Duplicating a tandem and ovoids distribution with intensity-modulated radiotherapy: a feasibility study.
Brachytherapy plays an important role in the definitive treatment of cervical cancers by radiotherapy. In the present study, we investigated whether sliding-window intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) can achieve a pear-shaped distribution with a similar sharp dose falloff identical to that of brachytherapy. The computed tomography scans of a tandem and ovoid patient were pushed to both a high dose rate (HDR) and an IMRT treatment planning system (TPS) after the rectum, bladder, and left and right femoral heads had been outlined, ensuring identical structures in both planning systems. A conventional plan (7 Gy in 5 fractions, defined as the average dose to the left and right point A) was generated for HDR treatment. The 150%, 125%, 100%, 75%, 50%, and 25% isodose curves were drawn on each slice and then transferred to the IMRT TPS. The 100% isodose envelope from the HDR plan was the target for IMRT planning. A 7-field IMRT plan using 6-MV X-ray beams was generated and compared with the HDR plan using isodose conformity to the target and 125% volume, dose-volume histograms, and integral dose. The resulting isodose distribution demonstrated good agreement between the HDR and IMRT plans in the 100% and 125% isodose range. The dose falloff in the HDR plan was much steeper than that in the IMRT plan, but it also had a substantially higher maximum dose. Integral dose for the target, rectum, and bladder were found to be 6.69 J, 1.07 J, and 1.02 J in the HDR plan; the respective values for IMRT were 3.47 J, 1.79 J, and 1.34 J. Our preliminary results indicate that the HDR dose distribution can be replicated using a standard sliding-window IMRT dose delivery technique for points lying closer to the three-dimensional isodose envelope surrounding point A. Differences in radiobiology and patient positioning between the two techniques merit further consideration.
Malhotra
Harish K
HK
Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.
Avadhani
Jaiteerth S
JS
Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.
de Boer
Steven F
SF
Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.
Jaggernauth
Wainwright
W
Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.
Kuettel
Michael R
MR
Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.
Podgorsak
Matthew B
MB
Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York, U.S.A.
D001822:Body Burden; D001918:Brachytherapy / Q000379:methods*; D003198:Computer Simulation; D005240:Feasibility Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008954:Models, Biological; D011874:Radiometry / Q000379:methods*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods*; D012062:Relative Biological Effectiveness; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy*
Med Dosim. 2002 Summer;27(2):131-6
12074464
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Apr 1;52(5):1330-7
11955746
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Apr 1;52(5):1400-6
11955755
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Oct 1;57(2):516-21
12957265
Med Dosim. 2002 Summer;27(2):177-84
12074470
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Feb 1;64(2):333-42
16414369