Advertisement

Radiation Therapy Beam Modulation Techniques

  • Arthur L. Boyer
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 93)

Abstract

The label conformal therapy has been applied to a wide variety of three-dimensional treatment planning and delivery procedures. The original concept for conformai therapy was to limit the normal tissue dose by conforming the treatment field to the beam’s-eye view (BEV) projection of the target volume under continuous rotation of the gantry [1]. A multileaf collimator (MLC) is generally used to efficiently collimate the multiple fields. Initial clinical trials are in progress with a form of fixed-field conformai therapy that relies on BEV field shaping of six or more fixedgantry fields to reduce the volume of normal tissue irradiated around a target volume [2–4].

Keywords

Monitor Unit Multileaf Collimator Gantry Angle Leaf Pair Conformal Therapy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Takahashi S. 1965. Conformation radiotherapyrotation techniques as applied to radiography and radiotherapy of cancer. Acta Radiol Suppl 242:1–142.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leibel SA, Heimann R, Kutcher GJ, Zelefsky MJ, Burman CM, Melian E, Orazem J, Mohan R, Losasso TJ, Lo H-C, Wiseberg HA, Chapman DS, Ling CC, Fuks S. 1994. Three-dimensional conformai radiation therapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the prostate: Preliminary results of a phase I dose-escalation study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48:55–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    LoSasso T, Chui CS, Kutcher GJ, Leibel SA, Fuk Z, Ling CC. 1993. The use of multileaf collimators for conformai radiotherapy of carcinomas of the prostate and nasopharynx. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 25:161–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pollack A, Zagars GK, Starkschall G, Childress CH, Kopplin S, Boyer AL, Rosen II. 1995. Conventional vs conformai radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Preliminary results of dosimetry and acute toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 34:555–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brahme A. 1988. Optimization of stationary and moving beam radiation therapy techniques. Radiother Oncol 12:129–140.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bortfeld T, Bürkelbach J, Boesecke R, Schlegel W. 1990. Methods of image reconstruction from projections applied to conformation radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 35:1423–1434.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Holmes TW, Mackie TR. 1991. A filtered backprojection dose calculation method useful for inverse treatment planning. Med Phys 21: 303–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Webb S. 1992. Optimization by simulated annealing of three-dimensional conformai treatment planning for radiation fields defined by multi-leaf collimator: II. Inclusion of two-dimensional modulation of X-ray intensity. Phys Med Biol 37:1689–1704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carol MP. 1992. An automatic 3-D treatment planning and implementation system for optimized conformai therapy by the NOMOS Corporation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 23: 1081.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mackie TR, Holmes TW, Reckwerdt PG, Yang J. 1995. Tomotherapy: Optimized planning and delivery of radiation therapy. Int J Imaging Syst Technol 6:43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boyer AL, Desobry GE, Wells NH. 1992. Potential applications of invariant kernel conformal therapy. In Breit A, ed. Tumor Response and Treatment Planning. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bortfeld T, Schlegel W. 1993. Optimization of beam orientations in radiation therapy: Some theoretical considerations. Phys Med Biol 38: 291–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Söderström S, Brahme A. 1995. Which is the most suitable number of photon beam portals in coplanar radiation therapy? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kallman P, Lind B, Eklof A, Brahme A. 1988. Shaping of arbitary dose distributions by dynamic multileaf collimation. Phys Med Biol 33: 1291–1300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Convery DJ, Rosenbloom MD. 1992. The generation of intensity-modulated fields for conformai radiotherapy by dynamic collimation. Phys Med Biol 37:1359–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bortfeld TR, Kahler DL, Waldron TJ, Boyer AL. 1994. X-ray field compensation with multileaf collimators. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 28: 723–730.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bortfeld T, Boyer AL, Schlegel W, Kahler DL, Waldron TJ. 1994. Realization and verification of three-dimensional conformai radiotherapy with modulated fields. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 30:899–908.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Geis P, Boyer AL. 1996. Use of a multileaf collimator as a dynamic missing-tissue compensator. Med Phys 23:1199–1205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arthur L. Boyer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations