title: From analytic inversion to contemporary IMRT optimization: radiation therapy planning revisited from a mathematical perspective.
abstract: In this paper we look at the development of radiation therapy treatment planning from a mathematical point of view. Historically, planning for Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) has been considered as an inverse problem. We discuss first the two fundamental approaches that have been investigated to solve this inverse problem: Continuous analytic inversion techniques on one hand, and fully-discretized algebraic methods on the other hand. In the second part of the paper, we review another fundamental question which has been subject to debate from the beginning of IMRT until the present day: The rotation therapy approach versus fixed angle IMRT. This builds a bridge from historic work on IMRT planning to contemporary research in the context of Intensity-Modulated Arc Therapy (IMAT).
authors: Department of Mathematics, University of Haifa, Mt. Carmel, Haifa, Israel. yair@math.haifa.ac.il
authors: Yair
authors: Y
authors: Censor
authors: Jan
authors: J
authors: Unkelbach
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1987 Dec;13(12):1921-5
references: 3679932
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990 Feb;18(2):425-31
references: 2303369
references: Phys Med Biol. 2005 Aug 7;50(15):3491-514
references: 16030379
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990 Feb;18(2):489-91
references: 2303373
references: Phys Med. 2008 Jun;24(2):42-8
references: 18295523
references: Phys Med Biol. 2010 Oct 7;55(19):6023-37
references: 20858916
references: Med Phys. 2002 Jun;29(6):1007-18
references: 12094970
references: Phys Med Biol. 1999 Apr;44(4):1089-104
references: 10232816
references: Phys Med Biol. 2008 Nov 21;53(22):6291-303
references: 18936519
references: Radiology. 1982 Nov;145(2):473-8
references: 7134454
references: Med Phys. 1997 Jan;24(1):103-10
references: 9029544
references: Med Phys. 2009 Jun;36(6):2328-39
references: 19610322
references: Phys Med Biol. 2000 Feb;45(2):429-40
references: 10701513
references: Radiother Oncol. 1988 Jun;12(2):129-40
references: 3406458
references: Comput Biol Med. 1976 Oct;6(4):273-94
references: 1000955
references: J Theor Biol. 1970 Dec;29(3):471-81
references: 5492997
references: Med Phys. 2008 Jan;35(1):310-7
references: 18293586
references: Inverse Probl. 2009 Jan 1;25(12):1230009
references: 20376330
references: Med Phys. 1993 Nov-Dec;20(6):1709-19
references: 8309444
references: Med Phys. 2008 Nov;35(11):4911-23
references: 19070225
references: Phys Med Biol. 1997 Jun;42(6):1065-86
references: 9194129
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1989 Jan;16(1):271-6
references: 2912950
references: Phys Med Biol. 2010 Jan 7;55(1):83-97
references: 19949256
references: Phys Med Biol. 2004 May 21;49(10):1915-32
references: 15214533
references: Phys Med Biol. 2011 Mar 7;56(5):R31-54
references: 21297245
references: Med Phys. 1997 Feb;24(2):149-60
references: 9048355
references: Phys Med Biol. 2007 Apr 7;52(7):N127-35
references: 17374906
references: Phys Med Biol. 1982 Oct;27(10):1221-9
references: 7146095
references: Phys Med Biol. 2006 Aug 7;51(15):3653-66
references: 16861772
references: Phys Med Biol. 2007 Jul 21;52(14):4099-119
references: 17664597
references: Br J Radiol. 2003 Oct;76(910):678-89
references: 14512327
references: Phys Med Biol. 2010 Jul 7;55(13):3873-83
references: 20571210
references: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1987 Apr;13(4):623-30
references: 3558053