Intensity‐modulated radiation therapy for multiple targets with tomotherapy using multiple sets of static ports from different angles. Issue 6 (6th April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Manabe, Yoshihiko; Shibamoto, Yuta; Murai, Taro; Torii, Akira; Niwa, Masanari; Kondo, Takuhito; Okazaki, Dai; Sugie, Chikao
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 21:Issue 6(2020)
• Page Start: 132
• Page End: 138
• Publication Date: 2020-04-06
• Subjects: dynamic‐couch and dynamic‐jaw mode -- intensity‐modulated radiation therapy -- multiple targets -- static‐port tomotherapy -- tomotherapy; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12874
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: Background: To treat multiple targets separated in the craniocaudal direction within a short time, we invented a new technique using multiple static‐port tomotherapy with the dynamic‐jaw mode and named it the pseudo‐DJDC (pDJDC) technique. We compared the pDJDC plans and helical tomotherapy plans using the dynamic‐jaw mode (HDJ) for multiple targets. In the pDJDC plans, we used a beam set with 2–7 ports to the targets at the same level in the craniocaudal direction, and employed another beam set for other targets using different port angles (9–12 angles in total). Methods: In seven patients, two plans using the pDJDC and HDJ techniques were compared. For multiple targets (n = 2–6), 20–60 Gy in 2‐ to 7.5‐Gy fractions were prescribed for the planning target volumes at D50%. The conformity index, uniformity index (D5%/D95%), dose distribution in the lung, and treatment time were evaluated. Results: The median conformity index of all seven patients was 3.0 for the pDJDC plans and 2.4 for the HDJ plans ( P = 0.031). The median uniformity indices of the planning target volume (n = 25) for the two plans were 1.048 and 1.057, respectively ( P = 0.10). For five patients with thoracic targets, the median mean lung doses were 2.6 Gy and 2.4 Gy, respectively ( P = 0.63). The median V5Gy and V20Gy of the lungs in the five patients were 11.8% and 8.5% ( P = 0.63), and 1.6% and 2.1% ( P = 0.31), respectively. The pDJDC plans reduced the treatment time by 48% compared to the HDJ plans (median: 462 and 884 sec, respectively, P = 0.031). Conclusion: The pDJDC technique allows treatment of multiple targets in almost half the time of the HDJ technique. The pDJDC plans were comparable to the HDJ plans in dose distribution, although the conformity index deteriorated.