• Yongbok Kim, Lynn J Verhey, and Ping Xia.
• Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, Comprehensive Cancer Center, 1600 Divisadero Street, Suite H1031, San Francisco, CA 94143-1708, USA.
• Phys Med Biol. 2007 Apr 21; 52 (8): 2147-56.

AbstractThe aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility of using conventional jaws to deliver inverse planned intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for patients with prostate cancer. For ten patients, each had one three-dimensional conformal plan (3D plan) and seven inverse IMRT plans using direct aperture optimization. For IMRT plans using conventional jaws (JO plans), the number of apertures per beam angle was set from two to seven while three apertures per beam angle were set for the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) plans. To evaluate each planning method, we compared average dose volume histograms (DVH), the conformal index (COIN), total number of segments and total number of monitor units. Among the JO plans with the number of apertures per beam angle varying from two to seven, no difference was observed in the average DVHs, and the plan conformal index became saturated after four apertures per beam angle. Subsequently, JO plans with four apertures per beam angle (JO-4A) were compared with 3D and MLC plans. Based on the average DVHs, no difference was found among 3D, JO-4A and MLC plans with regard to the planning target volume and rectum, but the DVHs for the bladder and penile bulb were significantly better with inverse IMRT plans than those with 3D plans. When compared with the plan conformity, the average COIN values for 3D, JO-4A and MLC plans were 0.61 +/- 0.07, 0.73 +/- 0.05 and 0.83 +/- 0.05, respectively. In conclusion, inverse IMRT plans using conventional jaws are clinically feasible, achieving better plan quality than 3D-CRT plans.

22 keywords...

hide…