• 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.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.105-110
• /
• 2007

Purpose : In spite of recent remarkable improvement of diagnostic imaging modalities such as CT, MRI, and PET and radiation therapy planing systems, ICR plan of uterine cervix cancer, based on recommendation of ICRU38(2D film-based) such as Point A, is still used widely. A 3-dimensional ICR plan based on CT image provides dose-volume histogram(DVH) information of the tumor and normal tissue. In this study, we compared tumor-dose, rectal-dose and bladder-dose through an analysis of DVH between CTV plan and ICRU38 plan based on CT image. Method and Material : We analyzed 11 patients with a cervix cancer who received the ICR of Ir-192 HDR. After 40Gy of external beam radiation therapy, ICR plan was established using PLATO(Nucletron) v.14.2 planing system. CT scan was done to all the patients using CT-simulator(Ultra Z, Philips). We contoured CTV, rectum and bladder on the CT image and established CTV plan which delivers the 100% dose to CTV and ICRU plan which delivers the 100% dose to the point A. Result : The volume$(average{\pm}SD)$ of CTV, rectum and bladder in all of 11 patients is $21.8{\pm}6.6cm^3,\;60.9{\pm}25.0cm^3,\;111.6{\pm}40.1cm^3$ respectively. The volume covered by 100% isodose curve is $126.7{\pm}18.9cm^3$ in ICRU plan and $98.2{\pm}74.5cm^3$ in CTV plan(p=0.0001), respectively. In (On) ICRU planning, $22.0cm^3$ of CTV volume was not covered by 100% isodose curve in one patient whose residual tumor size is greater than 4cm, while more than 100% dose was irradiated unnecessarily to the normal organ of $62.2{\pm}4.8cm^3$ other than the tumor in the remaining 10 patients with a residual tumor less than 4cm in size. Bladder dose recommended by ICRU 38 was $90.1{\pm}21.3%$ and $68.7{\pm}26.6%$ in ICRU plan and in CTV plan respectively(p=0.001) while rectal dose recommended by ICRU 38 was $86.4{\pm}18.3%$ and $76.9{\pm}15.6%$ in ICRU plan and in CTV plan, respectively(p=0.08). Bladder and rectum maximum dose was $137.2{\pm}50.1%,\;101.1{\pm}41.8%$ in ICRU plan and $107.6{\pm}47.9%,\;86.9{\pm}30.8%$ in CTV plan, respectively. Therefore, the radiation dose to normal organ was lower in CTV plan than in ICRU plan. But the normal tissue dose was remarkably higher than a recommended dose in CTV plan in one patient whose residual tumor size was greater than 4cm. The volume of rectum receiving more than 80% isodose (V80rec) was $1.8{\pm}2.4cm^3$ in ICRU plan and $0.7{\pm}1.0cm^3$ in CTV plan(p=0.02). The volume of bladder receiving more than 80% isodose(V80bla) was $12.2{\pm}8.9cm^3$ in ICRU plan and $3.5{\pm}4.1cm^3$ in CTV plan(p=0.005). According to these parameters, CTV plan could also save more normal tissue compared to ICRU38 plan. Conclusion : An unnecessary excessive radiation dose is irradiated to normal tissues within 100% isodose area in the traditional ICRU plan in case of a small size of cervix cancer, but if we use CTV plan based on CT image, the normal tissue dose could be reduced remarkably without a compromise of tumor dose. However, in a large tumor case, we need more research on an effective 3D-planing to reduce the normal tissue dose.