• 한국방사선학회논문지
• /
• 제12권5호
• /
• pp.583-592
• /
• 2018

세기변조방사선치료와 입체적세기조절회전치료 시 조사체적과 선량 퍼짐 현상을 줄이기 위한 방법으로 조사 각도를 제한하는 부분 각도에 의한 회전치료 기능을 적용하여 표적체적과 주변 정상장기의 선량에 대해 입체조형방사선치료와 비교 분석하였다. 치료계획에 따른 표적체적의 선량분포는 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 확인할 수 없었으며, 폐의 5 Gy(V5) 체적에서 입체조형방사선치료 56.53%, 세기변조방사선치료 52.03%, 입체적세기조절회전치료 47.84%를 나타내어 유의한 차이를 나타내었다(CRT-IMRT p=0.035, CRT-VMAT p<0.001, IMRT-VMAT p<0.001). 10 Gy 체적(V10)에서는 입체조형방사선치료 35.12%, 세기변조방사선치료 34.04%, 입체적세기조절회전치료 33.28%를 보여, 입체조형방사선치료와 세기변조방사선치료(p=0.018), 입체적세기조절회전치료(p=0.035)에서 유의한 차이를 나타내었으나 20 Gy 체적(V20)에서는 유의한 선량 차이를 확인할 수 없었다. 심장의 평균선량과 20 Gy 체적은 치료계획에 따라 유의한 차이를 확인할 수 없었으나, 30, 40 Gy 체적은 입체적세기조절회전치료에서 37.16%, 22.46%를 나타내어 입체조형방사선치료와 비교에서 유의한 차이(p=0.028)를 보였다. 이와 같이 조사체적 감소에 따른 폐의 저 선량 체적(V5, V10)의 감소를 확인할 수 있었으며, 세기변조방사선치료와 입체적세기조절회전치료 시 조사 각도를 일부 제한함으로써 표적체적의 선량분포는 동일하게 유지함과 동시에 조사체적을 줄일 수 있었다. 이로 인해 폐의 선량 퍼짐 현상의 감소로부터 폐의 독성을 낮추는데 기여할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• 제34권4호
• /
• pp.313-321
• /
• 2016

Purpose: Total scalp irradiation (TSI) is a rare but challenging indication. We previously reported that non-coplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was superior to coplanar IMRT in organ-at-risk (OAR) protection and target dose distribution. This consecutive treatment planning study compared IMRT with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Materials and Methods: A retrospective treatment plan databank search was performed and 5 patient cases were randomly selected. Cranial imaging was restored from the initial planning computed tomography (CT) and target volumes and OAR were redelineated. For each patients, three treatment plans were calculated (coplanar/non-coplanar IMRT, VMAT; prescribed dose 50 Gy, single dose 2 Gy). Conformity, homogeneity and dose volume histograms were used for plan. Results: VMAT featured the lowest monitor units and the sharpest dose gradient (1.6 Gy/mm). Planning target volume (PTV) coverage and homogeneity was better in VMAT (coverage, 0.95; homogeneity index [HI], 0.118) compared to IMRT (coverage, 0.94; HI, 0.119) but coplanar IMRT produced the most conformal plans (conformity index [CI], 0.43). Minimum PTV dose range was 66.8%-88.4% in coplanar, 77.5%-88.2% in non-coplanar IMRT and 82.8%-90.3% in VMAT. Mean dose to the brain, brain stem, optic system (maximum dose) and lenses were 18.6, 13.2, 9.1, and 5.2 Gy for VMAT, 21.9, 13.4, 14.5, and 6.3 Gy for non-coplanar and 22.8, 16.5, 11.5, and 5.9 Gy for coplanar IMRT. Maximum optic chiasm dose was 7.7, 8.4, and 11.1 Gy (non-coplanar IMRT, VMAT, and coplanar IMRT). Conclusion: Target coverage, homogeneity and OAR protection, was slightly superior in VMAT plans which also produced the sharpest dose gradient towards healthy tissue.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• 제16권8호
• /
• pp.3257-3265
• /
• 2015

Background: Radiotherapy is an important treatment of choice for breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery, and we compare the feasibility of using dual arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT2), single arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT1) and Multi-beam Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (M-IMRT) on patients after breast-conserving surgery. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with breast cancer (half right-sided and half left-sided) treated by conservative lumpectomy and requiring whole breast radiotherapy with tumor bed boost were planned with three different radiotherapy techniques: 1) VMAT1; 2) VMAT2; 3) M-IMRT. The distributions for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were compared. Dosimetries for all the techniques were compared. Results: All three techniques satisfied the dose constraint well. VMAT2 showed no obvious difference in the homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) of the PTV with respect to M-IMRT and VMAT1. VMAT2 clearly improved the treatment efficiency and can also decrease the mean dose and V5Gy of the contralateral lung. The mean dose and maximum dose of the spinal cord and contralateral breast were lower for VMAT2 than the other two techniques. The very low dose distribution (V1Gy) of the contralateral breast also showed great reduction in VMAT2 compared with the other two techniques. For the ipsilateral lung of right-sided breast cancer, the mean dose was decreased significantly in VMAT2 compared with VMAT1 and M-IMRT. The V20Gy and V30Gy of the ipsilateral lung of the left-sided breast cancer for VMAT2 showed obvious reduction compared with the other two techniques. The heart statistics of VMAT2 also decreased considerably compared to VMAT1 and M-IMRT. Conclusions: Compared to the other two techniques, the dual arc volumetric modulated arc therapy technique reduced radiation dose exposure to the organs at risk and maintained a reasonable target dose distribution.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• 제34권1호
• /
• pp.18-25
• /
• 2016

Purpose: Radiotherapy of the neck is known to cause carotid artery stenosis. We compared the carotid artery dose received between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans in patients with early glottic cancer. Materials and Methods: Twenty-one early glottic cancer patients who previously underwent definitive radiotherapy were selected for this study. For each patient, double arc VMAT, 8-field IMRT, 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), and lateral parallel-opposed photon field radiotherapy (LPRT) plans were created. The 3DCRT plan was generated using lateral parallel-opposed photon fields plus an anterior photon field. VMAT and IMRT treatment plan optimization was performed under standardized conditions to obtain adequate target volume coverage and spare the carotid artery. Dose-volume specifications for the VMAT, IMRT, 3DCRT, and LPRT plans were calculated with radiotherapy planning system. Monitor units (MUs) and delivery time were measured to evaluate treatment efficiency. Results: Target volume coverage and homogeneity results were comparable between VMAT and IMRT; however, VMAT was superior to IMRT for carotid artery dose sparing. The mean dose to the carotid arteries in double arc VMAT was reduced by 6.8% compared to fixed-field IMRT (p < 0.001). The MUs for VMAT and IMRT were not significantly different (p = 0.089). VMAT allowed an approximately two-fold reduction in treatment delivery time in comparison to IMRT (3 to 5 minutes vs. 5 to 10 minutes). Conclusion: VMAT resulted in a lower carotid artery dose compared to conventional fixed-field IMRT, and maintained good target coverage in patients with early glottic cancer.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• 제36권4호
• /
• pp.341-347
• /
• 2018

Surgical excision along with use of postoperative radiotherapy forms an integral management of sinonasal teratocarcinosarcoma (SNTCS). However, given the rarity of the tumor, no standardised guidelines, dose, technique and target delineation exist especially in the era of modern radiation delivery techniques. This is a case of 55-year-old male diagnosed as SNTCS treated with radical ethmoidectomy followed by volumetric modulated radiotherapy, showing good local control and acceptable toxicity profile.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• 제35권1호
• /
• pp.90-100
• /
• 2017

Purpose: To Study the dosimetric advantage of the Jaw tracking technique in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for Head and Neck Cancers. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively selected 10 previously treated head and neck cancer patients stage (T1/T2, N1, M0) in this study. All the patients were planned for IMRT and VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost technique. IMRT and VMAT plans were performed with jaw tracking (JT) and with static jaw (SJ) technique by keeping the same constraints and priorities for a particular patient. Target conformity, dose to the critical structures and low dose volumes were recorded and analyzed for IMRT and VMAT plans with and without JT for all the patients. Results: The conformity index average of all patients followed by standard deviation (${\bar{x}}{\pm}{\sigma}_{\bar{x}}$) of the JT-IMRT, SJ-IMRT, JT-VMAT, and SJ-VMAT were $1.72{\pm}0.56$, $1.67{\pm}0.57$, $1.83{\pm}0.65$, and $1.85{\pm}0.64$, and homogeneity index were $0.059{\pm}0.05$, $0.064{\pm}0.05$, $0.064{\pm}0.04$, and $0.064{\pm}0.05$. JT-IMRT shows significant mean reduction in right parotid and left parotid shows of 7.64% (p < 0.001) and 7.45% (p < 0.001) compare to SJ-IMRT. JT-IMRT plans also shows considerable dose reduction to thyroid, inferior constrictors, spinal cord and brainstem compared to the SJ-IMRT plans. Conclusion: Significant dose reductions were observed for critical structure in the JT-IMRT compared to SJ-IMRT technique. In JT-VMAT plans dose reduction to the critical structure were not significant compared to the SJ-IMRT due to relatively lesser monitor units.

• 한국의학물리학회지:의학물리
• /
• 제32권4호
• /
• pp.107-115
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical quality assurance results of portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device, a method that is extensively used for patient-specific quality assurance, and the newly released Mobius3D for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods: This retrospective study includes data from 122 patients who underwent IMRT and VMAT on the Novalis Tx and VitalBeam linear accelerators between April and June 2020. We used a paired t-test to compare portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device and the average gamma passing rates of MobiusFX using log files regenerated after patient treatment. Results: The average gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm) were 99.43%±1.02% and 99.32%±1.87% in VitalBeam and 97.53%±3.34% and 96.45%±13.94% in Novalis Tx, respectively. Comparison of the gamma passing rate results of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm as per the manufacturer's manual) does not show any statistically significant difference. Conclusions: Log file-based patient-specific quality assurance, including independent dose calculation, can be appropriately used in clinical practice as a second-check dosimetry, and it is considered comparable with primary quality assurance such as portal dosimetry.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• 제38권2호
• /
• pp.138-147
• /
• 2020

Purpose: To evaluate the dosimetric variations in patients of head and neck cancer treated with definitive or adjuvant radiotherapy using optimized non-coplanar (ncVMAT) beams with coplanar (cVMAT) beams using volumetric arc therapy. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two patients of head and neck cancer that had received radiotherapy using VMAT in our department were retrospectively analyzed. Each of the patients was planned using coplanar and non-coplanar orientations using an optimized couch angle and fluences. We analyzed the Conformity Index (C_IRTOG), Dose Homogeneity Index (DHI), Heterogeneity Index (HI_RTOG), low dose volume, target and organs-at-risk coverage in both the plans without changing planning optimization parameters. Results: The prescription dose ranged from 60 Gy to 70 Gy. Using ncVMAT, C_IRTOG, DHI and HI_RTOG, and tumor coverage (ID_95%) had improved, low dose spillage volume in the body V_5Gy was increased and V_10Gy was reduced. Integral dose and intensity-modulated radiation therapy factor had increased in ncVMAT. In the case of non-coplanar beam arrangements, maximum dose (D_max) of right and left humeral head were reduced significantly whereas apex of the right and left lung mean dose were increased. Conclusion: The use of ncVMAT produced better target coverage and sparing of the shoulder and soft tissue of the neck as well as the critical organ compared with the cVMAT in patients of head and neck malignancy.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• 제16권8호
• /
• pp.3365-3370
• /
• 2015

Radiotherapy has an important role in the treatment of prostate cancer. Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques are all applied for this purpose. However, the risk of secondary radiation-induced bladder cancer is significantly elevated in irradiated patients compared surgery-only or watchful waiting groups. There are also reports of risk of secondary cancer with low doses to normal tissues. This study was designed to compare received volumes of low doses among 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT techniques for prostate patients. Ten prostate cancer patients were selected retrospectively for this planning study. Treatment plans were generated using 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT techniques. Conformity index (CI), homogenity index (HI), receiving 5 Gy of the volume (V5%), receiving 2 Gy of the volume (V2%), receiving 1 Gy of the volume (V1%) and monitor units (MUs) were compared. This study confirms that VMAT has slightly better CI while thev olume of low doses was higher. VMAT had lower MUs than IMRT. 3D-CRT had the lowest MU, CI and HI. If target coverage and normal tissue sparing are comparable between different treatment techniques, the risk of second malignancy should be a important factor in the selection of treatment.

• 한국의학물리학회지:의학물리
• /
• 제30권4호
• /
• pp.94-103
• /
• 2019

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical feasibility of knowledge-based planning (KBP) for volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Methods: Forty-eight VMAT plans for spine SBRT was studied. Two planning target volumes (PTVs) were defined for simultaneous integrated boost: PTV for boost (PTV-B: 27 Gy/3fractions) and PTV elective (PTV-E: 24 Gy/3fractions). The expert VMAT plans were manually generated by experienced planners. Twenty-six plans were used to train the KBP model using Varian RapidPlan. With the trained KBP model each KBP plan was automatically generated by an individual with little experience and compared with the expert plan (closed-loop validation). Twenty-two plans that had not been used for KBP model training were also compared with the KBP results (open-loop validation). Results: Although the minimal dose of PTV-B and PTV-E was lower and the maximal dose was higher than those of the expert plan, the difference was no larger than 0.7 Gy. In the closed-loop validation, D_1.2cc, D_0.35cc, and D_mean of the spinal cord was decreased by 0.9 Gy, 0.6 Gy, and 0.9 Gy, respectively, in the KBP plans (P<0.05). In the open-loop validation, only D_mean of the spinal cord was significantly decreased, by 0.5 Gy (P<0.05). Conclusions: The dose coverage and uniformity for PTV was slightly worse in the KBP for spine SBRT while the dose to the spinal cord was reduced, but the differences were small. Thus, inexperienced planners could easily generate a clinically feasible plan for spine SBRT by using KBP.