• 대한방사선방어학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2011.11a
• /
• pp.102-103
• /
• 2011

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.28-34
• /
• 2011

The measurement-based verification for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a time-and labor-consuming procedure. Instead, this study aims to develop a MU fluence reconstruction method for IMRT QA. Total actual fluences from treatment planning system (TPS, Eclipse 8.6, Varian) were selected as a reference. Delivered leaf positions according to MU were extracted by the dynalog file generated after IMRT delivery. An in-house software was develop to reconstruct MU fluence from the acquired delivered leaf position data using MATLAB. We investigated five patient's plans delivered by both step-and-shoot IMRT and sliding window technologies. The total actual fluence was compared with the MU fluence reconstructed by using commercial software (Verisoft 3.1, PTW) and gamma analysis method (criteria: 3%/3 mm and 2%/1 mm). Gamma pass rates were $97.8{\pm}1.33$% and the reconstructed fluence was shown good agreement with RTP-based actual fluence. The fluence from step and shoot IMRT was shown slightly higher agreement with the actual fluence than that from sliding window IMRT. If moving from IMRT QA measurements toward independent computer calculations, the developed method can be used for IMRT QA. A point dose calculation method from reconstructed fluences is under development for the routine IMRT QA purpose.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.181-186
• /
• 2002

The IMRT planning depends on the algorithm of each planning system and MLC performance of each Linac system. Yonsei Cancer Center introduced an IMRT System at the beginning of February, 2002. The system consists of CORVUS (Nomos, U.S.A.) treatment planning system, LANTIS, PRIMEVIEW and PRIMART (Siemens, U.S.A) linac system. The optimization of CORVUS planning system with PRIMART is an important task to make a desirable quality treatment plan. Our Step ＆ Shoot IMRT system uses Finite Size Pencil Beams (FSPB) dose model, simulated annealing optimization algorithm and IMFAST segmentation algorithm. We constructed treatment plans for four different patient cases with two basic beamlet sizes, 1.0$\times$1.0 $\textrm{cm}^2$ and 0.5$\times$1.0 $\textrm{cm}^2$, and four intensity steps, 5%, 10%, 20%, 33%. Each case's plan was evaluated with the dose volume histograms of target volumes and delivery efficiencies. The patient case of small target volume is sensitive at the change of intensity map's segmentation and it highlighted an effective treatment plan at marrow intensity step and small basic projection beamlet.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.25-31
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The aim of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric properties of robust planning strategy for plain intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) taking into account of the uncertainties of effective proton range and set up error as compared to photon intensity-modulated radiation therapy (photon-IMRT) in prostate cancer treatment. Materials and Methods: The photon-IMRT (7 beams, step & shoot), plain-IMPT (2, 4, and 7 portals), and robust- IMPT plans, which was recalculated the plain-IMPT based on the uncertainties of range error (${\pm}5%$) and set up error (0.5 cm), were evaluated for five prostate cancer patients prescribed by 70 Gy/35 fractions. To quantitatively evaluate the dose distributions, several parameters such as maximum dose, minimum dose, mean dose, conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI) for PTV as well as dose-volume index of VxGy for OARs were calculated from dose-volume histograms. Results: Robust-IMPT showed superior dose distributios in the PTV and OARs as compared to plain-IMPT and photon-IMRT. Like plain-IMPT, robust-IMPT were resulted in dose fluctuation around OARs, while better homogeneity and conformity in PTVs and lower mean dose in OARs as compared to photon-IMRT. Conclusion: In consideration with the effective range correction and set up movement using robustness in IMPT plan, the dosimetric uncertainties from plain-IMPT could substantially reduce and suggest more effective solutions than photon-IMRT in prostate cancer treatment.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.63-70
• /
• 2018

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare dosimetric characteristics of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and two types of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) which are step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (s-IMRT) and modulated arc therapy (mARC) for thoracic esophageal cancer and analyze whether IMRT could reduce organ-at-risk (OAR) dose. Materials and Methods: We performed 3D-CRT, s-IMRT, and mARC planning for ten patients with thoracic esophageal cancer. The dose-volume histogram for each plan was extracted and the mean dose and clinically significant parameters were analyzed. Results: Analysis of target coverage showed that the conformity index (CI) and conformation number (CN) in mARC were superior to the other two plans (CI, p = 0.050; CN, p = 0.042). For the comparison of OAR, lung V5 was lowest in s-IMRT, followed by 3D-CRT, and mARC (p = 0.033). s-IMRT and mARC had lower values than 3D-CRT for heart $V_{30}$ (p = 0.039), $V_{40}$ (p = 0.040), and $V_{50}$ (p = 0.032). Conclusion: Effective conservation of the lung and heart in thoracic esophageal cancer could be expected when using s-IMRT. The mARC was lower in lung $V_{10}$, $V_{20}$, and $V_{30}$ than in 3D-CRT, but could not be proven superior in lung $V_5$. In conclusion, low-dose exposure to the lung and heart were expected to be lower in s-IMRT, reducing complications such as radiation pneumonitis or heart-related toxicities.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.154-161
• /
• 2013

This study assessed compared photon and proton treatment techniques, such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), uniform scanning proton therapy (USPT), and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), for a total of 10 prostate cancers. All treatment plans delivered 70 Gy to 95% of the planned target volume in 28 fractions. IMRT plans had 7 fields for the step and shoot technique, while USPT and IMPT plans employed two equally weighted, parallel-opposed lateral fields to deliver the prescribed dose to the planned target. Inverse planning was then incorporated to optimize IMPT. The homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) for the target and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for organ at risk (OAR) were calculated. Although the mean HI and CI for target were not significantly different for each treatment techniques, the NTCP of the rectum was 2.233, 3.326, and 1.707 for IMRT, USPT, and IMPT, respectively. The NTCP of the bladder was 0.008, 0.003, and 0.002 respectively. The NTCP values at the rectum and bladder were significantly lower using IMPT. Our study shows that using proton therapy, particularly IMPT, to treat prostate cancer could be beneficial compared to 7-field IMRT with similar target coverage. Given these results, radiotherapy using protons, particularly optimized IMPT, is a worthwhile treatment option for prostate cancer.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.48-57
• /
• 2021

Background: In this study, the complexities of step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans in magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy systems were evaluated. Materials and Methods: Overall, 194 verification plans from the abdomen, prostate, and breast sites were collected using a ⁶⁰Co-based ViewRay radiotherapy system (ViewRay Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA). Various plan complexity metrics (PCMs) were calculated for each verification plan, including the modulation complexity score (MCS), plan-averaged beam area (PA), plan-averaged beam irregularity, plan-averaged edge (PE), plan-averaged beam modulation, number of segments, average area among all segments (AA/Seg), and total beam-on time (TBT). The plan deliverability was quantified in terms of gamma passing rates (GPRs) with a 1 mm/2% criterion, and the Pearson correlation coefficients between GPRs and various PCMs were analyzed. Results and Discussion: For the abdomen, prostate, and breast groups, the average GPRs with the 1 mm/2% criterion were 77.8 ± 6.0%, 79.8 ± 4.9%, and 84.7 ± 7.3%; PCMs were 0.263, 0.271, and 0.386; PAs were 15.001, 18.779, and 35.683; PEs were 1.575, 1.444, and 1.028; AA/Segs were 15.37, 19.89, and 36.64; and TBTs were 18.86, 19.33, and 5.91 minutes, respectively. The various PCMs, i.e., MCS, PA, PE, AA/Seg, and TBT, showed statistically significant Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.416, 0.627, -0.541, 0.635, and -0.397, respectively, with GPRs. Conclusion: The area-related metrics exhibited strong correlations with GPRs. Moreover, the AA/Seg metric can be used to estimate the IMRT plan accuracy without beam delivery in the ⁶⁰Co-based ViewRay radiotherapy system.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.271-278
• /
• 2019

Purpose: To investigate the differences in treatment outcomes between two radiation techniques, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 160 (IMRT = 23, 3DCRT = 137) patients with stage I glottic cancer treated from January 2005 through December 2016. The IMRT was performed with TomoTherapy (16 patients), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (6 patients), and step-and-shoot technique (1 patient), respectively. The 3DCRT was performed with bilateral parallel opposing fields. The median follow-up duration was 30 months (range, 31 to 42 months) in the IMRT group and 65 months (range, 20 to 143 months) in the 3DCRT group. Results: The 5-year overall survival and 3-year local control rates of the 160 patients were 95.7% and 91.4%, respectively. There was no significant difference in 3-year local control rates between the IMRT and 3DCRT groups (94.4% vs. 91.0%; p = 0.587). Thirteen of 137 patients in the 3DCRT group had recurrences. In the IMRT group, one patient had a recurrence at the true vocal cord. Patients treated with IMRT had less grade 2 skin reaction than the 3DCRT group, but this had no statistical significance (4.3% vs. 21.2%; p = 0.080). Conclusion: IMRT had comparable outcomes with 3DCRT, and a trend of less acute skin reaction in stage I glottic cancer patients.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.1-10
• /
• 2006

Puroose: To present preliminary results of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using the simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy (SMART) boost technique in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Materials and Methods: Twenty patients who underwent IMRT for non-metastatic NPC at the Asan Medical Center between September 2001 and December 2003 were prospectively evaluated. IMRT was delivered using the 'step and shoot' SMART technique at prescribed doses of 72 Gy (2.4 Gy/day) to the gross tumor volume (GTV), 60 Gy (2 Gy/day) to the clinical target volume (CTV) and metastatic nodal station, and 46 Gy (2 Gy/day) to the clinically negative neck region. Eighteen patients also received concurrent chemotherapy using cisplatin once per week. Results: The median follow-up period was 27 months. Nineteen patients completed the treatment without interruption; the remaining patient interrupted treatment for 2 weeks owing to severe pharyngitis and malnutrition. Five patients (25%) had RTOG grade 3 mucositis, whereas nine (45%) had grade 3 pharyngitis. Seven patients (35%) lost more than 10% of their pretreatment weight, whereas 11 (55%) required intravenous fluids and/or tube feeding. There was no grade 3 or 4 chronic xerostomia. All patients showed complete response. Two patients had distant metastases and loco-regional recurrence, respectively. Conclusion: IMRT using the SMART boost technique allows parotid sparing, as shown clinically and by dosimetry, and may also be more effective biologically. A larger population of patients and a longer follow-up period are needed to evaluate ultimate tumor control and late toxicity.

• Korean Journal of Head & Neck Oncology
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.9-15
• /
• 2003

Purpose: To introduce our early experience with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods and Materials: Eight patients who underwent IMRT for no disseminated nasopharyngeal carcinoma at the Asan Medical Center between September 2001 and November 2002 were evaluate by prospective analysis. According to the 1997 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging classification, 5 had Stage III, and 3 had Stage IVB disease. The IMRT plans were designed to be delivered as a 'Simultaneous Modulated Accelerated Radiation Therapy' (SMART) using the 'step and shoot' technique with a MLC (multileaf collimator). Daily fractions of 2.2-2.5Gy and 1.9-2Gy were prescribed and delivered to the GTV and CTV and clinically negative neck node, respectively. The prescribed dose was 70A-79.0Gy to the gross tumor volume (GTV), 60Gy to the clinical target volume (CTV) and metastatic nodal station, and 46Gy to the clinically negative neck. All patients also received weekly cisplatin during radiotherapy. Acute and late normal tissue effects were graded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) radiation morbidity scoring criteria. Results: Follow-up period was ranging from 5 to 18 months. All patients showed complete response and loco-regional control rate was 100% but one patient died of malnutrition due to treatment related toxicity. There were no Grade 3 or 4 xerostomia and all patients had experienced improvement of salivary gland function. Conclusion: 'Simultaneous Modulated Accelerated Radiation Therapy' (SMART) boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique allows parotid sparing as evidenced both clinically and by dosimetry. Initial tumor response and loco-regional control was promising. It is clinically feasible. A larger population of patients and a long-term follow-up are needed to evaluate ultimate tumor control and late toxicity.