PURPOSE: To describe a novel and straightforward conformal avoidance intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique for coverage of pelvis and inguinal/femoral nodes and to compare the dosimetry of the new method with that of other traditional methods of radiation treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data of 2 patients with anal cancer were used as example cases to illustrate details and advantages of conformal avoidance IMRT technique. Conventional photons with enface electrons design was created first, thereby providing "outermost boundaries" defined as planning target volume (PTV) for subsequent conformal avoidance IMRT design. Organs at risk (OARs), including femoral head and neck and external genitalia, were contoured as conformal avoidance structures. A step-and-shoot inverse IMRT planning was subsequently generated. For dosimetric comparison, a recently published technique by modified segmental boost was also generated. These treatment techniques were evaluated by dose-volume histogram (DVH) of PTV and OARs. Dose profiles at four different depths from each treatment planning were generated for comparison. RESULTS: The DVH of PTV showed that coverage of the PTV was comparable among three treatment techniques. Percent volume of PTV receiving more than 90% prescription dose was in the range 94-98% for the three treatment techniques, and all had only 0-2% of PTV receiving more than 110% of prescription dose. The DVH of OARs confirmed that both femoral head and neck and external genitalia could be spared well by conformal avoidance IMRT as compared with the other two techniques. Although greater inhomogeneity of dose distribution within the PTV was noted by conformal avoidance IMRT technique, as shown by dose profiles at four different depths, the maximum doses at different depths were less than 115%, which was comparable to those planned by modified segmental boost technique. Planning by photons and enface electrons technique, however, showed a greater dose variation up to 134% of the prescription dose at 1.5 cm depth along photon-electron match-line. CONCLUSIONS: To cover pelvis and inguinal/femoral nodes, conformal avoidance IMRT is technically simple to simulate, plan, and execute. Dosimetric study has demonstrated that it achieves comparable PTV coverage compared with other approaches while at the same time significantly sparing the surrounding OARs.
PURPOSE: To describe a novel and straightforward conformal avoidance intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique for coverage of pelvis and inguinal/femoral nodes and to compare the dosimetry of the new method with that of other traditional methods of radiation treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data of 2 patients with anal cancer were used as example cases to illustrate details and advantages of conformal avoidance IMRT technique. Conventional photons with enface electrons design was created first, thereby providing "outermost boundaries" defined as planning target volume (PTV) for subsequent conformal avoidance IMRT design. Organs at risk (OARs), including femoral head and neck and external genitalia, were contoured as conformal avoidance structures. A step-and-shoot inverse IMRT planning was subsequently generated. For dosimetric comparison, a recently published technique by modified segmental boost was also generated. These treatment techniques were evaluated by dose-volume histogram (DVH) of PTV and OARs. Dose profiles at four different depths from each treatment planning were generated for comparison. RESULTS: The DVH of PTV showed that coverage of the PTV was comparable among three treatment techniques. Percent volume of PTV receiving more than 90% prescription dose was in the range 94-98% for the three treatment techniques, and all had only 0-2% of PTV receiving more than 110% of prescription dose. The DVH of OARs confirmed that both femoral head and neck and external genitalia could be spared well by conformal avoidance IMRT as compared with the other two techniques. Although greater inhomogeneity of dose distribution within the PTV was noted by conformal avoidance IMRT technique, as shown by dose profiles at four different depths, the maximum doses at different depths were less than 115%, which was comparable to those planned by modified segmental boost technique. Planning by photons and enface electrons technique, however, showed a greater dose variation up to 134% of the prescription dose at 1.5 cm depth along photon-electron match-line. CONCLUSIONS: To cover pelvis and inguinal/femoral nodes, conformal avoidance IMRT is technically simple to simulate, plan, and execute. Dosimetric study has demonstrated that it achieves comparable PTV coverage compared with other approaches while at the same time significantly sparing the surrounding OARs.
Authors: Michael D Chuong; Jessica M Freilich; Sarah E Hoffe; William Fulp; Jill M Weber; Khaldoun Almhanna; William Dinwoodie; Nikhil Rao; Kenneth L Meredith; Ravi Shridhar Journal: Gastrointest Cancer Res Date: 2013-03
Authors: Hanne Elisabeth Weber; Leif Hendrik Dröge; Steffen Hennies; Markus Karl Herrmann; Jochen Gaedcke; Hendrik Andreas Wolff Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2015-06-08 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Robert J Myerson; Michael C Garofalo; Issam El Naqa; Ross A Abrams; Aditya Apte; Walter R Bosch; Prajnan Das; Leonard L Gunderson; Theodore S Hong; J J John Kim; Christopher G Willett; Lisa A Kachnic Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-12-29 Impact factor: 7.038