Differential dosing of prostate and seminal vesicles using dynamic multileaf collimation

Abstract

Purpose: We have investigated the potential of applying different doses to the prostate (PTV2) and prostate/seminal vesicles (PTV1) using multileaf collimation (MLC) for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Current dose-escalation studies call for treatment of the PTV1 to 54 Gy in 27 fractions followed by 20 Gy minimum to the PTV2. A daily minimum PTV dose of 2 Gy using a 7-field technique (4 obliques, opposed laterals, and an ant-post field) is delivered. This requires monitor unit calculations, paper and electronic chart entry, and quality assurance for a total of 14 fields. The goal of MLC IMRT is to improve efficiency and deliver superior dose distributions. Acceptance testing and commissioning of the dynamic MLC (DMLC) option on a dual-energy accelerator was accomplished. Most of the testing was performed using segmental MLC (SMLC) IMRT with stop-and-shoot sequences built within the dynamic mode of the DMLC. Methods and Materials: The MLC IMRT fields were forward planned using a three-dimensional treatment planning system. The 14 fields were condensed to 7 SMLC IMRT fields with two segments each. In this process, steps were created by moving the leaves to the reduced field positions. No dose (<0.01%) was delivered during this motion. The monitor units were proportioned according to the planned treatment weights. Film and ionization chamber dosimetry were used to analyze leaf positional accuracy and speed, output, and depth-dose characteristics. A geometric phantom was used for absolute and relative measurements. We obtained a volumetric computerized tomography (CT) scan of the phantom, performed 3D planning, and then delivered a single treatment fraction. Results: The acceptance testing and commissioning demonstrated that the leaves move to programmed positions accurately and in a timely manner. We did find an ∼1 mm offset of the set leaf position and radiation edge (50%) due to the curved-end nature and calibration limitations. The 7-field SMLC IMRT treatment duplicated the 14-field static plan dose distribution with variations no greater than 1.5%. Conclusions: The MLC IMRT approach will improve efficiency because the number of electronic and chart entries has decreased by a factor of 2. Portal images are able to capture the initial and final MLC segments. The question of differential daily dose to the prostate and seminal vesicles remains.