To evaluate comparative dosimetry of brachytherapy treatment planning between a volume-based plan by computed tomography (CT) and a point-based plan by transabdominal ultrasound (TAUS) in CT datasets for brachytherapy.

From 2019 to 2021, 59 different datasets of CT images were collected from 38 patients treated by intracavitary brachytherapy with tandem ovoid or tandem ring applicators. At that time, TAUS was performed to prevent uterine perforation and to evaluate topography of the cervix during application. In volume-based planning by CT, the target dose was used to keep the dose at 90% of high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV), to give a dose of at least 7Gy, while in the point-based plan by TAUS, the target dose was used to keep the minimum dose to eight cervix reference points (measured by TAUS), to give a dose of at least 7Gy. The doses to targets and organs at risk were evaluated and compared between volume-based planning by CT and the point-based plan by TAUS.

Of 59 fractions, a tandem ovoid applicator was used in 48 fractions (81·3%). In the volume-based plan by CT, the mean doses to HR-CTV(D90), intermediate-risk clinical target volume (IR-CTV)(D90), bladder(D2cc), rectum(D2cc) and sigmoid colon(D2cc) were 7·0, 3·9, 4·9, 2·9 and 3·3 Gy, respectively, while in the point-based plan by TAUS, the mean doses to HR-CTV(D90), IR-CTV(D90), bladder(D2cc), rectum(D2cc) and sigmoid colon(D2cc) were 8·2, 4·6, 5·9, 3·4 and 3·9 Gy, respectively. The percentages of mean dose differences between TAUS and CT of HR-CTV(D90), IR-CTV(D90), bladder(D2cc), rectum(D2cc) and sigmoid colon(D2cc) were 17·7, 19·5, 20·5, 19·5, 21·3 and 19·8%, respectively. With the target dose to the point-based plan by TAUS (7 Gy to the cervix reference points), this was close to D98 of HR-CTV with a mean percentage of difference of 0·6%.

The point-based plan by TAUS showed higher values to targets and organs at risk than the volume-based plan by CT. With the point-based plan by TAUS, it was close to D98 of HR-CTV.

To study the feasibility of constant dose rate volumetric modulated arc therapy (CDR-VMAT) in radiotherapy for gallbladder cancer by comparing dosimetric parameter suggested by International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements-83 (ICRU-83) with step and shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SS IMRT).

For this study, we selected 21 post-operative gallbladder cancer patients, which were treated with the IMRT technique from 2016 to 2019. For each patient, we generated SS IMRT plan and CDR-VMAT plan and were dosimetrically compared by parameters suggested by ICRU-83 for PTV. Homogeneity Index (HI) and Conformity Index (CI) were also calculated. For evaluation of Organ at Risk (OAR), we compared the mean doses, volume doses to the right kidney, left kidney, both kidneys combined, liver and max dose to the spinal cord. Monitor units (MUs) and treatment delivery time were also compared.

On comparing, we found that CDR-VMAT plans were highly conformed as CI and PCI (CI define by Paddick) were found more (0·98 ± 0·01 vs. 0·97 ± 0·03 and 0·86 ± 0·05 vs. 0·85 ± 0·05) than IMRT plans but not statistically significant. Better dose HI was found for IMRT plans with statistical significant difference (p < 0·001). The tumour coverage was found similar 98·24% and 97·83% for SS IMRT and CDR-VMAT, respectively. For D2%, the maximum dose to PTV was significantly lower in IMRT (p = 0·001). D50% and mean dose to PTV were also comparable to IMRT with no statistically significant difference. The OAR parameters were comparable in both the techniques. The mean doses and volume doses V10, V20 and V30 to the right kidney, left kidney and liver were also comparable with no significant difference (p > 0·05) was noted among them. However, the maximum dose to the spinal cord was significantly less in CDR-VMAT (21·1 Gy vs. 25·1Gy) than SS IMRT with p = 0·006. More MUs were associated with the CDR-VMAT technique, but shorter treatment delivery time than the IMRT technique.

On dosimetric comparison of two treatment techniques, we conclude that CDR-VMAT can be a valid option in radiotherapy as it achieved highly conformed dose distribution, comparable tumour coverage and OAR sparing as IMRT technique for gallbladder cancer.

The objective of this study has been to identify monitor unit (MU) and treatment time variations, volume coverage dissimilarity among 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans for head and neck cancer (HNC) based on literature review.

A number of HNC cases were studied with the investigation of conformity and homogeneity index.

When high-dose modulation was required around small organs at risk (OARs), a clinically acceptable IMRT plan was achieved as VMAT usually required longer dose optimisation time. The greatest benefit of VMAT has been rapid treatment delivery allowing improved patient comfort, reduced intra-fraction motion and increased patient throughput. In some papers, 3D-CRT was shown not to meet well the requirements on parotid glands. One paper showed that cerebellum dose was lower for 3D-CRT than IMRT. However, it was found in other papers that OAR sparing with 3D-CRT was reasonable but in complex cases not enough.

IMRT usually consists of several treatment fields with different directions, hundreds of beam lets with modulated intensity, an advantage over 3D-CRT, whereas VMAT has advantage over IMRT due to rotating beam utilisation. VMAT has lower total MU and treatment times than IMRT and 3D-CRT, while maintaining similar dosimetric endpoints.

This study dosimetrically compared volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT) for patients with liver carcinoma.

Ten patients with liver carcinoma previously treated with IMRT or VMAT were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient received a total dose of 54 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. Dosimetric evaluations for each patient were performed using the dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OAR). All dosimetric parameters were statistically analysed using mean values, standard deviations and p-values for determining the significance. The conformality index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated and compared. For efficiency evaluation, monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOT) were recorded.

Compared to IMRT, VMAT plans showed significant differences in the heterogeneity with p < 0·01 and insignificant differences in both conformality and normal tissue sparing. VMAT required marginally fewer mean MU and shorter BOT when compared to IMRT with insignificant differences.

For radiation therapy treatment of liver carcinoma, IMRT and VMAT can achieve similar PTV coverage and normal tissue sparing. Treatment time is only marginally shorter with VMAT versus IMRT with insignificant differences.

The purpose of the present study is to compare hybrid [three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy-volumetric-modulated arc therapy (3DCRT-VMAT)] and helical tomotherapy (HT) techniques in terms of both planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) in the plans we made in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients

Radiotherapy was planned for 15 locally advanced NSCLC patients with 2 different techniques. Large tumours with positive mediastinal lymph nodes were preferred. The prescription dose was determined as 60 Gy at 30 fractions.

Mean PTV volume was 602·5 cc (range: 265–1461). Mean total lung volume was 4264 cc (range: 1885–6803). Homogeneity index, Dmean, Dmax, D2 and V105 were found to be lower in HT, V100, total monitor units (MU) and total beam on time were found to be lower in the hybrid plan. Total lung Dmean was found to be 17 Gy in both techniques. V10 value was 42·85 in the hybrid plan and 48·67 in HT (p = 0·037). Heart Dmean was 14·5 Gy in the hybrid plan and 18·7 in HT (p < 0·001), and V30 values were 18·1 and 22·9, respectively (p = 0·009).

Suitable dose coverage and OAR doses can be provided with both techniques. Especially the opposite lung, heart and oesophagus doses can be kept lower with the hybrid plan, and lower MU and shorter beam on time can be provided.

To compare the dosimetric results regarding the sparing effect on normal tissue between RapidArc (RA) and helical tomotherapy (HT) plans for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients in cases of the equal target dose controls utilising two techniques.

Thirteen NPC patients treated with HT were replanned using the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) for the RA plan. The target dose of the RA plan was optimised equally to the HT plan in terms of target coverage, dose conformity (CI) and dose homogeneity (HI) for assessing the normal tissue sparing between two techniques. All dose–volume parameters monitor units (MUs) and delivery time were also investigated.

All dosimetric parameter comparisons of organs-at-risk (OARs) between the RA and HT plans were not significantly different for brain stem, spinal cord and cochlea. However, the RA plan showed a significantly lower dose to the left parotid gland. The mean and median dose were significantly lower in the RA plan versus the HT plan by p-value 0·005 and 0·039, respectively. The MUs and delivery time were also significantly lower in the RA plan with a p-value of 0·00.

With the same planning target volume coverage, homogeneity and conformity, almost all of RA and HT treatment planning met the planning goal for normal tissue sparing. There were no significant differences between the two techniques except in the left parotid gland. The RA plans were superior to HT plans by effectively reducing the MUs and treatment time.

In this article, our goal is to compare the TMR10 and convolution dose calculation algorithm in GammaPlan used in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatments with Gamma Knife and to assess if the algorithms produce clinically significant differences.

Treatment plans were analysed from ten patients who have undergone Gamma Knife SRS treatments. Patient plans were retrospectively recalculated using Lesksell GammaPlan 10 treatment software utilising the TMR10 and convolution dose calculation algorithms in order to create a paired dataset for comparison. Evaluation was based on the dose volume histogram (parameters of minimum, mean, maximum and integral doses.

The ratios of average integral doses calculated by the convolution dose calculation algorithm to the average integral doses calculated by the TMR10 algorithm are 0·997 for the target (p=0·028), 1·048 (p=0·48) for the skull and 1·005 (p=0·68) for the brainstem.

Although doses calculated with the convolution algorithm resulted in slightly higher mean integral doses for the brainstem and skull critical structures when compared to that of TMR10 doses, these results were not statistically or clinically significant. Thus we continue to use the TMR10 algorithm at our clinic.

The aim of this study was to compare the dosimetric parameters and effects of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and traditional sequential electron boost, after helical tomotherapy, because of the lack of studies in this field in the current literature.

Computed tomographic data of 14 patients who received SIB in 2012–2015 were collected from Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital. New tomotherapy with SIB plans and tomotherapy with sequential boost plans were generated for each patient, and results were compared.

Conformation number, mean dose, dose received by 95% volume (both sides), ipsilateral lung volume receiving 20 Gy (V20) and skin dose (right side) were found to be significantly better for SIB (p<0·05), however coverage index and gross target volume dose showed no significant difference, and heart dose was significantly higher for SIB on the right side.

Tomotherapy with SIB may be able to offer less organ at risk dose (except for the heart), while maintaining the ability to deliver adequate dose coverage.

Craniospinal irradiation (CSI) has become an important and challenging radiation technique for radiation oncologists. Helical tomotherapy (HT) seems to have dosimetric advantage for CSI compared with other radiation modalities. The purpose of this study was to compare dosimetric data between two different HT plans; simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and sequential boost (Sq).

Twelve previously treated CSI contoured datasets by SIB technique were replanned. Dosimetric comparative parameters of targets were conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI). For organ at risk (OARs), the mean dose of parallel organs, D2% of serial organs and whole body integral dose (ID) were also investigated.

SIB plan significantly provided more conformed dose to CSI and tumour boost while resulting in a similar CI in spinal boost region compared with Sq plan. The HI showed no differences between two plans. Radiation exposure to serial organs and ID were also significantly lower in SIB plan.

CSI treatment using HT, SIB technique was feasible and had more target coverage while minimising the radiation dose to healthy tissues.