Dosimetric evaluation of 6 MV and 18 MV intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans for treatment of carcinoma of the cervix
Abstract
Introduction: Cervical cancer (Ca Cx) is the fourth most frequent cancer in women with an estimated 57000 new cases in 2018 representing 6.6% of all female cancers. Approximately 90% of deaths from cervical cancer occurred in low- and middle-income countries.
Material and Methods: A retrospective radiotherapy treatment planning comparative study conducted at the Department of Radiation Physics, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Bangalore during June 2018- March 2019.
Result: All the plans were normalized to 100 % at Target mean to achieve a similar target dose for quantitative comparison of DVHs. The results for target coverage, OAR sparing, integral dose, and monitoring units.
Conclusions: The tradeoff of using 6 MV and 18 MV for cervix patients depends on many parameters. Since the same PTV coverage was forced for both energies by having the same optimization constraints, there was little difference in target coverage and conformity index for both energies.
Downloads
References
Pirzkall A, Carol M, Pickett B, Xia P, Roach M, Verhey L. The Effect of beam energy and number of fields on photon based IMRT for deep seated targets. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53(2):434-441.
Soderstrom S, Eklof A, Brahme A. Aspects on the optimal photon energy for radiation therapy. Acta Oncologica. 1999;38(2):179-187.
Laughlin JS, Mohan R, Kutcher KJ. Choice of optimum megavoltage for accelerators for photon beam treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1986;12(9):1551-1557.
Boer SF, Kumek Y, Jaggernauth W, Podgarsak MB. The effect of beam energy on the quality of IMRT plans for prostate conformal radiotherapy. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2007;6(2):139-146.
Garrison H, Anderson J, Laughlin JS. Comparison of dose distributions in patients treated with X ray beams of widely different energies. Radiology. 1952;58(3):361-368.
Sternick ES, Bleier AR, Carol MP, Curran BH, Holmes TW, Kania AA, Lalond R, Larson LS. Intensity modulated radiation therapy: what photon energy is best. InPresentation at The XIIth International Conference on the Use of Computers in Radiation Therapy (ICCR) 1997 May.
Chibani O, Ma CM, Photonuclear dose calculations for high energy photon beams from Siemens and Varian Linacs. Med Phys. 2003;30(8):1990-2000.
Howell RM, Ferenci MS, Hertel NE, Fullerton GD. Investigation of secondary neutron dose for 18 MV dynamic MLC IMRT delivery. Med Phys. 2005;32(3):786-793.
Howell RM, Ferenci MS, Hertel NE. Measurements of secondary neutron dose from 15 MV and 18 MV IMRT. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;115(1-4):508-512.
Kry SF, Howell RM, Salehpour M, Followil DS. Neutron spectra and dose equivalents calculated in tissue for high-energy radiation therapy. Med Phys. 2009;36(4):1244-1250.
Khan FM. The Physics of Radiation therapy. 3rd Edition; Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Publishers (2003).
Feuvret L, Noel G, Mazeron J, Bey P. Conformity Index: A review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64(2):333-342.
Yoon M, Park SY, Shin D, Lee B, Pyo HR, Kim DY, et al. A new homogeneity index based on statistical analysis of the dose-volume histogram. J App Clin Med Physics. 2007;8(2): 9-17.
Chan MF, Schupak K, Burman C, Chui CS, Ling CC. Comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy planning for glioblastoma multiforme. Med Dosim. 2003;28(4):261-265.
Copyright (c) 2020 Author (s). Published by Siddharth Health Research and Social Welfare Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
OAI - Open Archives Initiative
