52 Resource issues of implementing intensity modulated radiotherapy within a mid-sized radiotherapy department

2004 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. S16
2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. A. McNair ◽  
J. Selous-Hodges ◽  
D. Convery ◽  
V. Cosgrove ◽  
J. Balyckyi ◽  
...  

The development of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has allowed the delivery of concave dose distributions. Planning studies have demonstrated the potential clinical benefit of IMRT in the treatment of the prostate and pelvic nodes in patients with advanced prostate cancer. As a consequence, IMRT was clinically implemented in the Royal Marsden NHS Trust in September 2000, using Elekta Sli series linear accelerators and NOMOS Corvus v3.0 planning system. As a relatively new treatment procedure in the United Kingdom, the clinical implementation involved developing appropriate quality assurance and verification procedures as well as training staff. This paper describes the practicalities of implementing IMRT into the routine workload of the radiotherapy department.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 3146-3155
Author(s):  
Luhua Wang

Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of advanced esophageal cancer (EC) and compare target homogeneity, conformity and normal tissue doses between HT and fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (ff-IMRT).Methods: In all, 23 patients with cT3-4N0-1M0-1a thoracic EC (upper esophagus, 9 patients; middle esophagus, 6; distal esophagus, 6 and esophagogastric junction, 2) who were treated with ff-IMRT (60 Gy in 30 fractions) were re-planned for HT and ff-IMRT with the same clinical require­ments. Comparisons were performed using the Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test.Results: Compared with ff-IMRT, HT significantly reduced the homogeneity index for thoracic, upper, middle and distal ECs by 38%, 31%, 36% and 33%, respectively (P < 0.05). The conformity index was increased by HT for thoracic, upper and middle ECs by 9%, 9% and 18%, respectively (P < 0.05). Target coverage was improved by 1% with HT (P < 0.05). The mean lung dose was significantly reduced by HT for thoracic and upper ECs (P < 0.05). The V20 (volume receiving at least 20 Gy) and higher dose volumes of the lungs were decreased by HT in all cases, but the differences were significant for thoracic, upper and distal ECs (P < 0.05), with reductions of 2.1%, 3.1% and 2.2%, respectively. HT resulted in a larger lung V5 for thoracic, upper, middle and distal ECs, with increases of 3.5%, 1.5%, 7.2% and 3.2%, respectively. Heart sparing was significantly better with HT than with ff-IMRT in terms of the V30 and V40 for thoracic, upper, middle and distal ECs (P < 0.05).Conclusions: Compared to ff-IMRT, HT provides superior target coverage, conformity and homogeneity, with reduced the volume of high doses to the lungs and heart for advanced EC. HT may be a treatment option for advanced EC, especially upper EC.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.R. Hanna ◽  
F. Slevin ◽  
A. Appelt ◽  
M. Beavon ◽  
R. Adams ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 108-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Ballivy ◽  
W. Parker ◽  
T. Vuong ◽  
G. Shenouda ◽  
H. Patrocinio

We assessed the effect of geometric uncertainties on target coverage and on dose to the organs at risk (OARS) during intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head-and-neck cancer, and we estimated the required margins for the planning target volume (PTV) and the planning organ-at-risk volume (PRV). For eight headand- neck cancer patients, we generated IMRT plans with localization uncertainty margins of 0 mm, 2.5 mm, and 5.0 mm. The beam intensities were then applied on repeat computed tomography (CT) scans obtained weekly during treatment, and dose distributions were recalculated. The dose–volume histogram analysis for the repeat CT scans showed that target coverage was adequate (V100 ≥ 95%) for only 12.5% of the gross tumour volumes, 54.3% of the upper-neck clinical target volumes (CTVS), and 27.4% of the lower-neck CTVS when no margins were added for PTV. The use of 2.5-mm and 5.0-mm margins significantly improved target coverage, but the mean dose to the contralateral parotid increased from 25.9 Gy to 29.2 Gy. Maximum dose to the spinal cord was above limit in 57.7%, 34.6%, and 15.4% of cases when 0-mm, 2.5-mm, and 5.0-mm margins (respectively) were used for PRV. Significant deviations from the prescribed dose can occur during IMRT treatment delivery for headand- neck cancer. The use of 2.5-mm to 5.0-mm margins for PTV and PRV greatly reduces the risk of underdosing targets and of overdosing the spinal cord.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document