Electron wedges for radiation therapy

A preliminary study of the role of modulated electron beams in intensity modulated radiotherapy, using automated beam orientation and modality selection

PURPOSE

To develop an algorithm for optimal beam arrangement selection in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of mixed photon and electron beams. To apply this algorithm to study the utility of modulated electron beams in the context of IMRT planning.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The optimization algorithm selects, for a user-specified number of beams, the optimal IMRT arrangement (beam orientations, and photon/electron modality for each orientation) using a novel fast heuristic intensity modulation procedure. The algorithm was employed to select optimal beam arrangements for breast (two, four, and six axial beams) and head-and-neck (three, four, five, and seven nonaxial beams) cases.

RESULTS

For the two cases, increasing the number of selected beams: (1) increased the number of electron beams for the breast case, but not more than one electron beam was selected for the head-and-neck case; (2) decreased critical structure doses for both cases; and (3) decreased target homogeneity for the breast case, but improved it for the head-and-neck case.

CONCLUSIONS

In the two cases analyzed using the selection algorithm, the primary role of modulated electrons differs based on treatment site-normal tissue dose reduction in breast and target homogeneity improvement in head and neck. Although this preliminary study with two cases appears to suggest that the role of intensity-modulated electrons differs based on treatment site, further investigation of large numbers of cases and varied treatment sites are required to establish a definitive conclusion.

Investigation of the added value of high-energy electrons in intensity-modulated radiotherapy: four clinical cases

PURPOSE

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with photon beams is currently pursued in many clinics. Theoretically, inclusion of intensity- and energy-modulated high-energy electron beams (15-50 MeV) offers additional possibilities to improve radiotherapy treatments of deep-seated tumors. In this study the added value of high-energy electron beams in IMRT treatments was investigated.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In a comparative treatment planning study, conventional treatment plans and various types of IMRT plans were constructed for four clinical cases (cancer of the bladder, pancreas, chordoma of the sacrum, and breast). The conventional plans were used for the actual treatment of the patients. The IMRT plans were optimized using the Orbit optimization code (Löf et al., 2000) with a radiobiologic objective function. The IMRT plans were either photon or combined electron and photon beam plans, with or without dose homogeneity constraints assuming standard or increased radiosensitivities of organs at risk.

RESULTS

Large improvements in expected treatment outcome are found using IMRT plans compared to conventional plans, but differences in tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) values between IMRT plans with and without electrons are small. However, the use of electrons improves the dose-volume histograms for organs at risk, especially at lower dose levels (e.g., 0-40 Gy).

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study indicates that addition of higher energy electrons to IMRT can only marginally improve treatment outcome for the selected cases. The dose-volume histograms of organs at risk show improvements for IMRT with higher energy electrons, which may reduce tumor induction but does not substantially reduce NTCP.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest

PURPOSE

To develop and disseminate a report aimed primarily at practicing radiation oncology physicians and medical physicists that describes the current state-of-the-art of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Those areas needing further research and development are identified by category and recommendations are given, which should also be of interest to IMRT equipment manufacturers and research funding agencies.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The National Cancer Institute formed a Collaborative Working Group of experts in IMRT to develop consensus guidelines and recommendations for implementation of IMRT and for further research through a critical analysis of the published data supplemented by clinical experience. A glossary of the words and phrases currently used in IMRT is given in the. Recommendations for new terminology are given where clarification is needed.

RESULTS

IMRT, an advanced form of external beam irradiation, is a type of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT). It represents one of the most important technical advances in RT since the advent of the medical linear accelerator. 3D-CRT/IMRT is not just an add-on to the current radiation oncology process; it represents a radical change in practice, particularly for the radiation oncologist. For example, 3D-CRT/IMRT requires the use of 3D treatment planning capabilities, such as defining target volumes and organs at risk in three dimensions by drawing contours on cross-sectional images (i.e., CT, MRI) on a slice-by-slice basis as opposed to drawing beam portals on a simulator radiograph. In addition, IMRT requires that the physician clearly and quantitatively define the treatment objectives. Currently, most IMRT approaches will increase the time and effort required by physicians, medical physicists, dosimetrists, and radiation therapists, because IMRT planning and delivery systems are not yet robust enough to provide totally automated solutions for all disease sites. Considerable research is needed to model the clinical outcomes to allow truly automated solutions. Current IMRT delivery systems are essentially first-generation systems, and no single method stands out as the ultimate technique. The instrumentation and methods used for IMRT quality assurance procedures and testing are not yet well established. In addition, many fundamental questions regarding IMRT are still unanswered. For example, the radiobiologic consequences of altered time-dose fractionation are not completely understood. Also, because there may be a much greater ability to trade off dose heterogeneity in the target vs. avoidance of normal critical structures with IMRT compared with traditional RT techniques, conventional radiation oncology planning principles are challenged. All in all, this new process of planning and treatment delivery has significant potential for improving the therapeutic ratio and reducing toxicity. Also, although inefficient currently, it is expected that IMRT, when fully developed, will improve the overall efficiency with which external beam RT can be planned and delivered, and thus will potentially lower costs.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations in the areas pertinent to IMRT, including dose-calculation algorithms, acceptance testing, commissioning and quality assurance, facility planning and radiation safety, and target volume and dose specification, are presented. Several of the areas in which future research and development are needed are also indicated. These broad recommendations are intended to be both technical and advisory in nature, but the ultimate responsibility for clinical decisions pertaining to the implementation and use of IMRT rests with the radiation oncologist and radiation oncology physicist. This is an evolving field, and modifications of these recommendations are expected as new technology and data become available.

Mixing intensity modulated electron and photon beams: combining a steep dose fall-off at depth with sharp and depth-independent penumbras and flat beam profiles

For application in radiotherapy, intensity modulated high-energy electron and photon beams were mixed to create dose distributions that feature: (a) a steep dose fall-off at larger depths, similar to pure electron beams, (b) flat beam profiles and sharp and depth-independent beam penumbras, as in photon beams, and (c) a selectable skin dose that is lower than for pure electron beams. To determine the required electron and photon beam fluence profiles, an inverse treatment planning algorithm was used. Mixed beams were realized at a MM50 racetrack microtron (Scanditronix Medical AB, Sweden), and evaluated by the dose distributions measured in a water phantom. The multileaf collimator of the MM50 was used in a static mode to shape overlapping electron beam segments, and the dynamic multileaf collimation mode was used to realize the intensity modulated photon beam profiles. Examples of mixed beams were generated at electron energies of up to 40 MeV. The intensity modulated electron beam component consists of two overlapping concentric fields with optimized field sizes, yielding broad, fairly depth-independent overall beam penumbras. The matched intensity modulated photon beam component has high fluence peaks at the field edges to sharpen this penumbra. The combination of the electron and the photon beams yields dose distributions with the characteristics (a)-(c) mentioned above.