Literature DB >> 33472549

Comparison of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Treatment Plans Between 1.5T MR-Linac and Conventional Linac.

Shouliang Ding1, Yongbao Li1, Hongdong Liu1, Rui Li1, Bin Wang1, Jun Zhang1, Yan Chen2, Xiaoyan Huang1.   

Abstract

In this study, we assess the dosimetric qualities and usability of planning for 1.5 T MR-Linac based intensity modulated radiotherapy (MRL-IMRT) for various clinical sites in comparison with IMRT plans using a conventional linac. In total of 30 patients with disease sites in the brain, esophagus, lung, rectum and vertebra were re-planned retrospectively for simulated MRL-IMRT using the Elekta Unity dedicated treatment planning system (TPS) Monaco (v5.40.01). Currently, the step-and-shoot (ss) is the only delivery technique for IMRT available on Unity. All patients were treated on an Elekta Versa HDTM with IMRT using the dynamic multileaf collimator (dMLC) technique, and the plans were designed using Monaco v5.11. For comparison, the same dMLC-IMRT plan was recalculated with the same machine and TPS but only changing the technique to step-and-shoot. The dosimetric qualities of the MRL-IMRT plans, to be evaluated by the Dose Volume Histograms (DVH) metrics, Homogeneity Index and Conformality Index, were compared with the clinical plans. The planning usability was measured by the optimization time and the number of Monitor Units (MUs). Comparing MRL-IMRT with conventional linac based plans, all created plans were clinically equivalent to current clinical practice. However, MRL-IMRT plans had higher dose to skin and larger low dose region of normal tissues. Furthermore, MRL-IMRT plans had significantly reduced optimization time by comparing conventional linac based plans. The number of MUs of MRL-IMRT was increased by 23% compared with ss-IMRT, and no difference from dMLC-IMRT. In conclusion, clinically acceptable plans can be achieved with 1.5 T MR-Linac system for multiple tumor sites. Given the differences in machine characteristics, some minor differences in plan quality were found between MR-Linac plans and current clinical practice and this should be considered in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MR-linac; MRI-guided radiotherapy; intensity modulated radiotherapy; plan evaluation; treatment planning

Year:  2021        PMID: 33472549     DOI: 10.1177/1533033820985871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 1533-0338


  2 in total

1.  Novel Plasma Proteomic Biomarkers for Early Identification of Induction Chemotherapy Beneficiaries in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

Authors:  Shan-Qiang Zhang; Su-Ming Pan; Shu-Zhen Lai; Hui-Jing Situ; Jun Liu; Wen-Jie Dai; Si-Xian Liang; Li-Qing Zhou; Qi-Qi Lu; Pei-Feng Ke; Fan Zhang; Hai-Bin Chen; Ji-Cheng Li
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 5.738

2.  Brain stereotactic radiosurgery using MR-guided online adaptive planning for daily setup variation: An end-to-end test.

Authors:  Eun Young Han; He Wang; Tina Marie Briere; Debra Nana Yeboa; Themistoklis Boursianis; Georgios Kalaitzakis; Evangelos Pappas; Pamela Castillo; Jinzhong Yang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 2.102

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.