|
KMID : 1038720220330040121
|
|
Progress in Medical Physics
2022 Volume.33 No. 4 p.121 ~ p.128
|
|
|
Evaluation of Treatment Plan Quality between Magnetic Resonance-Guided Radiotherapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Prostate Cancer
|
|
Choi Chang-Heon
Kim Jin-Ho
Son Jae-Man
Park Jong-Min
Kim Jung-In
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: T his s tudy e valuated t he q uality of plans based on magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) tri-Co-60, linac, and conventional linac-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (linac-VMAT) for prostate cancer.
Methods: Twenty patients suffering from prostate cancer with intermediate risk who were treated by MAT were selected. Additional treatment plans (primary and boost plans) were generated based on MRgRT-tri-Co-60 and MRgRT-linac. The planning target volume (PTV) of MRgRT-based plans was created by adding a 3 mm margin from the clinical target volume (CTV) due to high soft-tissue contrast and real-time motion imaging. On the other hand, the PTV of conventional linac was generated based on a 1 cm margin from CTV. The targets of primary and boost plans were prostate plus seminal vesicle and prostate only, respectively. All plans were normalized to cover 95% of the target volume by 100% of the prescribed dose. Dosimetric characteristics were evaluated for each of the primary, boost, and sum plans.
Results: For target coverage and conformity, the three plans showed similar results. In the sum plans, the average value of V65Gy of the rectum of MRgRT-linac (2.62%±2.21%) was smaller than those of MRgRT tri-Co-60 (9.04%±3.01%) and linac-VMAT (9.73%±7.14%) (P<0.001). In the case of bladder, the average value of V65Gy of MRgRT-linac was also smaller.
Conclusions: In terms of organs at risk sparing, MRgRT-linac shows the best value while maintaining comparable target coverage among the three plans.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
MRgRT, VMAT, Tri-Co-60, MR linac, Prostate
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
 
|
|