We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study aims to compare conventional simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) planning technique with a hybrid SIB intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique with varying open tangent to IMRT field dose ratios. Furthermore, we investigated which of the dose ratios proves the most favourable as a class solution across a sample.
Methods
In total, 15 patients with conventional SIB treatment plans were re-planned with hybrid SIB IMRT technique using three differing open field:IMRT dose ratios, that is, 80:20, 70:30 and 60:40. Plans were compared using dosimetric comparison of organs at risk (OARs) and homogeneity and conformity indexes across target structures.
Results
All hybrid plans reduced dose maximums and showed a reduction of high doses to both lungs but increased lower doses, that is, V5, with similar results discovered for the heart. Contralateral breast dose was shown to decrease V5 and V1 measures by hybrid arms, whereas increasing the V2. Left anterior descending artery dose and non-irradiated structures were reduced by all hybrid arms. The homogeneity and conformity increased across all hybrid arms. Qualitative assessment of all plans also favoured hybrid plans.
Findings
Hybrid plans produced superior dose conformity, homogeneity, reduced dose maximums and showed an improvement in most OAR parameters. The 70:30 hybrid technique exhibited greater benefits as a class solution to the sample than conventional plans due to superior dose conformity and homogeneity to target volumes.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.