Objective： The aim of this study was to compare bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy （IMRT） with IMRT without entering pelvic bone marrow as a planning constraint in the treatment of cervical cancer...Objective： The aim of this study was to compare bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy （IMRT） with IMRT without entering pelvic bone marrow as a planning constraint in the treatment of cervical cancer after hysterectomy. Methods： For a cohort of 10 patients, bone marrow-sparing IMRT and routine IMRT planning were designed. The prescribed dose was 45 Gy/1.8 Gy/25f, 95% of the planning target volume received this dose. Doses were computed with a commercially available treatment planning system （TPS） using convolution/superimposition （CS） algorithm. Plans were compared according to dose-volume histogram （DVH） analysis in terms of planning target volume （PTV） homogeneity and conformity indices （HI and CI） as well as organs at risk （OARs） dose and volume parameters. Results： Bone marrow-sparing IMRT had an vantages over routine IMRT in terms of CI, but inferior to the latter for HI. Compared with routine IMRT, V5, Vl0, V20, V30, V40 of pelvic bone marrow of bone marrow-sparing IMRT reduced by 1.81%, 8.61%, 31.81%, 29.50%, 28.29%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between bone marrow-sparing IMRT and routine IMRT in terms of small bowel, bladder and rectum. Conclusion： For patients with cervical cancer after hysterectomy, bone marrowsparing IMRT reduced the pelvic bone marrow volume irradiated at all dose levels and might be conducive to preventing the occurrence of acute bone marrow toxicity.展开更多
Objective: The objective of this work was to establish adequate tolerance limits based on a certain defined institutional indices and generate published data presenting our results to the radiotherapy community. Metho...Objective: The objective of this work was to establish adequate tolerance limits based on a certain defined institutional indices and generate published data presenting our results to the radiotherapy community. Methods: One hundred paediatric patients were treated using 6-MV X-ray beams produced by Siemens ONCOR Expression linear accelerator. The clinical step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans were designed using KonRad release 2.2.23. For two treatment sites (abdomen, head and neck), the fluence maps generated by the treatment planning system were all delivered for the quality assurance (QA) which included absolute dose verification for all treatment fields, relative dose verification for each treatment field. Results: The 724 fluence maps were analyzed at three different criteria using the gamma index tool. The 3% dose difference of local prescribed dose /3 mm was considered adequate. The passing rate for all fields of all plans always exceeded 70%. The dose differences between the measured and calculated doses ranged from -2.2% to +4% [mean and standard deviation (s): 1.4 ± 1.5] for the abdominal case, and from -3.3% to +5.6% (1.3 ± 1.6) for head and neck case with total confidence limit 0.046 (4.6%). The 14/100 (14%) of the absolute point dose measurements were out of ±3% from the dose predicted by the treatment planning system. Only two cases were below -3%, while 12 cases over +3%. Conclusion: At 3% dose difference of local prescribed dose /3 mm criteria, a 75% passing a gamma criterion and 3% for absolute point dose can be achieved for abdomen and head and neck treatments site. We considered the tolerance limits based on these indices for IMRT QA adequate.展开更多
文摘Objective： The aim of this study was to compare bone marrow-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy （IMRT） with IMRT without entering pelvic bone marrow as a planning constraint in the treatment of cervical cancer after hysterectomy. Methods： For a cohort of 10 patients, bone marrow-sparing IMRT and routine IMRT planning were designed. The prescribed dose was 45 Gy/1.8 Gy/25f, 95% of the planning target volume received this dose. Doses were computed with a commercially available treatment planning system （TPS） using convolution/superimposition （CS） algorithm. Plans were compared according to dose-volume histogram （DVH） analysis in terms of planning target volume （PTV） homogeneity and conformity indices （HI and CI） as well as organs at risk （OARs） dose and volume parameters. Results： Bone marrow-sparing IMRT had an vantages over routine IMRT in terms of CI, but inferior to the latter for HI. Compared with routine IMRT, V5, Vl0, V20, V30, V40 of pelvic bone marrow of bone marrow-sparing IMRT reduced by 1.81%, 8.61%, 31.81%, 29.50%, 28.29%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between bone marrow-sparing IMRT and routine IMRT in terms of small bowel, bladder and rectum. Conclusion： For patients with cervical cancer after hysterectomy, bone marrowsparing IMRT reduced the pelvic bone marrow volume irradiated at all dose levels and might be conducive to preventing the occurrence of acute bone marrow toxicity.
文摘Objective: The objective of this work was to establish adequate tolerance limits based on a certain defined institutional indices and generate published data presenting our results to the radiotherapy community. Methods: One hundred paediatric patients were treated using 6-MV X-ray beams produced by Siemens ONCOR Expression linear accelerator. The clinical step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans were designed using KonRad release 2.2.23. For two treatment sites (abdomen, head and neck), the fluence maps generated by the treatment planning system were all delivered for the quality assurance (QA) which included absolute dose verification for all treatment fields, relative dose verification for each treatment field. Results: The 724 fluence maps were analyzed at three different criteria using the gamma index tool. The 3% dose difference of local prescribed dose /3 mm was considered adequate. The passing rate for all fields of all plans always exceeded 70%. The dose differences between the measured and calculated doses ranged from -2.2% to +4% [mean and standard deviation (s): 1.4 ± 1.5] for the abdominal case, and from -3.3% to +5.6% (1.3 ± 1.6) for head and neck case with total confidence limit 0.046 (4.6%). The 14/100 (14%) of the absolute point dose measurements were out of ±3% from the dose predicted by the treatment planning system. Only two cases were below -3%, while 12 cases over +3%. Conclusion: At 3% dose difference of local prescribed dose /3 mm criteria, a 75% passing a gamma criterion and 3% for absolute point dose can be achieved for abdomen and head and neck treatments site. We considered the tolerance limits based on these indices for IMRT QA adequate.
