BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In this planning study we propose a class solution for partial boosting of prostate tumours. Treatment margins and rectum dose are similar to that of the conventional treatment and are supposed to have no direct link to the level of dose escalation. We also study the robustness of our class solution in the presence of geometrical deviations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: To study the specifications of the class solution ten patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer were replanned. Besides a conventional plan for each patient, different partial boost plans were produced with an inverse treatment-planning tool. We also simulated treatment geometrical deviations to estimate their effect on partial boost plans. RESULTS: In our class solution we use three contours in our inverse treatment planning, which are based on the classical CTV. A three beam arrangement appeared to produce a dose distribution, which is comparable to that of a five or seven beam geometry. Comparison of partial boost plans and conventional plans indicated that all conditions for a partial boost plan could be satisfied with the proposed class solution. Simulation of treatment geometrical deviations showed that large random deviations have a minor effect on the overall dose distributions, while systematic deviations may decrease the boost dose and increase the rectal dose. CONCLUSIONS: We presented a class solution for partial boosting of prostate tumours in which the level of dose escalation is dealt with separately from the margin size and the nominal rectum dose. The framework put forward in this study allows practical introduction of intensity modulated radiotherapy in routine clinical practice using current standards of imaging and position verification.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In this planning study we propose a class solution for partial boosting of prostate tumours. Treatment margins and rectum dose are similar to that of the conventional treatment and are supposed to have no direct link to the level of dose escalation. We also study the robustness of our class solution in the presence of geometrical deviations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: To study the specifications of the class solution ten patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer were replanned. Besides a conventional plan for each patient, different partial boost plans were produced with an inverse treatment-planning tool. We also simulated treatment geometrical deviations to estimate their effect on partial boost plans. RESULTS: In our class solution we use three contours in our inverse treatment planning, which are based on the classical CTV. A three beam arrangement appeared to produce a dose distribution, which is comparable to that of a five or seven beam geometry. Comparison of partial boost plans and conventional plans indicated that all conditions for a partial boost plan could be satisfied with the proposed class solution. Simulation of treatment geometrical deviations showed that large random deviations have a minor effect on the overall dose distributions, while systematic deviations may decrease the boost dose and increase the rectal dose. CONCLUSIONS: We presented a class solution for partial boosting of prostate tumours in which the level of dose escalation is dealt with separately from the margin size and the nominal rectum dose. The framework put forward in this study allows practical introduction of intensity modulated radiotherapy in routine clinical practice using current standards of imaging and position verification.
Authors: Jarad M Martin; Andrew Bayley; Robert Bristow; Peter Chung; Mary Gospodarowicz; Cynthia Menard; Michael Milosevic; Tara Rosewall; Padraig R Warde; Charles N Catton Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2009-11-03 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Irene M Lips; Uulke A van der Heide; Karin Haustermans; Emile N J T van Lin; Floris Pos; Stefan P G Franken; Alexis N T J Kotte; Carla H van Gils; Marco van Vulpen Journal: Trials Date: 2011-12-05 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Irene M Lips; Homan Dehnad; Carla H van Gils; Arto E Boeken Kruger; Uulke A van der Heide; Marco van Vulpen Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2008-05-21 Impact factor: 3.481