Literature DB >> 10613327

A comparison of different intensity modulation treatment techniques for tangential breast irradiation.

S X Chang1, K M Deschesne, T J Cullip, S A Parker, J Earnhart.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Several intensity modulation (IM) treatment techniques for tangential breast irradiation were evaluated in terms of dose uniformity in the treated breast volume, contralateral breast dose, and treatment irradiation time. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Contralateral breast dose was measured via TLD chips, and the dose uniformity was calculated on two anthropomorphic phantoms. IM was applied to all beams or to the lateral-medial (LM) beam only. The techniques evaluated include (a) IM via "step & shoot" multileaf collimator (MLC), (b) IM via intensity modulator (compensator), (c) virtual wedge, and (d) physical wedge. A dose optimization algorithm was used for the first two techniques.
RESULTS: Collimator-generated IM techniques (MLC-IM and the virtual wedge) produced 50% (average) less contralateral breast dose than the conventional two-wedge technique. When the compensator or the physical wedge was used, contralateral breast dose was reduced 30% (average) by leaving the ML beam open.
CONCLUSION: The treatments generated by dose optimization algorithm and delivered via the compensator and MLC techniques offered superior dose uniformity. Single-beam IM techniques in general use less irradiation time without significant degradation of dose uniformity. The MLC-IM technique in this study required the longest treatment irradiation time, while the virtual wedge and compensator IM techniques required the least.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10613327     DOI: 10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00344-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  7 in total

1.  Automatic segmentation of whole breast using atlas approach and deformable image registration.

Authors:  Valerie K Reed; Wendy A Woodward; Lifei Zhang; Eric A Strom; George H Perkins; Welela Tereffe; Julia L Oh; T Kuan Yu; Isabelle Bedrosian; Gary J Whitman; Thomas A Buchholz; Lei Dong
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Comparison between the four-field box and field-in-field techniques for conformal radiotherapy of the esophagus using dose-volume histograms and normal tissue complication probabilities.

Authors:  Farzaneh Allaveisi; Amir Nami Moghadam
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 2.374

3.  Statistical modeling approach to quantitative analysis of interobserver variability in breast contouring.

Authors:  Jinzhong Yang; Wendy A Woodward; Valerie K Reed; Eric A Strom; George H Perkins; Welela Tereffe; Thomas A Buchholz; Lifei Zhang; Peter Balter; Laurence E Court; X Allen Li; Lei Dong
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Setup Error and Effectiveness of Weekly Image-Guided Radiation Therapy of TomoDirect for Early Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Mi Joo Chung; Guk Jin Lee; Young Jin Suh; Hyo Chun Lee; Sea-Won Lee; Songmi Jeong; Jeong Won Lee; Sung Hwan Kim; Dae Gyu Kang; Jong Hoon Lee
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 4.679

5.  Feasibility of using nonflat photon beams for whole-breast irradiation with breath hold.

Authors:  Yuenan Wang; Andrew Vassil; Rahul Tendulkar; John Bayouth; Ping Xia
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-01-06       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Compensators: an alternative IMRT delivery technique.

Authors:  Sha X Chang; Timothy J Cullip; Katharin M Deschesne; Elizabeth P Miller; Julian G Rosenman
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Effect of collimator and couch angle change on breast IMRT dose distributions.

Authors:  Jie Yang; Charlie Ma; Lu Wang; Lili Chen; Jinsheng Li
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.