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

Title: SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and double-arc volumetricmodulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with simultaneous integrated boost in rectal cancer. Methods: Ten patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT were included in this analysis. For each patient, two treatment techniques were designed for each patient: the fixed 7 fields IMRT and double-arc VMAT with RapidArc technique. The treatment plan was designed to deliver in one process with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). The prescribed doses to the planning target volume of the subclinical disease (PTV1) and the gross disease (PTV2) were 45 Gy and 55 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk, total MU and the delivery time in two techniques were compared to explore the dosimetric differences. Results: For the target dose and homogeneity in PTV1 and PTV2, no statistically differences were observed in the two plans. VMAT plans showed a better conformity in PTV1. VMAT plans reduced the mean dose to bladder, small bowel, femur heads and iliac wings. For iliac wings, VMAT plans resulted in a statistically significant reduction in irradiated volume of 15 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy butmore » increased the 10 Gy irradiated volume. VMAT plans reduced the small bowel irradiated volume of 20 Gy and 30 Gy. Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed a significant reduction of monitor units by nearly 30% and reduced treatment time by an average of 70% Conclusion: Compared to IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed the similar target dose and reduced the dose of the organs at risk, especially for small bowel and iliac wings. For rectal cancer, VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost can be carried out with high quality and efficiency.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]
  1. Shandong Cancer Hospital, Jinan, Shandong (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22545163
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; BLADDER; FEMUR; HEALTH HAZARDS; IRRADIATION; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; RECTUM

Citation Formats

Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, and Liu, T. SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, & Liu, T. SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, and Liu, T. Mon . "SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
@article{osti_22545163,
title = {SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer},
author = {Sun, T and Lin, X and Yin, Y and Liu, T},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and double-arc volumetricmodulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with simultaneous integrated boost in rectal cancer. Methods: Ten patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT were included in this analysis. For each patient, two treatment techniques were designed for each patient: the fixed 7 fields IMRT and double-arc VMAT with RapidArc technique. The treatment plan was designed to deliver in one process with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). The prescribed doses to the planning target volume of the subclinical disease (PTV1) and the gross disease (PTV2) were 45 Gy and 55 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk, total MU and the delivery time in two techniques were compared to explore the dosimetric differences. Results: For the target dose and homogeneity in PTV1 and PTV2, no statistically differences were observed in the two plans. VMAT plans showed a better conformity in PTV1. VMAT plans reduced the mean dose to bladder, small bowel, femur heads and iliac wings. For iliac wings, VMAT plans resulted in a statistically significant reduction in irradiated volume of 15 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy but increased the 10 Gy irradiated volume. VMAT plans reduced the small bowel irradiated volume of 20 Gy and 30 Gy. Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed a significant reduction of monitor units by nearly 30% and reduced treatment time by an average of 70% Conclusion: Compared to IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed the similar target dose and reduced the dose of the organs at risk, especially for small bowel and iliac wings. For rectal cancer, VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost can be carried out with high quality and efficiency.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924390},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}