TCRT June 2009

category image Volume 8
No. 3 (p 177-248)
June 2009
ISSN 1533-0338
Four-Dimensional Radiotherapy

Assessing Four-dimensional Radiotherapy Planning and Respiratory Motion-induced Dose Difference Based on Biologically Effective Uniform Dose (187-200)

Four-dimensional (4D) radiotherapy is considered as a feasible and ideal solution to accommodate intra-fractional respiratory motion during conformal radiation therapy. With explicit inclusion of the temporal changes in anatomy during the imaging, planning, and delivery of radiotherapy, 4D treatment planning in principle provides better dose conformity. However, the clinical benefits of developing 4D treatment plans in terms of tumor control rate and normal tissue complication probability as compared to other treatment plans based on CT images of a fixed respiratory phase remains mostly unproven. The aim of our study is to comprehensively evaluate 4D treatment planning for nine lung tumor cases with both physical and biological measures using biologically effective uniform dose (D =) together with complication-free tumor control probability, P+. Based on the examined lung cancer patients and PTV margin applied, we found similar but not identical curves of DVH, and slightly different mean doses in tumor (up to 1.5%) and normal tissue in all cases when comparing 4D, P0%, and P50% plans. When it comes to biological evaluations, we did not observe definitively PTV size dependence in P+ among these nine lung cancer patients with various sizes of PTV. Moreover, it is not necessary that 4D plans would have better target coverage or higher P+ as compared to a fixed phase IMRT plan. However, on the contrary to significant deviations in P+ (up to 14.7%) observed if delivering the IMRT plan made at end-inhalation incorrectly at end-exhalation phase, we estimated the overall P+, PB, and PI for 4D composite plans that have accounted for intra-fractional respiratory motion.

Key words: Four-dimensional treatment planning; Biologically effective uniform dose; Treatment planning; Radiobiological objectives; Organ motion.

Fan-Chi Su, Ph.D.1,2
Chengyu Shi, Ph.D.1,2,*
Panayiotis Mavroidis, Ph.D.3,4
Virginia Goytia, MD5
Richard Crownover, MD, Ph.D.1,2
Prema Rassiah-Szegedi, Ph.D.6
Niko Papanikolaou, Ph.D.1,2

1Radiation Oncology Department
Cancer Therapy and Research Center
7979 Wurzbach Rd., MC 7889
San Antonio, TX 78229, USA
2Division of Radiological Sciences
University of Texas Health
Science Center at San Antonio
7703 Floyd Curl Drive
San Antonio, TX 78229, USA
3Department of Medical Radiation Physics
Karolinska Institute and
Stockholm University, Sweden
4Department of Medical Physics
Larissa University Hospital
Larissa, Greece
5Center for Radiation Oncology
717 West Robertson St.
Brandon, Fl 33511, USA
6Department of Radiation Oncology
University of Utah
7 1950 Circle of Hope Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112, USA

*shic@uthscsa.edu

Purchase Downloadable Full-text PDF of Articles

Corporate User

$100.00

University/Academic User

$50.00

Subscription is more cost effective than purchasing PDFs on-the-fly.  Click here for details.

Member Login | Home | Editorial Board | Instructions | Subscribe | Contact Us

Adenine Press, 2066 Central Avenue, Schenectady, NY 12304 USA
phone: 518-456-0784; fax: 518-452-4955; email: info@adeninepress.com
copyright © Adeninepress, All rights reserved.