Volume 78, Issue 1 , Pages 58-63, 1 September 2010
Dose Gradient Near Target–Normal Structure Interface for Nonisocentric CyberKnife and Isocentric Intensity-Modulated Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer
Purpose
The treatment planning quality between nonisocentric CyberKnife (CK) and isocentric intensity modulation treatment was studied for hypofractionated prostate body radiotherapy. In particular, the dose gradient across the target and the critical structures such as the rectum and bladder was characterized.
Methods and Materials
In the present study, patients treated with CK underwent repeat planning for nine fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using identical contour sets and dose–volume constraints. To calculate the dose falloff, the clinical target volume contours were expanded 30 mm anteriorly and posteriorly and 50 mm uniformly in other directions for all patients in the CK and IMRT plans.
Results
We found that all the plans satisfied the dose–volume constraints, with the CK plans showing significantly better conformity than the IMRT plans at a relative greater dose inhomogeneity. The rectal and bladder volumes receiving a low dose were also lower for CK than for IMRT. The average conformity index, the ratio of the prescription isodose volume and clinical target volume, was 1.18 ± 0.08 for the CK plans vs. 1.44 ± 0.11 for the IMRT plans. The average homogeneity index, the ratio of the maximal dose and the prescribed dose to the clinical target volume, was 1.45 ± 0.12 for the CK plans vs. 1.28 ± 0.06 for the IMRT plans. The average percentage of dose falloff was 2.9% ± 0.8%/mm for CK and 3.1% ± 1.0%/mm for IMRT in the anterior direction, 3.8% ± 1.6%/mm for CK and 3.2% ± 1.9%/mm for IMRT in the posterior direction, and 3.6% ± 0.4% for CK and 3.6% ± 0.4% for IMRT in all directions.
Conclusion
Nonisocentric CK was as capable of producing equivalent fast dose falloff as high-number fixed-field IMRT delivery.
CyberKnife, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, IMRT, prostate cancer, hypofractionation, stereotactic body radiotherapy, SBRT, dose gradient, dose falloff
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Supported in part by a research grant from the University of California, San Francisco, Dean's Office and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation.
Conflict of interest: none.
PII: S0360-3016(09)02947-2
doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.1752
© 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 78, Issue 1 , Pages 58-63, 1 September 2010
