A dosimetric comparison of IMRT versus helical tomotherapy for brain tumors

Abstract Background and purpose Helical tomotherapy (HT) can deliver highly conformal, uniform doses to the target volume. However, HT can only be delivered in a coplanar mode. The purpose of this study was to perform a dosimetric comparison of HT versus coplanar (cIMRT) and non-coplanar (n-cIMRT) b...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Physica medica 2014-06, Vol.30 (4), p.497-502
Main Authors: Skórska, M, Piotrowski, T, Kaźmierska, J, Adamska, K
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Brain Neoplasms - radiotherapy
Brain tumor
Humans
Organs at Risk - radiation effects
Particle Accelerators
Plan comparison
Radiology
Radiometry
Radiotherapy
Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated - adverse effects
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated - instrumentation
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated - methods
Tomotherapy
Treatment planning
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Background and purpose Helical tomotherapy (HT) can deliver highly conformal, uniform doses to the target volume. However, HT can only be delivered in a coplanar mode. The purpose of this study was to perform a dosimetric comparison of HT versus coplanar (cIMRT) and non-coplanar (n-cIMRT) beam arrangements on a conventional linear accelerator in a diverse group of brain tumors. Materials and methods A total of 45 treatment plans were calculated retrospectively for 15 cases. For each case, 3 different delivery techniques (n-cIMRT, cIMRT and HT) were used. The treatment plans were compared using the parameters of the target coverage (conformity index; CI) and homogeneity (HI) for the planning target volume (PTV) and the maximum and mean doses for organs at risk (OARs). Results Median HI and CI were the best for HT plans and the worst for cIMRT. The largest reduction of maximum dose for lenses and mean dose for both eyes was achieved for n-cIMRT plans. Mean dose for chiasm and the ipsilateral optic nerve were the lowest for HT. The contralateral optic nerve was most spared with n-cIMRT. For D1% in the brain stem, there was no significant difference between HT and the IMRT plans. Conclusions Both HT and n-cIMRT are capable of producing conformal and homogeneous treatment plans with a good sparing of OARs. However, due to the non-coplanar capabilities of IMRT, n-cIMRT led to a superior dose reduction to the lenses.
ISSN:1120-1797
1724-191X
DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.02.002