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.
References
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Mageras GS, Podmaniczky KC, Mohan R. A model for computer-controlled delivery of 3-D conformal treatments. Med Phys. 1992;19:945.
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.
Droege RT, Bjarngard BE. Influence of metal screens on contrast in megavoltage x-ray imaging. Med Phys. 1979;6:487.
Boyer AL, Antonuk L, Fenster A, et al. A review of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs). Med Phys. 1992;19:1.
Antonuk LE. Electronic portal imaging devices: a review and historical perspective of contemporary technologies and research. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47:R31.
Leszczynski KW, Shalev S, Ryder S. A study of efficacy of digital enhancement of on-line portal images. Med Phys. 1992;19:999.
Bijhold J, Gilhuijs GA, van Herk M. Automatic verification of radiation field shape using digital portal images. Med Phys. 1992;19:1007.
Munro P, Rawlinson JA, Fenster A. A digital fluoroscopic imaging device for radiotherapy localization. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1990;18:641.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yoo S, Kim GY, Hammoud R, et al. A quality assurance program for the on-board imager. Med Phys. 2006;33:4431.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
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)