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

Title: Treatment and Dosimetric Advantages Between VMAT, IMRT, and Helical TomoTherapy in Prostate Cancer

Abstract

We investigated the possible treatment and dosimetric advantage of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) over step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (step-and-hhoot IMRT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). Twelve prostate cancer patients undergoing VMAT to the prostate were included. Three treatment plans (VMAT, step-and-shoot IMRT, HT) were generated for each patient. The doses to clinical target volume and 95% of planning target volume were both {>=}78 Gy. Target coverage, conformity index, dose to rectum/bladder, monitor units (MU), treatment time, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of targets, and rectum/bladder were compared between techniques. HT provided superior conformity and significantly less rectal volume exposed to 65 Gy and 40 Gy, as well as EUD/NTCP of rectum than step-and-shoot IMRT, whereas VMAT had a slight dosimetric advantage over step-and-shoot IMRT. Notably, significantly lower MUs were needed for VMAT (309.7 {+-} 35.4) and step-and-shoot IMRT (336.1 {+-} 16.8) than for HT (3368 {+-} 638.7) (p < 0.001). The treatment time (minutes) was significantly shorter for VMAT (2.6 {+-} 0.5) than step-and-shoot IMRT (3.8 {+-} 0.3) and HT (3.8 {+-} 0.6) (p < 0.001). Dose verification of VMAT using point dose and film dosimetry met the accepted criteria. VMAT and step-and-shoot IMRT have comparablemore » dosimetry, but treatment efficiency is significantly higher for VMAT than for step-and-shoot IMRT and HT.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]
  1. Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
21590490
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
Medical Dosimetry
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 36; Journal Issue: 3; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2010.05.001; PII: S0958-3947(10)00067-1; Copyright (c) 2011 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Journal ID: ISSN 0958-3947
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; BLADDER; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; CT-GUIDED RADIOTHERAPY; EFFICIENCY; FILM DOSIMETRY; NEOPLASMS; PLANNING; PROBABILITY; PROSTATE; RADIATION DOSES; RECTUM; VERIFICATION; BODY; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM; DISEASES; DOSES; DOSIMETRY; GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT; GLANDS; INTESTINES; LARGE INTESTINE; MALE GENITALS; MEDICINE; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ORGANS; RADIOLOGY; RADIOTHERAPY; THERAPY; TOMOGRAPHY; URINARY TRACT

Citation Formats

Tsai, Chiao-Ling, Wu, Jian-Kuen, Chao, Hsiao-Ling, Tsai, Yi-Chun, Cheng, Jason Chia-Hsien, E-mail: jasoncheng@ntu.edu.tw, Graduate Institute of Oncology, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, and Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. Treatment and Dosimetric Advantages Between VMAT, IMRT, and Helical TomoTherapy in Prostate Cancer. United States: N. p., 2011. Web. doi:10.1016/j.meddos.2010.05.001.
Tsai, Chiao-Ling, Wu, Jian-Kuen, Chao, Hsiao-Ling, Tsai, Yi-Chun, Cheng, Jason Chia-Hsien, E-mail: jasoncheng@ntu.edu.tw, Graduate Institute of Oncology, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, & Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. Treatment and Dosimetric Advantages Between VMAT, IMRT, and Helical TomoTherapy in Prostate Cancer. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2010.05.001
Tsai, Chiao-Ling, Wu, Jian-Kuen, Chao, Hsiao-Ling, Tsai, Yi-Chun, Cheng, Jason Chia-Hsien, E-mail: jasoncheng@ntu.edu.tw, Graduate Institute of Oncology, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, and Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. 2011. "Treatment and Dosimetric Advantages Between VMAT, IMRT, and Helical TomoTherapy in Prostate Cancer". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2010.05.001.
@article{osti_21590490,
title = {Treatment and Dosimetric Advantages Between VMAT, IMRT, and Helical TomoTherapy in Prostate Cancer},
author = {Tsai, Chiao-Ling and Wu, Jian-Kuen and Chao, Hsiao-Ling and Tsai, Yi-Chun and Cheng, Jason Chia-Hsien, E-mail: jasoncheng@ntu.edu.tw and Graduate Institute of Oncology, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan and Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan},
abstractNote = {We investigated the possible treatment and dosimetric advantage of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) over step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (step-and-hhoot IMRT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). Twelve prostate cancer patients undergoing VMAT to the prostate were included. Three treatment plans (VMAT, step-and-shoot IMRT, HT) were generated for each patient. The doses to clinical target volume and 95% of planning target volume were both {>=}78 Gy. Target coverage, conformity index, dose to rectum/bladder, monitor units (MU), treatment time, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of targets, and rectum/bladder were compared between techniques. HT provided superior conformity and significantly less rectal volume exposed to 65 Gy and 40 Gy, as well as EUD/NTCP of rectum than step-and-shoot IMRT, whereas VMAT had a slight dosimetric advantage over step-and-shoot IMRT. Notably, significantly lower MUs were needed for VMAT (309.7 {+-} 35.4) and step-and-shoot IMRT (336.1 {+-} 16.8) than for HT (3368 {+-} 638.7) (p < 0.001). The treatment time (minutes) was significantly shorter for VMAT (2.6 {+-} 0.5) than step-and-shoot IMRT (3.8 {+-} 0.3) and HT (3.8 {+-} 0.6) (p < 0.001). Dose verification of VMAT using point dose and film dosimetry met the accepted criteria. VMAT and step-and-shoot IMRT have comparable dosimetry, but treatment efficiency is significantly higher for VMAT than for step-and-shoot IMRT and HT.},
doi = {10.1016/j.meddos.2010.05.001},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/21590490}, journal = {Medical Dosimetry},
issn = {0958-3947},
number = 3,
volume = 36,
place = {United States},
year = {Sat Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 2011},
month = {Sat Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 2011}
}