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

Title: Patient performance–based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of treatment-planning parameters on the quality of treatment plans in tomotherapy and to find the optimized planning parameter combinations when treating patients with prostate cancer under different performances. A total of 3 patients with prostate cancer with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or 3 were included in this study. For each patient, 27 treatment plans were created using a combination of planning parameters (field width of 1, 2.5, and 5 cm; pitch of 0.172, 0.287, and 0.43; and modulation factor of 1.8, 3, and 3.5). Then, plans were analyzed using several dosimetrical indices: the prescription isodose to target volume (PITV) ratio, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), target coverage index (TCI), modified dose HI (MHI), conformity number (CN), and quality factor (QF). Furthermore, dose-volume histogram of critical structures and critical organ scoring index (COSI) were used to analyze organs at risk (OAR) sparing. Interestingly, treatment plans with a field width of 1 cm showed more favorable results than others in the planning target volume (PTV) and OAR indices. However, the treatment time of the 1-cm field width was 3 times longer than that of plans withmore » a field width of 5 cm. There was no substantial decrease in treatment time when the pitch was increased from 0.172 to 0.43, but the PTV indices were slightly compromised. As expected, field width had the most significant influence on all of the indices including PTV, OAR, and treatment time. For the patients with good performance who can tolerate a longer treatment time, we suggest a field width of 1 cm, pitch of 0.172, and modulation factor of 1.8; for the patients with poor performance status, field width of 5 cm, pitch of 0.287, and a modulation factor of 3.5 should be considered.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22577838
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Dosimetry; Journal Volume: 40; Journal Issue: 4; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2015 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:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; 62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; CT-GUIDED RADIOTHERAPY; HAZARDS; MODULATION; NEOPLASMS; OPTIMIZATION; PATIENTS; PERFORMANCE; PLANNING; PROSTATE; QUALITY FACTOR; RADIATION DOSES

Citation Formats

Cao, Yuan Jie, Lee, Suk, E-mail: sukmp@korea.ac.kr, Chang, Kyung Hwan, Shim, Jang Bo, Kim, Kwang Hyeon, Park, Young Je, and Kim, Chul Yong. Patient performance–based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.03.005.
Cao, Yuan Jie, Lee, Suk, E-mail: sukmp@korea.ac.kr, Chang, Kyung Hwan, Shim, Jang Bo, Kim, Kwang Hyeon, Park, Young Je, & Kim, Chul Yong. Patient performance–based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy. United States. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.03.005.
Cao, Yuan Jie, Lee, Suk, E-mail: sukmp@korea.ac.kr, Chang, Kyung Hwan, Shim, Jang Bo, Kim, Kwang Hyeon, Park, Young Je, and Kim, Chul Yong. Thu . "Patient performance–based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy". United States. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.03.005.
@article{osti_22577838,
title = {Patient performance–based plan parameter optimization for prostate cancer in tomotherapy},
author = {Cao, Yuan Jie and Lee, Suk, E-mail: sukmp@korea.ac.kr and Chang, Kyung Hwan and Shim, Jang Bo and Kim, Kwang Hyeon and Park, Young Je and Kim, Chul Yong},
abstractNote = {The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of treatment-planning parameters on the quality of treatment plans in tomotherapy and to find the optimized planning parameter combinations when treating patients with prostate cancer under different performances. A total of 3 patients with prostate cancer with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or 3 were included in this study. For each patient, 27 treatment plans were created using a combination of planning parameters (field width of 1, 2.5, and 5 cm; pitch of 0.172, 0.287, and 0.43; and modulation factor of 1.8, 3, and 3.5). Then, plans were analyzed using several dosimetrical indices: the prescription isodose to target volume (PITV) ratio, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), target coverage index (TCI), modified dose HI (MHI), conformity number (CN), and quality factor (QF). Furthermore, dose-volume histogram of critical structures and critical organ scoring index (COSI) were used to analyze organs at risk (OAR) sparing. Interestingly, treatment plans with a field width of 1 cm showed more favorable results than others in the planning target volume (PTV) and OAR indices. However, the treatment time of the 1-cm field width was 3 times longer than that of plans with a field width of 5 cm. There was no substantial decrease in treatment time when the pitch was increased from 0.172 to 0.43, but the PTV indices were slightly compromised. As expected, field width had the most significant influence on all of the indices including PTV, OAR, and treatment time. For the patients with good performance who can tolerate a longer treatment time, we suggest a field width of 1 cm, pitch of 0.172, and modulation factor of 1.8; for the patients with poor performance status, field width of 5 cm, pitch of 0.287, and a modulation factor of 3.5 should be considered.},
doi = {10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2015.03.005},
journal = {Medical Dosimetry},
number = 4,
volume = 40,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2015},
month = {Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 EST 2015}
}