Literature DB >> 17264375

Evaluation of surface and superficial dose for head and neck treatments using conventional or intensity-modulated techniques.

P D Higgins1, E Y Han, J L Yuan, S Hui, C K Lee.   

Abstract

With increased use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck treatment questions have arisen as to selection of an optimum treatment approach when either superficial sparing or treatment is desired. Other work has pointed out the increased superficial dose resulting from obliquity effects when multiple tangential beams are applied to head and neck treatment, as is the general case in IMRT planning. Helical tomotherapy might be expected to result in even further enhanced superficial dose compared with conventional bilateral field treatment. We have designed a typical right oropharynx target volume in an anthropomorphic head and neck phantom. Three different treatment techniques have been used to optimally treat this target, including bilateral static fields, eight-field IMRT and helical tomotherapy. The phantom was immobilized in a standard treatment position and treated on a Varian 2300cd linear accelerator and on a Hi-Art Helical Tomotherapy unit. 1 mm3 lithium-fluoride thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were placed on the surface of the phantom at a number of axial test positions. Film strips (Kodak EDR2) were either wrapped around the surface or sandwiched within the phantom. Measured doses at the surface and as a function of depth are compared with the planning system predictions for each treatment technique. The maximum surface doses on the proximal treatment side, averaged from TLDs and films, were measured to be 69-82% of the target dose with the bilateral fields yielding the lowest surface doses (69%), tomotherapy about 2% more than that (71%) and IMRT 13% more (82%). Anterior to the target volume, doses are always low for bilateral treatment. In this case the minimum anterior surface dose (chin area) was 6% of the prescription dose from that technique as compared with 26% and 35% from the IMRT and tomotherapy methods, respectively. The Eclipse and Tomotherapy planning systems both modelled deep and superficial doses well. Surface doses were better modelled by Eclipse at the test points, while the tomotherapy plans consistently overestimated the measured doses by 10% or more. Depth dose measurements, extracted from embedded films, indicated the depth of dose build-up to >99% to be the shallowest for IMRT (2-5 mm) followed by tomotherapy (5-8 mm) and bilateral fields (10-15 mm). The amount of surface dose is clearly technique dependent and should be taken into account in the planning stage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17264375     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/52/4/018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  10 in total

1.  Dose discrepancies in the buildup region and their impact on dose calculations for IMRT fields.

Authors:  Shu-Hui Hsu; Jean M Moran; Yu Chen; Ravi Kulasekere; Peter L Roberson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Superficial dosimetry imaging of Čerenkov emission in electron beam radiotherapy of phantoms.

Authors:  Rongxiao Zhang; Colleen J Fox; Adam K Glaser; David J Gladstone; Brian W Pogue
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Preemptive treatment with Xonrid®, a medical device to reduce radiation induced dermatitis in head and neck cancer patients receiving curative treatment: a pilot study.

Authors:  Nicola Alessandro Iacovelli; Simona Naimo; Francesca Bonfantini; Anna Cavallo; Paolo Bossi; Carlo Fallai; Emanuele Pignoli; Salvatore Alfieri; Cristiana Bergamini; Federica Favales; Ester Orlandi
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Junctioning longitudinally adjacent PTVs with Helical TomoTherapy.

Authors:  Lourdes M Garcia; Lee H Gerig; Peter Raaphorst; David Wilkins
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-04-16       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Verification of IMRT dose calculations using AAA and PBC algorithms in dose buildup regions.

Authors:  Arun S Oinam; Lakhwant Singh
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-08-26       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Radiographic film dosimetry for IMRT fields in the nearsurface buildup region.

Authors:  Peter L Roberson; Jean M Moran; Ravi Kulasekere
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Evaluation of six TPS algorithms in computing entrance and exit doses.

Authors:  Yun I Tan; Mohamed Metwaly; Martin Glegg; Shaun Baggarley; Alex Elliott
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Measurement of skin surface dose distributions in radiation therapy using poly(vinyl alcohol) cryogel dosimeters.

Authors:  Molham M Eyadeh; Marcin Wierzbicki; Kevin R Diamond
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Acute toxicity of normofractionated intensity modulated radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy with sequential boost in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer.

Authors:  David Krug; Christine Köder; Matthias F Häfner; Nathalie Arians; Semi B Harrabi; Stefan A Koerber; Tobias Forster; Ingmar Schlampp; Christof Sohn; Joerg Heil; Holger Hof; Juliane Hörner-Rieber; Jürgen Debus
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  The Measurement of the Surface Dose in Regular and Small Radiation Therapy Fields Using Cherenkov Imaging.

Authors:  Yi Li; HongJun Liu; Nan Huang; Zhaolu Wang; Chunmin Zhang
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.