Knowledge-based Organ-at-Risk Sparing Models and Individualized Trade-offs in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Planning

2012 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. S27
Author(s):  
Q. Wu ◽  
L. Yuan ◽  
T. LI ◽  
J. Kirkpatrick ◽  
F. Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy ◽  
Therapy Planning ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
Radiation Therapy Planning ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Organ At Risk

scholarly journals Dosimetric Comparison Between Jaw Tracking and No Jaw Tracking in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 153303381984106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shengyu Yao ◽  
Yin Zhang ◽  
Tingfeng Chen ◽  
Guoqi Zhao ◽  
Zhekai Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽  
Brain Metastasis ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy ◽  
Large Tumor ◽  
Intensity Modulated ◽  
Passing Rates ◽  
Passing Rate ◽  
Organ At Risk

Purpose: This article compares the dosimetric differences between jaw tracking and no jaw tracking technique in static intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans of large and small tumors. Methods: Eight plans with large tumor (nasopharyngeal carcinoma, volume range: 510.9 to 768.0 cm3) and 8 plans with small tumor (single brain metastasis, volume range: 5.3 to 9.9 cm3) treated with jaw tracking on Varian EDGE LINAC were chosen and recalculated with no jaw tracking to study the dosimetric differences. We compared the differences of organ-at-risk doses (Dmax, Dmean), monitor units, and γ passing rate of plan verification (3mm/3%, threshold 10%; 2mm/2%, threshold 10%) between the 2 techniques. Results: The organ-at-risk doses of nasopharyngeal carcinoma cases having jaw tracking are all less than those with no jaw tracking. The Dmax and Dmean of organ-at-risks reduced 0.61% to 17.65% and 2.17% to 19.32%, P < .05, respectively. In cases with single brain metastasis, the organ-at-risk doses with jaw tracking were also lower than no jaw tracking. The Dmax and Dmean of organ-at-risk doses reduced 0.84% to 1.52% and 0.90% to 1.86%, P < .05, respectively. The monitor units for the large tumor and small tumor were increased by 2.41% and 1.1%, respectively. The γ passing rates (3mm/3%, th10%; 2mm/2%, th10%) of nasopharyngeal carcinoma plans are 99.89% ± 0.06% (jaw tracking) versus 99.56% ± 0.19% (no jaw tracking; P = .127); 97.15% ± 0.98% (jaw tracking) versus 91.90% ± 1.40% (no jaw tracking; P = .000), and the γ passing rates (3mm/3%, th10%; 2mm/2%, th10%) of brain metastasis plans are 99.97% ± 0.05% (jaw tracking) versus 99.44% ± 1.24% (no jaw tracking; P = .251), 98.65% ± 1.27% (jaw tracking) versus 93.35% ± 2.72% (no jaw tracking; P = .000). Conclusion: Jaw tracking can reduce the dose of organ-at-risks compared to no jaw tracking, and the effect is more significant for plans with large tumor. The γ passing rate of plans with jaw tracking is also higher than the plans with no jaw tracking. Although the monitor units in plans of jaw tracking will increase slightly, it is recommended to use jaw tracking in static intensity-modulated radiation therapy both in large and in small tumors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document