Sensitivity of 3 kinds of intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques to setup errors in radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma(PDF)
《中国医学物理学杂志》[ISSN:1005-202X/CN:44-1351/R]
- Issue:
- 2017年第11期
- Page:
- 1102-1105
- Research Field:
- 医学放射物理
- Publishing date:
Info
- Title:
- Sensitivity of 3 kinds of intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques to setup errors in radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma
- Author(s):
- SU Huanfan1; QUAN Hong1; LIANG Zhiwen2; ZHANG Jun3; MING Shufeng4
- 1. School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China; 2. Cancer Center, Wuhan Union Hospital, Wuhan 430023, China; 3. Department of Radiotherapy, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430071, China; 4. Department of Oncology, Qichun People’s Hospital, Huanggang 435300, China
- Keywords:
- ; Keywords: nasopharyngeal carcinoma; static intensity-modulated radiotherapy; dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy; volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy; setup error; sensitivity
- PACS:
- R739.6；R815.6
- DOI:
- DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-202X.2017.11.005
- Abstract:
- Abstract: Objective To compare the sensitivity of different radiotherapy techniques to the setup errors in the radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), including static intensity-modulated radiotherapy (S-IMRT), dynamic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (D-IMRT), volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT). Methods Seven NPC patients were selected, and for each patient, 3 plans with consistent optimized objective function were designed, including 9-field S-IMRT, 9-field D-IMRT, and dual-arc VMAT. After the verification plans were generated based on ArcCheck, the isocenter of ArcCheck was moved 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 mm in three-dimensional directions (X, Y, Z) for simulating the setup errors, and the dose distributions in those plans were re-calculated. SunNuclear patient QA software was used to compare re-calculated dose distributions with the dose distribution of isocenters. The absolute dose passing rate ([γ33]) of different radiotherapy plans with different setup errors were acquired based on gamma analysis (3 mm/3%), and the [γ33] in X (lateral), Y (longitudinal), Z (vertical) directions was compared by one-way ANOVA to obtain the sensitivity of different radiotherapy techniques to setup errors in radiotherapy for NPC. Results In X and Y directions, [γ33 ]of VMAT was significantly higher than that of S-IMRT and D-IMRT, while in Z direction, [γ33] of VMAT was obviously lower than that of S-IMRT and D-IMRT. No statistical differences between S-IMRT and D-IMRT were observed in[γ33] in three-dimensional directions. Conclusion For NPC, S-IMRT and D-IMRT show a similar sensitivity to setup errors, but VMAT was more sensitive in Z direction, less sensitive in X and Y directions as comparison with S-IMRT and D-IMRT.
Last Update: 2017-11-23