Radiotherapy: what can be achieved by technical improvements in dose delivery?

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
J MORAN ◽  
M ELSHAIKH ◽  
T LAWRENCE
Keyword(s):  
2003 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl-axel Johansson ◽  
Sören Mattsson ◽  
Anders Brahme ◽  
Jörgen Carlsson ◽  
Björn Zackrisson ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 152 ◽  
pp. S292-S293
Author(s):  
U. Bernchou ◽  
R.L. Christiansen ◽  
D. Tilly ◽  
A. Bertelsen ◽  
H.L. Riis ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Whitmore ◽  
R. I. Mackay ◽  
M. van Herk ◽  
J. K. Jones ◽  
R. M. Jones

AbstractThis paper presents the first demonstration of deeply penetrating dose delivery using focused very high energy electron (VHEE) beams using quadrupole magnets in Monte Carlo simulations. We show that the focal point is readily modified by linearly changing the quadrupole magnet strength only. We also present a weighted sum of focused electron beams to form a spread-out electron peak (SOEP) over a target region. This has a significantly reduced entrance dose compared to a proton-based spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP). Very high energy electron (VHEE) beams are an exciting prospect in external beam radiotherapy. VHEEs are less sensitive to inhomogeneities than proton and photon beams, have a deep dose reach and could potentially be used to deliver FLASH radiotherapy. The dose distributions of unfocused VHEE produce high entrance and exit doses compared to other radiotherapy modalities unless focusing is employed, and in this case the entrance dose is considerably improved over existing radiations. We have investigated both symmetric and asymmetric focusing as well as focusing with a range of beam energies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 5279-5285
Author(s):  
Angelo D. Bonzanini ◽  
Joel A. Paulson ◽  
David B. Graves ◽  
Ali Mesbah

2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-171
Author(s):  
Shingo Ohira ◽  
Naoyuki Kanayama ◽  
Riho Komiyama ◽  
Toshiki Ikawa ◽  
Masayasu Toratani ◽  
...  

Abstract The immobilization of patients with a bite block (BB) carries the risk of interpersonal infection, particularly in the context of pandemics such as COVID-19. Here, we compared the intra-fractional patient setup error (intra-SE) with and without a BB during fractionated intracranial stereotactic irradiation (STI). Fifteen patients with brain metastases were immobilized using a BB without a medical mask, while 15 patients were immobilized without using a BB and with a medical mask. The intra-SEs in six directions (anterior–posterior (AP), superior–inferior (SI), left–right (LR), pitch, roll, and yaw) were calculated by using cone-beam computed tomography images acquired before and after the treatments. We analyzed a total of 53 and 67 treatment sessions for the with- and without-BB groups, respectively. A comparable absolute mean translational and rotational intra-SE was observed (P > 0.05) in the AP (0.19 vs 0.23 mm with- and without-BB, respectively), SI (0.30 vs 0.29 mm), LR (0.20 vs 0.29 mm), pitch (0.18 vs 0.27°), roll (0.23 vs 0.23°) and yaw (0.27 vs 22°) directions. The resultant planning target volume (PTV) margin to compensate for intra-SE was <1 mm. No statistically significant correlation was observed between the intra-SE and treatment times. A PTV margin of <1 mm was achieved even when patients were immobilized without a BB during STI dose delivery.


Author(s):  
Kung-Shan Cheng ◽  
Robert B. Roemer

This study derives the first analytic solution for evaluating the optimal treatment parameters needed for delivering a desired thermal dose during thermal therapies consisting of a single heating pulse. Each treatment is divided into four time periods (two power-on and two power-off), and the thermal dose delivered during each of those periods is evaluated using the non-linear Sapareto and Dewey equation relating thermal dose to temperature and time. The results reveal that the thermal dose delivered during the second power-on period when T>43C (TD2) and the initial power-off period when T>43C (TD3) contribute the major portions of the total thermal dose needed for a successful treatment (taken as 240 CEM43°C), and that TD3 dominates for treatments with higher peak temperatures. For a fixed perfusion value, the analytical results show that once the maximum treatment temperature and the total thermal dose (e.g., 240 CEM43°C) are specified, then the required heating time and the applied power magnitude are uniquely determined. These are the optimal heating parameters since lower/higher values result in under-dosing/over-dosing of the treated region. It is also shown that higher maximum treatment temperatures result in shorter treatment times, and for each patient blood flow there is a maximum allowable temperature that can be used to reach the desired thermal dose. In addition, since TD2 and TD3 contribute most of the total thermal dose, and they are both significantly affected by the blood flow present for high treatment temperatures, these results show that perfusion effects must be considered when attempting to optimize high temperature thermal therapy treatments (no excess thermal dose delivered, minimum power applied and shortest treatment time attained).


2017 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. S1001-S1002
Author(s):  
T. Berlon ◽  
L. Specht ◽  
P.M. Petersen ◽  
L.S. Fog

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document