skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment

Abstract

The surface doses of 6- and 15-MV prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) irradiations were measured and compared to those from a 15-MV prostate 4-beam box (FBB). IMRT plans (step-and-shoot technique) using 5, 7, and 9 beams with 6- and 15-MV photon beams were generated from a Pinnacle treatment planning system (version 6) using computed tomography (CT) scans from a Rando Phantom (ICRU Report 48). Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor detectors were used and placed on a transverse contour line along the Phantom surface at the central beam axis in the measurement. Our objectives were to investigate: (1) the contribution of the dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC) to the surface dose during the IMRT irradiation; (2) the effects of photon beam energy and number of beams used in the IMRT plan on the surface dose. The results showed that with the same number of beams used in the IMRT plan, the 6-MV irradiation gave more surface dose than that of 15 MV to the phantom. However, when the number of beams in the plan was increased, the surface dose difference between the above 2 photon energies became less. The average surface dose of the 15-MV IMRT irradiation increased with the numbermore » of beams in the plan, from 0.86% to 1.19%. Conversely, for 6 MV, the surface dose decreased from 1.33% to 1.24% as the beam number increased from 7 to 9. Comparing the 15-MV FBB and 6-MV IMRT plans with 2 Gy/fraction, the IMRT irradiations gave generally more surface dose, from 15% to 30%, depending on the number of beams in the plan. It was found that the increase in surface dose for the IMRT technique compared to the FBB plan was predominantly due to the number of beams and the calculated monitor units required to deliver the same dose at the isocenter in the plans. The head variation due to the dynamic MLC movement changing the surface dose distribution on the patient was reflected by the IMRT dose-intensity map. Although prostate IMRT in this study had an average higher surface dose than that of FBB, the more even distribution of relatively lower surface dose in IMRT field could avoid the big dose peaks at the surface positions directly under the FBB fields. Such an even and low surface dose distribution surrounding the patient in IMRT is believed to give less skin complication than that of FBB with the same prescribed dose.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [2];  [3]
  1. Medical Physics Department, Grand River Regional Cancer Center, Grand River Hospital, Kitchener, Ontario (Canada) and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario (Canada). E-mail: james.chow@rmp.uhn.on.ca
  2. Medical Physics Department, Grand River Regional Cancer Center, Grand River Hospital, Kitchener, Ontario (Canada)
  3. (Canada)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
20858080
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Dosimetry; Journal Volume: 31; Journal Issue: 4; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2005.07.002; PII: S0958-3947(06)00049-5; Copyright (c) 2006 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; COLLIMATORS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; IRRADIATION; MOSFET; PHANTOMS; PHOTON BEAMS; PHOTONS; PROSTATE; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIALS; SKIN

Citation Formats

Chow, James, Grigorov, Grigor N., Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Barnett, Rob, and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario. Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment. United States: N. p., 2006. Web. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2005.07.002.
Chow, James, Grigorov, Grigor N., Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Barnett, Rob, & Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario. Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment. United States. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2005.07.002.
Chow, James, Grigorov, Grigor N., Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Barnett, Rob, and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario. Sun . "Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment". United States. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2005.07.002.
@article{osti_20858080,
title = {Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment},
author = {Chow, James and Grigorov, Grigor N. and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario and Barnett, Rob and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario},
abstractNote = {The surface doses of 6- and 15-MV prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) irradiations were measured and compared to those from a 15-MV prostate 4-beam box (FBB). IMRT plans (step-and-shoot technique) using 5, 7, and 9 beams with 6- and 15-MV photon beams were generated from a Pinnacle treatment planning system (version 6) using computed tomography (CT) scans from a Rando Phantom (ICRU Report 48). Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor detectors were used and placed on a transverse contour line along the Phantom surface at the central beam axis in the measurement. Our objectives were to investigate: (1) the contribution of the dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC) to the surface dose during the IMRT irradiation; (2) the effects of photon beam energy and number of beams used in the IMRT plan on the surface dose. The results showed that with the same number of beams used in the IMRT plan, the 6-MV irradiation gave more surface dose than that of 15 MV to the phantom. However, when the number of beams in the plan was increased, the surface dose difference between the above 2 photon energies became less. The average surface dose of the 15-MV IMRT irradiation increased with the number of beams in the plan, from 0.86% to 1.19%. Conversely, for 6 MV, the surface dose decreased from 1.33% to 1.24% as the beam number increased from 7 to 9. Comparing the 15-MV FBB and 6-MV IMRT plans with 2 Gy/fraction, the IMRT irradiations gave generally more surface dose, from 15% to 30%, depending on the number of beams in the plan. It was found that the increase in surface dose for the IMRT technique compared to the FBB plan was predominantly due to the number of beams and the calculated monitor units required to deliver the same dose at the isocenter in the plans. The head variation due to the dynamic MLC movement changing the surface dose distribution on the patient was reflected by the IMRT dose-intensity map. Although prostate IMRT in this study had an average higher surface dose than that of FBB, the more even distribution of relatively lower surface dose in IMRT field could avoid the big dose peaks at the surface positions directly under the FBB fields. Such an even and low surface dose distribution surrounding the patient in IMRT is believed to give less skin complication than that of FBB with the same prescribed dose.},
doi = {10.1016/j.meddos.2005.07.002},
journal = {Medical Dosimetry},
number = 4,
volume = 31,
place = {United States},
year = {Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2006},
month = {Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2006}
}
  • Megavoltage photon intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is typically used in the treatment of prostate cancer at our institution. Approximately 1% to 2% of patients with prostate cancer have hip prostheses. The presence of the prosthesis usually complicates the planning process because of dose perturbation around the prosthesis, radiation attenuation through the prosthesis, and the introduction of computed tomography artifacts in the planning volume. In addition, hip prostheses are typically made of materials of high atomic number, which add uncertainty to the dosimetry of the prostate and critical organs in the planning volume. When the prosthesis is bilateral, treatment planning ismore » further complicated because only a limited number of beam angles can be used to avoid the prostheses. In this case study, we will report the observed advantages of using noncoplanar beams in the delivery of IMRT to a prostate cancer patient with bilateral hip prostheses. The treatment was planned for 75.6 Gy using a 7-field coplanar approach and a noncoplanar arrangement, with all fields avoiding entrance though the prostheses. Our results indicate that, compared with the coplanar plan, the noncoplanar plan delivers the prescribed dose to the target with a slightly better conformality and sparing of rectal tissue versus the coplanar plan.« less
  • With traditional photon therapy to treat large postoperative pancreatic target volume, it often leads to poor tolerance of the therapy delivered and may contribute to interrupted treatment course. This study was performed to evaluate the potential advantage of using passive-scattering (PS) and modulated-scanning (MS) proton therapy (PT) to reduce normal tissue exposure in postoperative pancreatic cancer treatment. A total of 11 patients with postoperative pancreatic cancer who had been previously treated with PS PT in University of Pennsylvania Roberts Proton Therapy Center from 2010 to 2013 were identified. The clinical target volume (CTV) includes the pancreatic tumor bed as wellmore » as the adjacent high-risk nodal areas. Internal (iCTV) was generated from 4-dimensional (4D) computed tomography (CT), taking into account target motion from breathing cycle. Three-field and 4-field 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), 5-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy, 2-arc volumetric-modulated radiation therapy, and 2-field PS and MS PT were created on the patients’ average CT. All the plans delivered 50.4 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV). Overall, 98% of PTV was covered by 95% of the prescription dose and 99% of iCTV received 98% prescription dose. The results show that all the proton plans offer significant lower doses to the left kidney (mean and V{sub 18} {sub Gy}), stomach (mean and V{sub 20} {sub Gy}), and cord (maximum dose) compared with all the photon plans, except 3-field 3DCRT in cord maximum dose. In addition, MS PT also provides lower doses to the right kidney (mean and V{sub 18} {sub Gy}), liver (mean dose), total bowel (V{sub 20} {sub Gy} and mean dose), and small bowel (V{sub 15} {sub Gy} absolute volume ratio) compared with all the photon plans and PS PT. The dosimetric advantage of PT points to the possibility of treating tumor bed and comprehensive nodal areas while providing a more tolerable treatment course that could be used for dose escalation and combining with radiosensitizing chemotherapy.« less
  • Purpose: To give a preliminary report of clinical and treatment factors associated with toxicity in men receiving high-dose radiation therapy (RT) on a phase 3 dose-escalation trial. Methods and Materials: The trial was initiated with 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) and amended after 1 year to allow intensity modulated RT (IMRT). Patients treated with 3D-CRT received 55.8 Gy to a planning target volume that included the prostate and seminal vesicles, then 23.4 Gy to prostate only. The IMRT patients were treated to the prostate and proximal seminal vesicles to 79.2 Gy. Common Toxicity Criteria, version 2.0, and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/Europeanmore » Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer late morbidity scores were used for acute and late effects. Results: Of 763 patients randomized to the 79.2-Gy arm of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0126 protocol, 748 were eligible and evaluable: 491 and 257 were treated with 3D-CRT and IMRT, respectively. For both bladder and rectum, the volumes receiving 65, 70, and 75 Gy were significantly lower with IMRT (all P<.0001). For grade (G) 2+ acute gastrointestinal/genitourinary (GI/GU) toxicity, both univariate and multivariate analyses showed a statistically significant decrease in G2+ acute collective GI/GU toxicity for IMRT. There were no significant differences with 3D-CRT or IMRT for acute or late G2+ or 3+ GU toxicities. Univariate analysis showed a statistically significant decrease in late G2+ GI toxicity for IMRT (P=.039). On multivariate analysis, IMRT showed a 26% reduction in G2+ late GI toxicity (P=.099). Acute G2+ toxicity was associated with late G3+ toxicity (P=.005). With dose–volume histogram data in the multivariate analysis, RT modality was not significant, whereas white race (P=.001) and rectal V70 ≥15% were associated with G2+ rectal toxicity (P=.034). Conclusions: Intensity modulated RT is associated with a significant reduction in acute G2+ GI/GU toxicity. There is a trend for a clinically meaningful reduction in late G2+ GI toxicity with IMRT. The occurrence of acute GI toxicity and large (>15%) volumes of rectum >70 Gy are associated with late rectal toxicity.« less
  • A small decrease in testosterone level has been documented after prostate irradiation, possibly owing to the incidental dose to the testes. Testicular doses from prostate external beam radiation plans with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were calculated to investigate any difference. Testicles were contoured for 16 patients being treated for localized prostate cancer. For each patient, 2 plans were created: 1 with IMRT and 1 with VMAT. No specific attempt was made to reduce testicular dose. Minimum, maximum, and mean doses to the testicles were recorded for each plan. Of the 16 patients, 4 receivedmore » a total dose of 7800 cGy to the prostate alone, 7 received 8000 cGy to the prostate alone, and 5 received 8000 cGy to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. The mean (range) of testicular dose with an IMRT plan was 54.7 cGy (21.1 to 91.9) and 59.0 cGy (25.1 to 93.4) with a VMAT plan. In 12 cases, the mean VMAT dose was higher than the mean IMRT dose, with a mean difference of 4.3 cGy (p = 0.019). There was a small but statistically significant increase in mean testicular dose delivered by VMAT compared with IMRT. Despite this, it unlikely that there is a clinically meaningful difference in testicular doses from either modality.« less
  • The primary aim of this study is to compare intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the radical treatment of prostate cancer using version 10.0 (v10.0) of Varian Medical Systems, RapidArc radiation oncology system. Particular focus was placed on plan quality and the implications on departmental resources. The secondary objective was to compare the results in v10.0 to the preceding version 8.6 (v8.6). Twenty prostate cancer cases were retrospectively planned using v10.0 of Varian's Eclipse and RapidArc software. Three planning techniques were performed: a 5-field IMRT, VMAT using one arc (VMAT-1A), and VMAT with twomore » arcs (VMAT-2A). Plan quality was assessed by examining homogeneity, conformity, the number of monitor units (MUs) utilized, and dose to the organs at risk (OAR). Resource implications were assessed by examining planning and treatment times. The results obtained using v10.0 were also compared to those previously reported by our group for v8.6. In v10.0, each technique was able to produce a dose distribution that achieved the departmental planning guidelines. The IMRT plans were produced faster than VMAT plans and displayed improved homogeneity. The VMAT plans provided better conformity to the target volume, improved dose to the OAR, and required fewer MUs. Treatments using VMAT-1A were significantly faster than both IMRT and VMAT-2A. Comparison between versions 8.6 and 10.0 revealed that in the newer version, VMAT planning was significantly faster and the quality of the VMAT dose distributions produced were of a better quality. VMAT (v10.0) using one or two arcs provides an acceptable alternative to IMRT for the treatment of prostate cancer. VMAT-1A has the greatest impact on reducing treatment time.« less