open access

Vol 18, No 5 (2013)
Original research articles
Published online: 2013-09-01
Submitted: 2012-11-26
Get Citation

Comparison of dosimetric variation between prostate IMRT and VMAT due to patient's weight loss: Patient and phantom study

James C.L. Chow, Runqing Jiang
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2013.05.003
·
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2013;18(5):272-278.

open access

Vol 18, No 5 (2013)
Original research articles
Published online: 2013-09-01
Submitted: 2012-11-26

Abstract

Aim

This study compared the dosimetric impact between prostate IMRT and VMAT due to patient's weight loss.

Background

Dosimetric variation due to change of patient's body contour is difficult to predict in prostate IMRT and VMAT, since a large number of small and irregular segmental fields is used in the delivery.

Materials and methods

Five patients with prostate volumes ranging from 32.0 to 86.5[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]cm3 and a heterogeneous pelvis phantom were used for prostate IMRT and VMAT plans using the same set of dose–volume constraints. Doses in IMRT and VMAT plans were recalculated with the patient's and phantom's body contour reduced by 0.5–2[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]cm to mimic size reduction. Dose coverage/criteria of the PTV and CTV and critical organs (rectum, bladder and femoral heads) were compared between IMRT and VMAT.

Results

In IMRT plans, increases of the D99% for the PTV and CTV were equal to 4.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.1% per cm of reduced depth, which were higher than those in VMAT plans (2.7[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.24% per cm). Moreover, increases of the D30% of the rectum and bladder per reduced depth in IMRT plans (4.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.2% per cm and 3.5[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.5% per cm) were higher than those of VMAT (2.2[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.2% per cm and 2.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.6% per cm). This was also true for the increase of the D5% for the right femoral head in a patient or phantom with size reduction due to weight loss.

Conclusions

VMAT would be preferred to IMRT in prostate radiotherapy, when a patient has potential to suffer from weight loss during the treatment.

Abstract

Aim

This study compared the dosimetric impact between prostate IMRT and VMAT due to patient's weight loss.

Background

Dosimetric variation due to change of patient's body contour is difficult to predict in prostate IMRT and VMAT, since a large number of small and irregular segmental fields is used in the delivery.

Materials and methods

Five patients with prostate volumes ranging from 32.0 to 86.5[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]cm3 and a heterogeneous pelvis phantom were used for prostate IMRT and VMAT plans using the same set of dose–volume constraints. Doses in IMRT and VMAT plans were recalculated with the patient's and phantom's body contour reduced by 0.5–2[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]cm to mimic size reduction. Dose coverage/criteria of the PTV and CTV and critical organs (rectum, bladder and femoral heads) were compared between IMRT and VMAT.

Results

In IMRT plans, increases of the D99% for the PTV and CTV were equal to 4.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.1% per cm of reduced depth, which were higher than those in VMAT plans (2.7[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.24% per cm). Moreover, increases of the D30% of the rectum and bladder per reduced depth in IMRT plans (4.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.2% per cm and 3.5[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.5% per cm) were higher than those of VMAT (2.2[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.2% per cm and 2.0[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]±[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]0.6% per cm). This was also true for the increase of the D5% for the right femoral head in a patient or phantom with size reduction due to weight loss.

Conclusions

VMAT would be preferred to IMRT in prostate radiotherapy, when a patient has potential to suffer from weight loss during the treatment.

Get Citation

Keywords

Prostate IMRT; Prostate VMAT; Patient' s weight loss; Treatment planning evaluation and dose–volume points

About this article
Title

Comparison of dosimetric variation between prostate IMRT and VMAT due to patient's weight loss: Patient and phantom study

Journal

Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy

Issue

Vol 18, No 5 (2013)

Pages

272-278

Published online

2013-09-01

DOI

10.1016/j.rpor.2013.05.003

Bibliographic record

Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2013;18(5):272-278.

Keywords

Prostate IMRT
Prostate VMAT
Patient's weight loss
Treatment planning evaluation and dose–volume points

Authors

James C.L. Chow
Runqing Jiang

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: journals@viamedica.pl