In the present study, we aimed to evaluate effects of bladder filling on dose–volume distributions for bladder, rectum, planning target volume (PTV), and prostate in radiation therapy of prostate cancer. Patients (n=21) were scanned with a full bladder, and after 1 hour, having been allowed to void, with an empty bladder. Radiotherapy plans were generated using a four‐field box technique and dose of 70 Gy in 35 fractions. First, plans obtained for full‐ and empty‐bladder scans were compared. Second, situations in which a patient was planned on full bladder but was treated on empty bladder, and vice versa, were simulated, assuming that patients were aligned to external tattoos. Doses to the prostate [equivalent uniform dose (EUD)], bladder and rectum [effective dose (Deff)], and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) were compared. Dose to the small bowel was examined. Mean bladder volume was 354.3 cm3 when full and 118.2 cm3 when empty. Median prostate EUD was 70 Gy for plans based on full‐ and empty‐bladder scans alike. The median rectal Deff was 55.6 Gy for full‐bladder anatomy and 56.8 Gy for empty‐bladder anatomy, and the corresponding bladder Deff was 29.0 Gy and 49.3 Gy respectively. In 1 patient, part of the small bowel (7.5 cm3) received more than 50 Gy with full‐bladder anatomy, and in 6 patients, part (2.5 cm3−30 cm3) received more than 50 Gy with empty‐bladder anatomy. Bladder filling had no significant impact on prostate EUD or rectal Deff. A minimal volume of the small bowel received more than 50 Gy in both groups, which is below dose tolerance. The bladder Deff was higher with empty‐bladder anatomy; however, the predicted complication rates were clinically insignificant. When the multileaf collimator pattern was applied in reverse, substantial underdosing of the planning target volume (PTV) was observed, particularly for patients with prostate shifts in excess of 0.5 cm in any one direction. However, the prostate shifts showed no correlation with bladder filling, and therefore the PTV underdosing also cannot be related to bladder filling. For some patients, bladder dose–volume constraints were not fulfilled in the worst‐case scenario—that is, when a patient planned with full bladder consistently arrived for treatment with an empty bladder.PACS numbers: 87.53.‐j, 87.53.Kn, 87.53.Tf
Objective: To assess the impact of CT slice index and thickness (3 mm versus 5 mm) on (i) prostate volume, dimensions, and isocenter coordinates, (ii) bladder and rectal volumes, and (iii) DRR quality, in the treatment of prostate cancer. Methods: 16 patients with prostate cancer underwent two planning CT‐scans using 3 and 5 mm slice index/thickness. Prostate, bladder, and rectum were outlined on all scans. Prostate isocenter coordinates, maximum dimensions, and volumes were compared along with bladder and rectal volumes. Bladder volumes and maximum diameters were further investigated using a second observer. A comparative analysis of DRR quality was conducted as well as a dosimetric analysis using DVH. Results: The differences in measurements of prostate volume, isocenter coordinates and maximum dimensions between the 3 and 5 mm scans, were small and not statistically significant. Similar finding was seen for rectal volume. However, bladder volume was always larger on the 3 mm scan (mean difference=27.9 cc; SE=4.8 cc; 95% CI: 17.7−38.2 cc; p<0.001) and the findings were reproduced with the second observer (mean difference=31.9 cc; SE=4.7 cc; 95% CI: 21.9−41.9 cc; p<0.001). The differences in volume are caused by a slight increase in (1) the measurement of the longitudinal dimensions on the 3 mm scans, and (2) the slice by slice measured bladder area on the 3 mm scans. The latter is due to partial volume effect. The 3 mm DRR were slightly better than the 5 mm DRR. The bladder DVH differed significantly in some patients. Conclusion: Bladder volume is significantly larger on the 3 mm scans. Differences in contoured areas may be accounted for, in part, by the partial volume effect.PACS number(s): 87.57.–s, 87.53.–j
The dosimetric consequences of plans optimized using a commercial treatment planning system (TPS) for hypofractionated radiation therapy are evaluated by re-calculating with Monte Carlo (MC). Planning guidelines were in strict accordance with the Canadian BR25 protocol which is similar to the RTOG 0236 and 0618 protocols in patient eligibility and total dose, but has a different hypofractionation schedule (60 Gy in 15 fractions versus 60 Gy in 3 fractions). A common requirement of the BR25 and RTOG protocols is that the dose must be calculated by the TPS without tissue heterogeneity (TH) corrections. Our results show that optimizing plans using the pencil beam algorithm with no TH corrections does not ensure that the BR25 planning constraint of 99% of the PTV receiving at least 95% of the prescription dose would be achieved as revealed by MC simulations. This is due to poor modelling of backscatter and lateral electronic equilibrium by the TPS. MC simulations showed that as little as 75% of the PTV was actually covered by the 95% isodose line. The under-dosage of the PTV was even more pronounced if plans were optimized with the TH correction applied. In the most extreme case, only 23% of the PTV was covered by the 95% isodose.
BackgroundTo be less resource intensive, we developed a template-based breast IMRT technique (TB-IMRT). This study aims to compare resources and dose distribution between TB-IMRT and conventional breast radiation (CBR).MethodsTwenty patients with early stage breast cancer were planned using CBR and TB-IMRT. Time to plan, coverage of volumes, dose to critical structures and treatment times were evaluated for CBR and TB-IMRT. Two sided-paired t tests were used.ResultsTB-IMRT planning time was less than CBR (14.0 vs 39.0 min, p < 0.001). Fifteen patients with CBR needed 18 MV, and 11 of these were planned successfully with TB-IMRT using 6 MV. TB-IMRT provided better homogeneity index (0.096 vs 0.124, p < 0.001) and conformity index (0.68 vs 0.59, p = 0.003). Dose to critical structures were comparable between TB-IMRT and CBR, and treatment times were also similar (6.0 vs 7.8 min, p = 0.13).ConclusionsTB- IMRT provides reduction of planning time and minimizes the use of high energy beams, while providing similar treatment times and equal plans compared to CBR. This technique permits efficient use of resources with a low learning curve, and can be done with existing equipment and personnel.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.