PURPOSE: Three-dimensional treatment planning systems and inverse planning optimization for brachytherapy are becoming commercially available. Guidelines for target delineation and dose constrictions have not been established using this new software. In this study we describe a method of target delineation for the tandem and ovoids applicator. We then compare inverse planning dose distributions with the traditional methods of prescribing dose. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Target and organ-at-risk volumes were defined using systematic guidelines on 15 patients treated in our department with high-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer using tandem and ovoids. High-dose-rate distributions were created according to three different dose optimization protocols: inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA), point A, and point A with a normalization of 2 cc of the bladder receiving 80% of the dose (bladder-sparing method). An uniform cost function for dose constraints was applied to all IPSA generated plans, and no manual optimization was allowed for any planning method. RESULTS: Guidelines for target and structure-at-risk volumes, as well as dose constraint cost functions, were established. Dose-volume histogram analysis showed that the IPSA algorithm indicated no difference in tumor coverage compared with point A optimization while decreasing dose to the bladder and rectum. The IPSA algorithm provided better target volume coverage compared with bladder-sparing method with equivalent doses to the bladder and rectum. CONCLUSION: This study uses a systematic approach for delineating target and organ-at-risk volumes and a uniform cost function for generating IPSA plans for cervical cancer using tandem and ovoids. Compared with conventional dose prescription methods, IPSA provides a consistent method of optimization that maintains or improves target coverage while decreasing dose to normal structures. Image-guided brachytherapy and inverse planning improve brachytherapy dosimetry.
PURPOSE: Three-dimensional treatment planning systems and inverse planning optimization for brachytherapy are becoming commercially available. Guidelines for target delineation and dose constrictions have not been established using this new software. In this study we describe a method of target delineation for the tandem and ovoids applicator. We then compare inverse planning dose distributions with the traditional methods of prescribing dose. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Target and organ-at-risk volumes were defined using systematic guidelines on 15 patients treated in our department with high-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical cancer using tandem and ovoids. High-dose-rate distributions were created according to three different dose optimization protocols: inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA), point A, and point A with a normalization of 2 cc of the bladder receiving 80% of the dose (bladder-sparing method). An uniform cost function for dose constraints was applied to all IPSA generated plans, and no manual optimization was allowed for any planning method. RESULTS: Guidelines for target and structure-at-risk volumes, as well as dose constraint cost functions, were established. Dose-volume histogram analysis showed that the IPSA algorithm indicated no difference in tumor coverage compared with point A optimization while decreasing dose to the bladder and rectum. The IPSA algorithm provided better target volume coverage compared with bladder-sparing method with equivalent doses to the bladder and rectum. CONCLUSION: This study uses a systematic approach for delineating target and organ-at-risk volumes and a uniform cost function for generating IPSA plans for cervical cancer using tandem and ovoids. Compared with conventional dose prescription methods, IPSA provides a consistent method of optimization that maintains or improves target coverage while decreasing dose to normal structures. Image-guided brachytherapy and inverse planning improve brachytherapy dosimetry.
Authors: Petra Trnková; Dimos Baltas; Andreas Karabis; Markus Stock; Johannes Dimopoulos; Dietmar Georg; Richard Pötter; Christian Kirisits Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2011-01-14