedure, all analyzed results were satisfied with acceptance criteria based on TG-119. So, the IMRT and VMAT of our institution was confirmed the accuracy.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.183-191
• /
• 2010

In this study, the patient with localized prostate cancer who had previously been treated at Ajou University Hospital was randomly selected since March, 2009. we performed IMRT and 2RA plans and the same dose objectives were used for CTVs, PTVs, rectum, bladder, and femoral head of the respective plans. Arc optimizations and dose calculations were performed using Eclipse versions 8.6. In this paper, we evaluated the performance of IMRT and RA plans to investigate the clinical effect of RA for prostate cancer case. In our comparison of treatment techniques, RA was found to be superior to IMRT being better dose conformity of target volume. As for the rectum and bladder, RA was better than IMRT at decreasing the volume irradiated. RA has the ability to avoid critical organs selectively through applied same dose constraints while maximally treating the target dose. Therefore, this result suggests that there should be less rectal toxicity with RA compared with IMRT, with no compromise in tumor margin. These findings, which show more favorable rectal, bladder, and femoral head DVHs with RA, imply that should not result in excess risk of toxicity when this technique is used. Many experiences with RA have shown not only dosimetric advantage, but also improved clinical toxicity when comparing with IMRT. The main drawbacks of RA are the more complex and time-consuming treatment planning process and the need for more exact physics quality assurance (QA).