Abstract

A technical note: When Do Differences in IMRT Fluence Intensities have Clinical Significance?

Highlights

  • The intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been the treatment modality for several cancers’ treatment sites [1,2]

  • Artificial changes of more than 10% of the fluence area in the field were made by a value of +5% in areas of a high dose gradient and dose levels in the field to simulate a few mis-calibrated leaves; these changes were followed by a recalculation of the IMRT plan

  • Field 2 exhibits the most of the points in the field that did not meet the evaluation criteria. These results showed that the IMRT plan failed to meet the criteria of 3%/3mm

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been the treatment modality for several cancers’ treatment sites [1,2]. The beauty of the technique, its ability to maximize the dose to the target volume while further reduces the dose to the organ at risk. The technique provides a good treatment outcome but it quality assurance has of the challenges in the verifications of the dose delivery [3,4]. The quality assurance of the technique in terms of the verification of the dose delivery has been the most concern. This is usually done through comparing the calculated IMRT plan using the planning system and the measured on with different dosimetric modalities such as film dosimetry and 2D-Array detector

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.