This study aimed to investigate the influence of calibration field size on the gamma passing rate (GPR) in patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA).

Two independent detectors, PTW OCTAVIUS 4D (4DOCT) and Arc Check, were utilised in volumetric modulated arc therapy plans for 26 patients (14 with Arc Check and 12 with 4DOCT). Plans were administered using Varian Unique machine (with 4DOCT) and Varian TrueBeam (with Arc Check), each employing different calibration factors (CFs): 4 × 4, 6 × 6, 8 × 8, 10 × 10, 12 × 12 and 15 × 15 cm2 field sizes. Gamma analysis was conducted with 2%2mm, 2%3mm and 3%3mm gamma criteria.

GPR exhibited variations across different CFs. GPR demonstrated an increasing trend below 10 × 10 cm² CFs, while it displayed a decreasing trend above 10 × 10 cm². Both detectors exhibited similar GPR patterns. The correlation between 4DOCT and Arc Check was strong in tighter criteria (2%2mm) with an R² value of 0·9957, moderate criteria (2%3mm) with an R² value of 0·9868, but reduced in liberal criteria (3%3mm) with an R² value of 0·4226.

This study demonstrates that calibration field sizes significantly influence GPR in PSQA. This study recommends the plan specific calibration field must obtain to calibrate the QA devices for modulated plans.

This study aimed to determine the suitable breast treatment technique for a small facility’s hospital with limited staff and equipment resources. The benefits and drawbacks of each technique should be considered to guide radiation oncologists choose the appropriate treatment option for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) patients.

This study included the computed tomography images of 15 patients who received left-sided PMRT. The patient’s characteristics were classified into two groups: 1. irradiation of only the chest wall (CW) and 2. CW lymph nodes plus supraclavicular lymph nodes (SPCs). All 15 PMRT patients were generated in 4 treatment techniques including 3DCRT, field-in-field (FiF), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and hybrid (3DCRT + IMRT). Each treatment technique’s dosimetric parameters and treatment time were compared.

All four treatment plans met the acceptable criteria. The IMRT plans achieved the highest plan quality scores for two groups of PMRT patients but require the longest treatment time, whereas the 3DCRT and FiF plans demonstrated superiority for organ at risk (OAR) sparing and required the shortest treatment time when compared with the IMRT and hybrid plans.

The IMRT plan had the highest plan quality but required the most time to treat. Treatment times are critical in facilities with limited resources. As a result, the FiF plan was found to be a suitable technique for both CW-only and CW plus SPC irradiation due to its short treatment time and high plan quality scores for OAR dose sparing.

The aim of our study is to retrospectively report the radiobiological aspects for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) against intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for patients with head and neck cancer treated at our institution. A secondary goal is to reinforce current model-based approaches to head and neck cancer patient selection for IMPT.

Eighteen patients were evaluated with prescription doses ranging from 50 to 70 Gy delivered in 2 Gy per fraction. The dose volume histograms (DVH) were used to calculate equivalent uniform dose (EUD), tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for biophysical comparison using mechanistic mathematical dose response models. Absolute values of TCP and NTCP were then compared between IMPT and IMRT.

The dose models demonstrate a minimal radiobiological advantage for IMPT compared to IMRT in treating head and neck cancers. Absolute values of TCP were slightly higher, while absolute values of NTCP were slightly lower for IMPT versus IMRT.

Further studies are needed to determine if the radiobiological advantage indeed translates to a therapeutic advantage for patients.

The radiotherapy techniques are evolving. Besides optimal tumour coverage, considering organs at risk (OAR) is pertinent to radiation oncologists. In mid-lower esophageal cancer (MLEC) radiotherapy, heart is the main OAR. Studies on excess absolute risk (EAR) of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in MLEC radiotherapy are limited in the main literature. Therefore, this study was conducted to estimate the EAR of CVD in patients with MLEC treated with the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique.

Family history of heart disease and smoking increased the EAR of CVD significantly compared to the cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. The 10-year EAR of the high-risk group was more than four times of the low-risk group at all ages. In the low-risk group, EAR of CVD after radiotherapy of esophageal cancer can increase by up to 9·1%, while in the high-risk group, EAR increased by 34·89%.

Adding the baseline CVD risk factors improved the estimation of EAR of heart disease after MLEC radiotherapy with the IMRT technique.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has revolutionised the way head and neck cancers can be treated. It allows for a more conformal treatment plan when compared to 3D conformal radiation therapy. In paediatric patients, however, IMRT continues to deliver higher doses than desirable. Proton beam therapy on the other hand has the potential to further spare organs-at-risk.

A 16-year-old boy with a left-sided paraganglioma of the left base of skull manifested by headaches, neck pain and tongue cramping was simulated, planned and treated with proton therapy with significant contralateral organ-at-risk sparing.

For this patient, dosimetric plan comparison between photon and proton plans clearly showed better sparing of contralateral organs-at-risk with protons. The contralateral parotid gland received a mean dose of 386·3 cGy with photons, whereas it received 1·3 cGy (CGE) in the proton plan.

The dosimetric advantage of proton beam over photon beam therapy has successfully been demonstrated in this case study for a paediatric patient with a head and neck tumour. Sparing of contralateral structures is especially important in paediatric patients who are at a greater risk of secondary malignancies due to possible long life expectancy.

This study compares three different hybrid plans, for left-sided chest wall (CW) and nodal stations irradiation using a hypofractionated dose regimen.

Planning target volumes (PTVs) of 25 breast cancer patients that included CW, supraclavicular (SCL) and internal mammary node (IMN) were planned with 3 different hybrid techniques: 3DCRT+IMRT, 3DCRT+VMAT and IMRT+VMAT. All hybrid plans were generated with a hypofractionated dose prescription of 40·5 Gy in 15 fractions. Seventy per cent of the dose was planned with the base-dose component and remaining 30% of the dose was planned with the hybrid component. All plans were evaluated based on the PTVs and organs at risk (OARs) dosimetric parameters.

The results for PTVs parameters have shown that the 3DCRT+IMRT and 3DCRT+VMAT plans were superior in uniformity index to the IMRT+VMAT plan. The OARs dose parameters were comparable between hybrid plans. The IMRT+VMAT plan provided a larger low dose volume spread to the heart and ipsilateral lung (p < 0·001). The 3DCRT+VMAT plan required less monitor units and treatment time (p = 0·005) than other plans.

The 3DCRT+VMAT hybrid plan showed superior results with efficient treatment delivery and provide clinical benefit by reducing both low and high dose levels.

The Pinnacle3 Auto-Planning (AP) package is an automated inverse planning tool employing a multi-sequence optimisation algorithm. The nature of the optimisation aims to improve the overall quality of radiotherapy plans but at the same time may produce higher modulation, increasing plan complexity and challenging linear accelerator delivery capability.

Thirty patients previously treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to the prostate with or without pelvic lymph node irradiation were replanned with locally developed AP techniques for step-and-shoot IMRT (AP-IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (AP-VMAT). Each case was also planned with VMAT using conventional inverse planning. The patient cohort was separated into two groups, those with a single primary target volume (PTV) and those with dual PTVs of differing prescription dose levels. Plan complexity was assessed using the modulation complexity score.

Plans produced with AP provided equivalent or better dose coverage to target volumes whilst effectively reducing organ at risk (OAR) doses. For IMRT plans, the use of AP resulted in a mean reduction in bladder V50Gy by 4·2 and 4·7 % (p ≤ 0·01) and V40Gy by 4·8 and 11·3 % (p < 0·01) in the single and dual dose level cohorts, respectively. For the rectum, V70Gy, V60Gy and V40Gy were all reduced in the dual dose level AP-VMAT plans by an average of 2·0, 2·7 and 7·3 % (p < 0·01), respectively. A small increase in plan complexity was observed only in dual dose level AP plans.

The automated nature of AP led to high quality treatment plans with improvement in OAR sparing and minimised the variation in achievable dose planning metrics when compared to the conventional inverse planning approach.

This study aimed to evaluate and compare simultaneous integrated boost-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (SIB-VMAT) of head-and-neck plans optimised using segmented and non-segmented intermediate-risk target volumes.

CT data of 20 patients with locally advanced laryngeal cancer treated with radical chemoradiation were included retrospectively. Both segmented [planning target volume (PTV) IR!] and non-segmented PTV (PTV IR) volumes were created for the intermediate-risk volume. Correspondingly, two VMAT plans were generated for every CT dataset. Dosimetry parameters obtained from cumulative dose volume histogram and the quality indices such as conformity and homogeneity indices were evaluated for both plans and were statistically analysed.

Maximum dose of PTV IR! was observed to be higher in the non-segmented plans (7281·45 versus 7075·75 cGy) and was statistically significant (p = 0·002). Homogeneity index (HI) of PTV IR! in segmented plans fared better compared to non-segmented plans (0·1 versus 0·12, p = 0·01). All other dosimetry parameters were found to be similar in both plans.

This study shows that using segmented volumes for planning will lead to more homogenous plans with regard to intermediate- and low-risk volumes, especially under controlled settings.

To identify treatment outcome, dose uniformity, treatment time, toxicity among 3D conformal therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on literature review.

A literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, BMC—part of Springer Nature, Google Scholar and iMEDPub Ltd with the following keywords for filtering: 3D-CRT, IMRT, VMAT, lung cancer, local control and radiobiology. A total of 14 publications were finally selected for the comparison of 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT to determine which technique is superior or inferior among these three.

Compared to 3D-CRT, IMRT delivers more precise treatment, has better conformal dose coverage to planning target volume (PTV) that covers gross tumour with microscopic extension, respiratory tumour motion and setup margin. 3D-CRT has large number of limitations: low overall survival (OS), large toxicity, secondary malignancies.

It is difficult to choose the best technique for treating NSCLC due to patient conditions and technique availability. A high-precision treatment may improve tumour control probability (TCP) and patient’s quality of life. VMAT, whether superior or not, needs more clinical trials to treat NSCLC and requires longer dose optimisation time with the greatest benefit of rapid treatment delivery, improved patient comfort, reduced intrafraction motion and increased patient throughput compared to IMRT and 3D-CRT.

This study aimed to evaluate acute and late toxicities in nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) patients who were treated between split-field (SF) and extended-field (EF) step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques.

Between January 2011 and October 2011, 21 NPC patients with stage I-IVB (7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging) were randomly assigned to undergo radiotherapy with SF or EF step-and-shoot IMRT technique.

At a median follow-up time of 60 months (range 3–77), we reported the comparable acute and late toxicities between the two techniques. One patient (9%) in SF-IMRT arm developed grade 3 acute skin toxicity.

Both SF and EF step-and-shoot IMRT techniques for NPC patients did not produce any statistically significant differences in both acute and late toxicities. Although no difference in toxicity was observed, technical problems due to field matching management were the obstacles in utilisation of SF-IMRT in our routine practice.

To study the feasibility of constant dose rate volumetric modulated arc therapy (CDR-VMAT) in radiotherapy for gallbladder cancer by comparing dosimetric parameter suggested by International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements-83 (ICRU-83) with step and shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SS IMRT).

For this study, we selected 21 post-operative gallbladder cancer patients, which were treated with the IMRT technique from 2016 to 2019. For each patient, we generated SS IMRT plan and CDR-VMAT plan and were dosimetrically compared by parameters suggested by ICRU-83 for PTV. Homogeneity Index (HI) and Conformity Index (CI) were also calculated. For evaluation of Organ at Risk (OAR), we compared the mean doses, volume doses to the right kidney, left kidney, both kidneys combined, liver and max dose to the spinal cord. Monitor units (MUs) and treatment delivery time were also compared.

On comparing, we found that CDR-VMAT plans were highly conformed as CI and PCI (CI define by Paddick) were found more (0·98 ± 0·01 vs. 0·97 ± 0·03 and 0·86 ± 0·05 vs. 0·85 ± 0·05) than IMRT plans but not statistically significant. Better dose HI was found for IMRT plans with statistical significant difference (p < 0·001). The tumour coverage was found similar 98·24% and 97·83% for SS IMRT and CDR-VMAT, respectively. For D2%, the maximum dose to PTV was significantly lower in IMRT (p = 0·001). D50% and mean dose to PTV were also comparable to IMRT with no statistically significant difference. The OAR parameters were comparable in both the techniques. The mean doses and volume doses V10, V20 and V30 to the right kidney, left kidney and liver were also comparable with no significant difference (p > 0·05) was noted among them. However, the maximum dose to the spinal cord was significantly less in CDR-VMAT (21·1 Gy vs. 25·1Gy) than SS IMRT with p = 0·006. More MUs were associated with the CDR-VMAT technique, but shorter treatment delivery time than the IMRT technique.

On dosimetric comparison of two treatment techniques, we conclude that CDR-VMAT can be a valid option in radiotherapy as it achieved highly conformed dose distribution, comparable tumour coverage and OAR sparing as IMRT technique for gallbladder cancer.

The objective of this study has been to identify monitor unit (MU) and treatment time variations, volume coverage dissimilarity among 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans for head and neck cancer (HNC) based on literature review.

A number of HNC cases were studied with the investigation of conformity and homogeneity index.

When high-dose modulation was required around small organs at risk (OARs), a clinically acceptable IMRT plan was achieved as VMAT usually required longer dose optimisation time. The greatest benefit of VMAT has been rapid treatment delivery allowing improved patient comfort, reduced intra-fraction motion and increased patient throughput. In some papers, 3D-CRT was shown not to meet well the requirements on parotid glands. One paper showed that cerebellum dose was lower for 3D-CRT than IMRT. However, it was found in other papers that OAR sparing with 3D-CRT was reasonable but in complex cases not enough.

IMRT usually consists of several treatment fields with different directions, hundreds of beam lets with modulated intensity, an advantage over 3D-CRT, whereas VMAT has advantage over IMRT due to rotating beam utilisation. VMAT has lower total MU and treatment times than IMRT and 3D-CRT, while maintaining similar dosimetric endpoints.

This study aims to compare the dosimetric parameters among four different external beam radiotherapy techniques used for the treatment of retinoblastoma.

Computed tomography (CT) sets of five retinoblastoma patients who required radiotherapy to one globe were included. Four different plans were generated for each patient using three dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and VMAT using flattening filter free (VMAT-FFF) beam techniques. Plans were compared for target coverage and organs at risk (OARs) sparing.

The target coverage of planning target volume (PTV) for all the four modalities were clinically acceptable with a V95 of 95 ± 0%, 97·6 ± 1·87%, 99·3 ± 0·5% and 99·17 ± 0·45% for 3DCRT, IMRT, VMAT and VMAT-FFF respectively. The VMAT and IMRT plans had better target coverage than the 3DCRT plans (p = 0·001 and p = 0·07 respectively). IMRT and VMAT plans were also found superior to 3DCRT plans in terms of OAR sparing like brainstem, optic chiasm, brain (p < 0·05). VMAT delivered significantly lower dose to the brainstem and contralateral optic nerve in comparison to IMRT. Use of VMAT-FFF beams did not show any benefit over VMAT in target coverage and OAR sparing.

VMAT should be preferred over 3DCRT and IMRT for treatment of retinoblastoma owing to better target coverage and less dose to most of the OARs. However, IMRT and VMAT should be used with caution because of the increased low dose volumes to the OARs like contralateral lens and eyeball.

This study dosimetrically compared volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT) for patients with liver carcinoma.

Ten patients with liver carcinoma previously treated with IMRT or VMAT were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient received a total dose of 54 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. Dosimetric evaluations for each patient were performed using the dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OAR). All dosimetric parameters were statistically analysed using mean values, standard deviations and p-values for determining the significance. The conformality index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated and compared. For efficiency evaluation, monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOT) were recorded.

Compared to IMRT, VMAT plans showed significant differences in the heterogeneity with p < 0·01 and insignificant differences in both conformality and normal tissue sparing. VMAT required marginally fewer mean MU and shorter BOT when compared to IMRT with insignificant differences.

For radiation therapy treatment of liver carcinoma, IMRT and VMAT can achieve similar PTV coverage and normal tissue sparing. Treatment time is only marginally shorter with VMAT versus IMRT with insignificant differences.

Supine orientation is the standard treatment position for radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Some patients, however, cannot tolerate this due to pooling of secretions and airway concerns, and theoretically, treatment would be better tolerated in a prone position. Here, we described the first prone treatment setup and delivery for a patient with head and neck cancer.

A 68-year-old male patient with inoperable locally advanced, T4aN0M0, squamous cell carcinoma of the maxillary sinus was simulated, planned, and treated in prone position due to sinus congestion.

Prone position was well tolerated by the patient, who then did not require daily anaesthesia for airway secretion management. The prone dosimetry demonstrated good target coverage and normal tissue sparing. His treatment setup was found to be reproducible throughout the course of therapy.

We successfully demonstrated the feasibility of prone treatment position for patients with head and neck cancer who are unable to tolerate supine position due to unmanageable secretions. Consideration should be given to prone treatment when designing both radiation therapy protocols and individual treatment plans.

Optic nerve glioma (OPG) is a rare tumour of children and adolescents. The treatment is challenging as it may jeopardise the visual outcome. We are reporting a case of bilateral OPG, treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in our department.

An 18-year-old female presented with a gradually deteriorating vision in both eyes. A detailed clinical and ophthalmological examination was carried out. Her MRI of orbit and brain were suggestive of bilateral optic nerve glioma. She was treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy to a total dose of 54Gy in 30 fractions over 6 weeks.

She well tolerated the treatment. Post radiotherapy at 8 weeks, she had stabilization of vision on clinical assessment.

Radiotherapy using IMRT can be successfully used to treat OPG, and it checks tumour growth and prevents further deterioration.

To modify the final dose delivered to superficial tissues and to modulate dose distribution near irradiated surface, different boluses are used. Air gaps often form under the bolus affecting dose distribution. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an air gap under the bolus radiation on dose delivery.

To evaluate the impact of the air gap, both helical tomotherapy (HT) and direct tomotherapy (DT) were performed in a simulation study.

The maximum dose to bolus in DT plans was bigger than that used in HT plans. The maximum dose delivered to the bolus depended on the air gap size. However, the maximum dose to bolus in all HT plans was within the acceptable value range. Acceptable value was set to up to 107% of the prescription dose. In the simulation performed in this study, the acceptable air gap under bolus was up to 15 mm and below 5 mm in HT and DT plans, respectively.

HT technique is a good choice, but DT technique can be also used if the bolus position can be reproduced accurately. Thus, the reproducibility of the bolus position between planning and treatment is very important.

A comprehensive analysing method has been required since long in the field of radiotherapy. The basic purpose of all techniques has been to deliver the prescribed dose safely to the target volume containing tumour and as well as to reduce dose to organs at risk (OARs). The detailed comparison between different treatment techniques is very difficult and inexplicit as well. The gradual improvement in imaging software has made easy to users to assess spatial arrangement of tumour, critical organs and isodose lines in the form of a single 3D representation that can be observed from all angles. The conformity index (CI) alone cannot provide practical information about treatment plans as it is a single isodose line quantity.

The aim of this study was to develop a new method to assess the degree of damage numerically for OARs along with CI assessment for the target.

The radiotherapy plans of 30 patients of different sites, diagnosed as cancer, were selected for this study irrespective of gender. Out of 30 cases, 8 plans were of head and neck, 2 were of glyoblastoma (GBM), 10 were of pelvis, 5 were of left breast and other 5 were of oesophagus cancer. The mean age was 42 years ranging from 31 to 72 years. Patient’s consents were taken before starting the treatment and carried out this research. Risk factor (RF) for OARs depends on volume of irradiation (VVOI), total volume of the organ (VTVO) and tolerance dose (DTDO). All radiotherapy plans (Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT)) were generated using eclipse planning system, version 11.0 (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, California, USA).

The formula developed to assess degree of damage of OARs including CI of the target is risk factor conformity index (RFC) = CI + RF. In head and neck cases, for right parotid, the maximum value of RF is 1·50 and minimum value is observed as 0·97. Optic nerve, brainstem and spinal cord are completely safe as their RF values are found to be 0 on RF scale.

RFC is a comprehensive evaluation tool encompassing a wider range of clinically relevant parameters, isodose volumes and tolerance dose of OARs. It is an advance analysing method to check both the qualitative and quantitative nature of a conformal plan, and at the same time, it assesses the degree of damage of OARs.

If RF ≥ 1, then OAR will be completely damaged as a result of irradiation.

If RF = 0, then OAR will remain safe totally during the course of irradiation.

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical efficacy and radiobiological outcome of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) modalities using various collimator angles and non-coplanar fields for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC).

A 70-Gy planning target volume dose was administered for 30 NPC patients referred for IMRT. Standard IMRT plans were constructed based on the target and organs at risk (OARs) volume; and dose constraints recommended by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG). Using various collimator angles and non-coplanar fields, 11 different additional IMRT protocols were investigated. Homogeneity indexes (HIs) and conformation numbers (CNs) were calculated. Poisson and relative seriality models were utilised for estimating tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs), respectively.

Various collimator angles and non-coplanar fields had no significant effect on HI, CN and TCP, while significant effects were noted for some OARs, with a maximum mean dose (Dmax). No significant differences were observed among the calculated NTCPs of all the IMRT protocols. However, the protocol with 10° collimator angle (for five fields out of seven) and 8° couch angle had the lowest NTCP. Furthermore, the standard and some of non-coplanar IMRT protocols led to the reduction in OARs Dmax.

Using appropriate standard/non-coplanar IMRT protocols for NPC treatment could potentially reduce the dose to the OARs and the probability of inducing secondary cancer in patients.

To evaluate the dosimetric parameters of level II lymph nodes in chest wall three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of mastectomy patients using dual-isocentric (DIT) and mono-isocentric techniques (MIT).

Computed tomography (CT) images of 20 mastectomy patients undergoing chest wall external radiotherapy were used as the input data for the abovementioned techniques. Selected dosimetric parameters were calculated for the axillary level I–III lymph nodes, chest wall, heart and lung. Paired t-test statistical analysis was used for comparing the results of MIT and DIT in both 3D-CRT and IMRT methods.

There were significant differences in Dmin (minimum dose), Dmax (maximum dose) and maximum–minimum dose between MIT and DIT techniques (13, −8·6, −52·2% differences for Dmin, Dmax and maximum–minimum, respectively) in IMRT. There were also significant differences for Dmean (mean dose), Dmax and maximum–minimum dose (7·8, −11·4, −44·6% differences in Dmean, Dmax and maximum–minimum, respectively) in 3D-CRT (p < 0·05). In addition, there were not any differences in the dosimetric parameters for heart, lung and level I and III lymph nodes.

In both 3D-CRT and IMRT methods, level II lymph node dose distribution in MIT was closer to the prescribed dose compared with DIT due to the position of these nodes in the field junction area. To achieve a better dose homogeneity, it could be recommended to use MIT instead of DIT in 3D-CRT and IMRT for mastectomy patients.