Literature DB >> 16275562

Optimization of collimator parameters to reduce rectal dose in intensity-modulated prostate treatment planning.

Julie Chapek1, Matt Tobler, Beau J Toy, Christopher M Lee, Dennis D Leavitt.   

Abstract

The inability to avoid rectal wall irradiation has been a limiting factor in prostate cancer treatment planning. Treatment planners must not only consider the maximum dose that the rectum receives throughout a course of treatment, but also the dose that any volume of the rectum receives. As treatment planning techniques have evolved and prescription doses have escalated, limitations of rectal dose have remained an area of focus. External pelvic immobilization devices have been incorporated to aid in daily reproducibility and lessen concern for daily patient motion. Internal immobilization devices (such as the intrarectal balloon) and visualization techniques (including daily ultrasound or placement of fiducial markers) have been utilized to reduce the uncertainty of intrafractional prostate positional variation, thus allowing for minimization of treatment volumes. Despite these efforts, prostate volumes continue to abut portions of the rectum, and the necessary volume expansions continue to include portions of the anterior rectal wall within high-dose regions. The addition of collimator parameter optimization (both collimator angle and primary jaw settings) to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) allows greater rectal sparing compared to the use of IMRT alone. We use multiple patient examples to illustrate the positive effects seen when utilizing collimator parameter optimization in conjunction with IMRT to further reduce rectal doses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16275562     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2005.06.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  3 in total

1.  Dosimetric effects of jaw tracking in step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Sarah Joy; George Starkschall; Stephen Kry; Mohammed Salehpour; R Allen White; Steven H Lin; Peter Balter
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 2.102

2.  Assessment of potential jaw-tracking advantage using control point sequences of VMAT planning.

Authors:  Jung-in Kim; Jong Min Park; So-Yeon Park; Chang Heon Choi; Hong-Gyun Wu; Sung-Joon Ye
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  A comparative study of identical VMAT plans with and without jaw tracking technique.

Authors:  Hao Wu; Fan Jiang; Haizhen Yue; Qiaoqiao Hu; Jian Zhang; Zhuolun Liu; Jian Gong; Sha Li; Jianhao Geng; Yibao Zhang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.