• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.93-99
• /
• 1988

Some modern accerelators provide a dual energy for photon beam treatment. The main advantages of dual energy in the treatment of rectosigmoid or rectal cancer are as fellows. 1. Dose in the critical organ such as small intestine, bladder and genital organ are reduced. 2. Presacral and perineal area is fully covered. Dose distribution analysis such as calculation of dose in a target volume, isocenter, $D_{nax}$ and dose spectrum in any region of interest are possible. Examples of plan are given and results are discussed.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.37 no.2
• /
• pp.127-133
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify volume changes and dose variations of rectum and bladder during radiation therapy in prostate cancer (PC) patients. Materials and Methods: We analyzed 20 patients with PC treated with helical tomotherapy. Daily image guidance was performed. We re-contoured the entire bladder and rectum including its contents as well as the organ walls on megavoltage computed tomography once a week. Dose variations were analyzed by means of Dmedian, Dmean, Dmax, V₁₀ to V₇₅, as well as the organs at risk (OAR) volume. Further, we investigated the correlation between volume changes and changes in Dmean of OAR. Results: During treatment, the rectal volume ranged from 62% to 223% of its initial volume, the bladder volume from 22% to 375%. The average Dmean ranged from 87% to 118% for the rectum and 58% to 160% for the bladder. The Pearson correlation coefficients between volume changes and corresponding changes in Dmean were -0.82 for the bladder and 0.52 for the rectum. The comparison of the dose wall histogram (DWH) and the dose volume histogram (DVH) showed that the DVH underestimates the percentage of the rectal and bladder volume exposed to the high dose region. Conclusion: Relevant variations in the volume of OAR and corresponding dose variations can be observed. For the bladder, an increase in the volume generally leads to lower doses; for the rectum, the correlation is weaker. Having demonstrated remarkable differences in the dose distribution of the DWH and the DVH, the use of DWHs should be considered.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.15 no.13
• /
• pp.5259-5264
• /
• 2014

Background: CT based brachytherapy allows 3-dimensional (3D) assessment of organs at risk (OAR) doses with dose volume histograms (DVHs). The purpose of this study was to compare computed tomography (CT) based volumetric calculations and International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) reference-point estimates of radiation doses to the bladder and rectum in patients with carcinoma of the cervix treated with high-dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT). Materials and Methods: Between March 2011 and May 2012, 20 patients were treated with 55 fractions of brachytherapy using tandem and ovoids and underwent post-implant CT scans. The external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) dose was 48.6Gy in 27 fractions. HDR brachytherapy was delivered to a dose of 21 Gy in three fractions. The ICRU bladder and rectum point doses along with 4 additional rectal points were recorded. The maximum dose ($D_{Max}$) to rectum was the highest recorded dose at one of these five points. Using the HDRplus 2.6 brachyhtherapy treatment planning system, the bladder and rectum were retrospectively contoured on the 55 CT datasets. The DVHs for rectum and bladder were calculated and the minimum doses to the highest irradiated 2cc area of rectum and bladder were recorded ($D_{2cc}$) for all individual fractions. The mean $D_{2cc}$ of rectum was compared to the means of ICRU rectal point and rectal $D_{Max}$ using the Student's t-test. The mean $D_{2cc}$ of bladder was compared with the mean ICRU bladder point using the same statistical test. The total dose, combining EBRT and HDR brachytherapy, were biologically normalized to the conventional 2 Gy/fraction using the linear-quadratic model. (${\alpha}/{\beta}$ value of 10 Gy for target, 3 Gy for organs at risk). Results: The total prescribed dose was $77.5Gy{\alpha}/{\beta}10$. The mean dose to the rectum was $4.58{\pm}1.22Gy$ for $D_{2cc}$, $3.76{\pm}0.65Gy$ at $D_{ICRU}$ and $4.75{\pm}1.01Gy$ at $D_{Max}$. The mean rectal $D_{2cc}$ dose differed significantly from the mean dose calculated at the ICRU reference point (p<0.005); the mean difference was 0.82 Gy (0.48-1.19Gy). The mean EQD2 was $68.52{\pm}7.24Gy_{{\alpha}/{\beta}3}$ for $D_{2cc}$, $61.71{\pm}2.77Gy_{{\alpha}/{\beta}3}$ at $D_{ICRU}$ and $69.24{\pm}6.02Gy_{{\alpha}/{\beta}3}$ at $D_{Max}$. The mean ratio of $D_{2cc}$ rectum to $D_{ICRU}$ rectum was 1.25 and the mean ratio of $D_{2cc}$ rectum to $D_{Max}$ rectum was 0.98 for all individual fractions. The mean dose to the bladder was $6.00{\pm}1.90Gy$ for $D_{2cc}$ and $5.10{\pm}2.03Gy$ at $D_{ICRU}$. However, the mean $D_{2cc}$ dose did not differ significantly from the mean dose calculated at the ICRU reference point (p=0.307); the mean difference was 0.90 Gy (0.49-1.25Gy). The mean EQD2 was $81.85{\pm}13.03Gy_{{\alpha}/{\beta}3}$ for $D_{2cc}$ and $74.11{\pm}19.39Gy_{{\alpha}/{\beta}3}$ at $D_{ICRU}$. The mean ratio of $D_{2cc}$ bladder to $D_{ICRU}$ bladder was 1.24. In the majority of applications, the maximum dose point was not the ICRU point. On average, the rectum received 77% and bladder received 92% of the prescribed dose. Conclusions: OARs doses assessed by DVH criteria were higher than ICRU point doses. Our data suggest that the estimated dose to the ICRU bladder point may be a reasonable surrogate for the $D_{2cc}$ and rectal $D_{Max}$ for $D_{2cc}$. However, the dose to the ICRU rectal point does not appear to be a reasonable surrogate for the $D_{2cc}$.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.75-81
• /
• 2019

Purpose: Tomo therapy and Proton therapy treatment plans for the treatment of prostate cancer patients were established, and the characteristics of dose distribution according to beam delivery method using Tomo therapy IMRT method and Proton therapy PBS method to compare and analyze the treatment effect were sought. Materials and Methods: Tomo IMRT treatment plan and Proton PBS treatment plan were established using the Hi.art planning station 5.1.1.6 of Tomo therapy and Eclipse 13.7 of VARIAN for three prostate cancer patients who were treated with radiotherapy only for radical purposes without surgery. For the evaluation of two treatment plans, the average dose (Dmean) and maximum dose (Dmax) of PGTV were calculated from dose volume histogram (DVH) to confirm the coverage and calculate CI and HI. In OAR evaluation, the dose received from the rectal volume 25% and the dose received from the bladder were evaluated to compare the normal long-term protection effect. Results: The mean maximum doses of the three patients were 71.4Gy, 75.3Gy and the mean doses were 70.4Gy and 72.8Gy in the DVH of the Tomo IMRT and Proton PBS. The CI was 1.16 and 1.31, and the HI was 0.04 and 0.12 respectively, and the Tomo IMRT was superior to the Proton PBS in dose suitability. Conclusion: The mean dose of PGTV in prostate cancer patients was 3.4% higher in Proton PBS than in Tomo IMRT. This is because the Dose suitability of Tomo IMRT was better, but it is considered to be a small difference to be seen as a significant result. However, the results of the two methods were 51.2% in D 25% and 55.7% less in the average dose of bladder, which could reduce the side effects of patients in proton PBS.