Improving IMRT delivery efficiency using intensity limits during inverse planning

被引:51
作者
Coselmon, MM [1 ]
Moran, JM [1 ]
Radawski, JD [1 ]
Fraass, BA [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiat Oncol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1118/1.1895545
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Inverse planned intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) fields can be highly modulated due to the large number of degrees of freedom involved in the inverse planning process. Additional modulation typically results in a more optimal plan, although the clinical rewards may be small or offset by additional delivery complexity and/or increased dose from transmission and leakage. Increasing modulation decreases delivery efficiency, and may lead to plans that are more sensitive to geometrical uncertainties. The purpose of this work is to assess the use of maximum intensity limits in inverse IMRT planning as a simple way to increase delivery efficiency without significantly affecting plan quality. Nine clinical cases (three each for brain, prostate, and head/neck) were used to evaluate advantages and disadvantages of limiting maximum intensity to increase delivery efficiency. IMRT plans were generated using in-house protocol-based constraints and objectives for the brain and head/neck,. and RTOG 9406 dose volume objectives in the prostate. Each case was optimized at a series of maximum intensity ratios (the product of the maximum intensity and the number of beams divided by the prescribed dose to the target volume), and evaluated in terms of clinical metrics, dose-volume histograms, monitor units (MU) required per fraction (SMLC and DMLC delivery), and intensity map variation (a measure of the beam modulation). In each site tested, it was possible to reduce total monitor units by constraining the maximum allowed intensity without compromising the clinical acceptability of the plan. Monitor unit reductions up to 38% were observed for SMLC delivery, while reductions up to 29% were achieved for DMLC delivery. In general, complicated geometries saw a smaller reduction in monitor units for both delivery types, although DMLC delivery required significantly more monitor units in all cases. Constraining the maximum intensity in an inverse IMRT plan is a simple way to improve delivery efficiency without compromising plan objectives. (c) 2005 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:1234 / 1245
页数:12
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   Optimization of intensity modulated radiotherapy under constraints for static and dynamic MLC delivery [J].
Alber, M ;
Nüsslin, F .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2001, 46 (12) :3229-3239
[2]   Optimization of the step-and-shoot leaf sequence for delivery of intensity modulated radiation therapy using a variable division scheme [J].
Beavis, AW ;
Ganney, PS ;
Whitton, VJ ;
Xing, L .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2001, 46 (09) :2457-2465
[3]   X-RAY FIELD COMPENSATION WITH MULTILEAF COLLIMATORS [J].
BORTFELD, TR ;
KAHLER, DL ;
WALDRON, TJ ;
BOYER, AL .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1994, 28 (03) :723-730
[4]   Hardware-sensitive optimization for intensity modulated radiotherapy [J].
Cho, PS ;
Marks, RJ .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2000, 45 (02) :429-440
[5]   Minimizing delivery time and monitor units in static IMRT by leaf-sequencing [J].
Crooks, SM ;
McAven, LF ;
Robinson, DF ;
Xing, L .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2002, 47 (17) :3105-3116
[6]   Leaf trajectory calculation for dynamic multileaf collimation to realize optimized fluence profiles [J].
Dirkx, MLP ;
Heijmen, BJM ;
van Santvoort, JPC .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1998, 43 (05) :1171-1184
[7]   Assessment of different IMRT boost delivery methods on target coverage and normal-tissue sparing [J].
Dogan, N ;
King, S ;
Emami, B ;
Mohideen, N ;
Mirkovic, N ;
Leybovich, LB ;
Sethi, A .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2003, 57 (05) :1480-1491
[8]  
FRAASS BA, 1987, USE COMPUTERS RAD TH, P193
[9]  
Fraass BA, 1987, USE COMPUTERS RAD TH, P273
[10]   Implementing IMRT in clinical practice: A joint document of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine [J].
Galvin, JM ;
Ezzell, G ;
Eisbrauch, A ;
Yu, C ;
Butler, B ;
Xiao, Y ;
Rosen, I ;
Rosenman, J ;
Sharpe, M ;
Xing, L ;
Xia, P ;
Lomax, T ;
Low, DA ;
Palta, J .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2004, 58 (05) :1616-1634