Background and Purpose: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is considered by many to be the standard of care in the delivery of external-beam radiotherapy treatments to the prostate. The purpose of this study is to assess the validity of the purported benefits of IMRT.

Materials and Methods: Treatment plans were produced for 10 patients using both 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and IMRT, utilising the dose constraints recommended by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0415 protocol. Three IMRT modalities used in this study were linear accelerator based IMRT, helical tomotherapy, and serial tomotherapy. The prescription to the target, 76 Gy, was the same for all plans.

Results: In general the 3D-CRT plans satisfied the RTOG criteria for planning target volume (PTV) coverage, and met or bettered the dose criteria for the organs at risk. PTV coverage was more homogeneous for the IMRT plans than the 3D-CRT plans but not significantly improved.

Conclusions: Technically, because the IMRT plans required greater effort for the optimisation, longer treatment times and higher monitor units, the use of IMRT for the fulfilment of the protocol’s dosimetric goals was not justified using these constraints.