• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.223-229
• /
• 2005

Purpose: In this work we designed and made MPBP(Multi Purpose Brachytherapy Phantom). The MPBP enables one to reproduce the same patient set-up in MPBP as the treatment of the patient and we tried to get an exact analysis of rectal doses in the phantom without need of in-vivo dosimetry. Materials and Methods: Dose measurements were tried at a point of rectum 1, the reference point of rectum, with a diode detector for 4 patients treated with tandem and ovoid for a brachytherapy of a cervix cancer. Total 20 times of rectal dose measurements were made with 5 times a patient. The set-up variation of the diode detector was analyzed. The same patient set-ups were reproduced in self-made MPBP and then rectal doses were measured with TLD. Results: The measurement results of the diode detector showed that the set-up variation of the diode detector was the maximum $11.25{\pm}0.95mm$ in the y-direction for Patient 1 and the maximum $9.90{\pm}4.50mm,\;20.85{\pm}4.50mm,\;and\;19.15{\pm}3.33mm$ in the z-direction for Patient 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Un analyzing the degree of variation in 3 directions the more variation was showed in the z-direction than x- and y-direction except Patient 1. The results of TLD measurements in MPBP showed the relative maximum error of 8.6% and 7.7% at a point of rectum 1 for Patient 1 and 4, respectively and 1.7% and 1.2% for Patient 2 and 3, respectively. The doses measured at R1 and R2 were higher than those calculated except R point of Patient 2. this can be thought to related to the algorithm of dose calculation, whcih corrects for air and water but is guessed not to consider the correction for the scattered rays, but by considering the self-error (${\pm}5%$) TLD has the relative error of values measured and calculated was analyzed to be in a good agreement within 15%. Conclusion: The reproducibility of dose measurements under the same condition as the treatment could be achieved owing to the self-made MPMP and the dose at the point of interest could be analyzed accurately. If a treatment is peformed after achieving dose optimization using the data obtained in the phantom, dose will be able to be minimized to important organs.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.17-29
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this work was to investigate the dosimetric impact of mixed energy partial arc technique on prostate cancer VMAT. Materials and Methods: This study involved prostate only patients planned with 70Gy in 30 fractions to the planning target volume (PTV). Femoral heads, Bladder and Rectum were considered as oragan at risk (OARs). For this study, mixed energy partial arcs (MEPA) were generated with gantry angle set to 180°~230°, 310°~50° for 6MV arc and 130°~50°, 310°~230° for 15MV arc. Each arc set the avoidance sector which is gantry angle 230°~310°, 50°~130° at first arc and 50°~310° at second arc. After that, two plans were summed and were analyzed the dosimetry parameter of each structure such as Maximum dose, Mean dose, D2%, Homogeneity index (HI) and Conformity Index (CI) for PTV and Maximum dose, Mean dose, V70Gy, V50Gy, V30Gy, and V20Gy for OARs and Monitor Unit (MU) with 6MV 1 ARC, 6MV, 10MV, 15MV 2 ARC plan. Results: In MEPA, the maximum dose, mean dose and D2% were lower than 6MV 1 ARC plan(p<0.0005). However, the average difference of maximum dose was 0.24%, 0.39%, 0.60% (p<0.450, 0.321, 0.139) higher than 6MV, 10MV, 15MV 2 ARC plan, respectively and D2% was 0.42%, 0.49%, 0.59% (p<0.073, 0.087, 0.033) higher than compared plans. The average difference of mean dose was 0.09% lower than 10MV 2 ARC plan, but it is 0.27%, 0.12% (p<0.184, 0.521) higher than 6MV 2 ARC, 15MV 2 ARC plan, respectively. HI was 0.064±0.006 which is the lowest value (p<0.005, 0.357, 0.273, 0.801) among the all plans. For CI, there was no significant differences which were 1.12±0.038 in MEPA, 1.12±0.036, 1.11±0.024, 1.11±0.030, 1.12±0.027 in 6MV 1 ARC, 6MV, 10MV, 15MV 2 ARC, respectively. MEPA produced significantly lower rectum dose. Especially, V70Gy, V50Gy, V30Gy, V20Gy were 3.40, 16.79, 37.86, 48.09 that were lower than other plans. For bladder dose, V30Gy, V20Gy were lower than other plans. However, the mean dose of both femoral head were 9.69±2.93, 9.88±2.5 which were 2.8Gy~3.28Gy higher than other plans. The mean MU of MEPA were 19.53% lower than 6MV 1 ARC, 5.7% lower than 10MV 2 ARC respectively. Conclusion: This study for prostate radiotherapy demonstrated that a choice of MEPA VMAT has the potential to minimize doses to OARs and improve homogeneity to PTV at the expense of a moderate increase in maximum and mean dose to the femoral heads.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.171-178
• /
• 2016

Purpose : In order to minimize the dose of femoral head as an appropriate treatment plan for rectal cancer radiation therapy, we compare and evaluate the usefulness of 3-field 3D conformal radiation therapy(below 3fCRT), which is a universal treatment method, and 5-field 3D conformal radiation therapy(below 5fCRT), and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT). Materials and Methods : The 10 cases of rectal cancer that treated with 21EX were enrolled. Those cases were planned by Eclipse(Ver. 10.0.42, Varian, USA), PRO3(Progressive Resolution Optimizer 10.0.28) and AAA(Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm Ver. 10.0.28). 3fCRT and 5fCRT plan has $0^{\circ}$, $270^{\circ}$, $90^{\circ}$ and $0^{\circ}$, $95^{\circ}$, $45^{\circ}$, $315^{\circ}$, $265^{\circ}$ gantry angle, respectively. VMAT plan parameters consisted of 15MV coplanar $360^{\circ}$ 1 arac. Treatment prescription was employed delivering 54Gy to recum in 30 fractions. To minimize the dose difference that shows up randomly on optimizing, VMAT plans were optimized and calculated twice, and normalized to the target V100%=95%. The indexes of evaluation are D of Both femoral head and aceta fossa, total MU, H.I.(Homogeneity index) and C.I.(Conformity index) of the PTV. All VMAT plans were verified by gamma test with portal dosimetry using EPID. Results : D of Rt. femoral head was 53.08 Gy, 50.27 Gy, and 30.92 Gy, respectively, in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. Likewise, Lt. Femoral head showed average 53.68 Gy, 51.01 Gy and 29.23 Gy in the same order. D of Rt. aceta fossa was 54.86 Gy, 52.40 Gy, 30.37 Gy, respectively, in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. Likewise, Lt. Femoral head showed average 53.68 Gy, 51.01 Gy and 29.23 Gy in the same order. The maximum dose of both femoral head and aceta fossa was higher in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. C.I. showed the lowest VMAT treatment plan with an average of 1.64, 1.48, and 0.99 in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. There was no significant difference on H.I. of the PTV among three plans. Total MU showed that the VMAT treatment plan used 124.4MU and 299MU more than the 3fCRT and 5fCRT treatment plan, respectively. IMRT verification gamma test results for the VMAT plan passed over 90.0% at 2mm/2%. Conclusion : In rectal cancer treatment, the VMAT plan was shown to be advantageous in most of the evaluation indexes compared to the 3D plan, and the dose of the femoral head was greatly reduced. However, because of practical limitations there may be a case where it is difficult to select a VMAT treatment plan. 5fCRT has the advantage of reducing the dose of the femoral head as compared to the existing 3fCRT, without regard to additional problems. Therefore, not only would it extend survival time but the quality of life in general, if hospitals improved radiation therapy efficiency by selecting the treatment plan in accordance with the hospital's situation.