This is an archive of papers published by the staff and faculty of Fox Chase Cancer Center. For questions about content, please contact Talbot Research Library
Last updated on
Wang L , Hoban P , Paskalev K , Yang J , Li JS , Chen LL , Xiong WJ , Ma CCM
Dosimetric advantage and clinical implication of a micro-multileaf collimator in the treatment of prostate with intensity-modulated radiotherapy
MEDICAL DOSIMETRY. 2005 Sum;30(2) :97-103
URL: http://gateway.isiknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=Alerting&SrcApp=Alerting&DestApp=WOS&DestLinkType=FullRecord;KeyUT=000235798300007*Order Full Text [ ]
AbstractThis paper investigates the dosimetric benefits of a micro-multileaf (4-mm leaf width) collimator (mMLC) for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning of the prostate cancer and its potential application for dose escalation and hypofractionation. We compared treatment plans for IMRT delivery using 2 different multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf widths (4 vs. 10 mm) for 10 patients with prostate cancer. Treatment planning was performed on the XknifeRT2 treatment planning system. All beams and optimization parameters were identical for the mMLC and MLC plans. All of the plans were normalized to ensure that 95% of the planning target volume (PTV) received 100% of the prescribed dose (74 Gy). The differences in dose distribution between the 2 groups of plans using the mMLC and the MLC were assessed by dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis of the target and critical organs. Significant reductions in the volume of rectum receiving medium to higher doses were achie! ved using the mMLC. The average decrease in the volume of the rectum receiving 40, 50, and 60 Gy using the mMLC plans was 40.2%, 33.4%, and 17.7%, respectively, with p-values less than 0.0001 for V-40 and V-50 and 0.012 for V-60. The mean dose reductions for D-17 and D-35 for the rectum were 20.0% (p<0.0001) and 18.3% (p<0.0002), respectively, when compared to those with the MLC plans. There were consistent reductions in all dose indices studied for the bladder. The target dose inhomogeneity was improved in the mMLC plans by an average of 32%. In the high-dose range, there was no significant difference in the dose deposited in the "hottest" 1 cc of the rectum between the 2 MLC plans for all cases (p>0.78). Because of the reduction of rectal volume receiving medium to higher doses, dose to the prostate target can be escalated by about 20 Gy to over 74 Gy, while keeping the rectal dose (either denoted by D-17 or D-35) the same as those with the use of the MLC. The maximum ach! ievable dose, derived when the rectum is allowed to reach the ! toleranc e level, was found to be in the range of 113-172 Gy (using the tolerance value of D-17). We conclude that the use of the mMLC for IMRT of the prostate may facilitate dose hypofractionation due to its dosimetric advantage in significantly improving the DVH parameters of the prostate and critical organs. When used for conventional fractionation scheme, mMLC for IMRT of the prostate may reduce the toxicity to the critical organs. (C) 2005 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.