Journal of cancer research and therapeutics · 2024
Efficacy of the collapsed cone algorithm calculated radiotherapy plans in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT): A comparative dosimetric study in tumors of thorax.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mishra Atul, Pathak Ramji, Mittal Kailash Kumar, Srivastava Anoop Kumar, Dayashankar Maurya Surendrakumar, Mishra Surendra Prasad, Singh Sudesh Kumar
Аннотация
AIM: In this study, efficacy of collapsed cone algorithm-generated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were evaluated for treatment of thoracic esophageal cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten previously treated patients with VMAT were considered for evaluation. The planning parameters were evaluated in terms of max dose, mean dose, Homogeneity Index, Conformity Index for planning target volume, and organ at risk doses. Total monitor unit, treatment time, and gamma passing index were also reported.
RESULTS: The target dose coverage of the VMAT and IMRT plans achieved the clinical dosimetric criteria for all ten patients in the evaluation. Under the condition of equivalent target dose distribution, the VMAT plan's Conformity Index, monitor unit, treatment time, and gamma passing index rate were superior than in the IMRT plan, and the result was statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Collapsed cone algorithm-based VMAT can have a more effective and better approach for esophageal cancer than IMRT.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten previously treated patients with VMAT were considered for evaluation. The planning parameters were evaluated in terms of max dose, mean dose, Homogeneity Index, Conformity Index for planning target volume, and organ at risk doses. Total monitor unit, treatment time, and gamma passing index were also reported.
RESULTS: The target dose coverage of the VMAT and IMRT plans achieved the clinical dosimetric criteria for all ten patients in the evaluation. Under the condition of equivalent target dose distribution, the VMAT plan's Conformity Index, monitor unit, treatment time, and gamma passing index rate were superior than in the IMRT plan, and the result was statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Collapsed cone algorithm-based VMAT can have a more effective and better approach for esophageal cancer than IMRT.