Skip to main content

Planning a Patient, Deciding on the Volumes and Fields and Plan Verification

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Basics of Planning and Management of Patients during Radiation Therapy
  • 1336 Accesses

Abstract

After having completed the simulation process, the therapist must then decide on the treatment volumes, beam positions and beam parameters; create treatment plans; and verify if the plans produced cover the targeted volume. In cases where only the dose along the central axis of the beam is sought, only the source-to-skin distance (SSD) is required. Simple algorithms, such as Clarkson’s method, may be used to determine the dosimetric effects of using standard or even customized blocks in the fields and to calculate the dose to off-axis points if their coordinates and SSD are measured. In simple computerized 2D treatment planning, a single skin contour taken at the point of the central axis of the beam is sufficient and can be prepared by using lead wire or a plaster cast at the time of simulation. The patient data requirements for conformal treatment planning are more elaborate than in 2D treatment planning. External shape of the patient must be outlined in all areas where the beams enter and exit and in the adjacent areas. The targets and internal structures have to be contoured for dose calculation, and electron densities for each volume element in the dose calculation matrix must be determined for correction for heterogeneities. Transverse CT scans contain all the information required for complex treatment planning and form the basis of CT simulation in modern radiotherapy treatment. This chapter will deal mainly with beam definition in 2D radiotherapy and set-up verification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, (ICRU). Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, ICRU Report 29, ICRU, Bethesda; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  2. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, (ICRU). Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, ICRU Report 50, ICRU, Bethesda; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  3. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, (ICRU). Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy (Supplement to ICRU Report 50). ICRU Report 62, ICRU, Bethesda; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Purdy JA, Wong JW, Harms WB, et al. Three dimensional treatment planning system. In: IAD B, van der Giessen PH, van Kleffens HJ, Wittkamper FW, editors. The use of computers in radiation therapy. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 1987. p. 277.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mohan R, Barest G, Brewster L, et al. A comprehensive three-dimensional radiation treatment planning system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1988;15:481.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sailer SL, Chaney EL, Rosenman JG, et al. Treatment planning at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Semin Radiat Oncol. 1992;2:267.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Photon Treatment Planning Collaborative Working Group. State-of-the-art of external photon beam radiation treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991;21:9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Armstrong JG, Burman C, Leibel S, et al. Conformal three-dimensional treatment planning may improve the therapeutic ratio of high dose radiation therapy for lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993;26:685.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Measurement of absorbed dose measured in a phantom irradiated by a single beam of X or gamma rays. ICRU Report 23, ICRU, Bethesda; 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mageras GS, Podmaniczky KC, Mohan R. A model for computer-controlled delivery of 3-D conformal treatments. Med Phys. 1992;19:945.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Marks JE, Haus AG, Sutton HG, et al. The value of frequent treatment verification films in reducing localization error in the irradiation of complex fields. Cancer. 1976;37:2755.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Droege RT, Bjarngard BE. Influence of metal screens on contrast in megavoltage x-ray imaging. Med Phys. 1979;6:487.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Boyer AL, Antonuk L, Fenster A, et al. A review of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs). Med Phys. 1992;19:1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Antonuk LE. Electronic portal imaging devices: a review and historical perspective of contemporary technologies and research. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47:R31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leszczynski KW, Shalev S, Ryder S. A study of efficacy of digital enhancement of on-line portal images. Med Phys. 1992;19:999.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bijhold J, Gilhuijs GA, van Herk M. Automatic verification of radiation field shape using digital portal images. Med Phys. 1992;19:1007.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Munro P, Rawlinson JA, Fenster A. A digital fluoroscopic imaging device for radiotherapy localization. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990;18:641.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Van Herk M, Meertens H. A digital imaging system for portal verification. In: Bruinvis IAD, van der Giessen PH, van Kleffens HJ, Wittkamper FW, editors. The use of computers in radiation therapy. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 1987. p. 371.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Meertens H, van Herk M, Bijhold J, et al. First clinical experience with a newly developed electronic portal imaging device. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990;18:1173.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Antonuk LE, El-Mohri Y, Jee KW. Active matrix flat-panel imagers (AMFPIs) for electronic portal imaging. In: Hazel JD, Boyer AL, editors. Imaging in radiation therapy; American Association of Physicists in Medicine 1998 Summer School Proceedings. Madison: University of Wisconsin; 1998. p. 371.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jaffray DA, Drake DG, Moreau M, et al. A radiographic and tomographic imaging system integrated into a medical linear accelerator for localization of bone and soft-tissue targets. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45:773.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yoo S, Kim GY, Hammoud R, et al. A quality assurance program for the on-board imager. Med Phys. 2006;33:4431.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mukherji, A. (2018). Planning a Patient, Deciding on the Volumes and Fields and Plan Verification. In: Basics of Planning and Management of Patients during Radiation Therapy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6659-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6659-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6658-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6659-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics