Dosimetric and Monte Carlo verification of jaws-only IMRT plans calculated by the Collapsed Cone Convolution algorithm for head and neck cancers.

AIM: The aim of this study is to verify the Prowess Panther jaws-only intensity modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) treatment planning (TP) by comparing the TP dose distributions for head-and-neck (H&N) cancer with the ones simulated by Monte Carlo (MC). BACKGROUND: To date, dose distributions planned using JO-IMRT for H&N patients were found superior to the corresponding three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plans. Dosimetry of the JO-IMRT plans were also experimentally verified using an ionization chamber, MapCHECK 2, and Octavius 4D and good agreements were shown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dose distributions of 15 JO-IMRT plans of nasopharyngeal patients were recalculated using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code. The clinical photon beams were simulated using the BEAMnrc. The absorbed dose to patients treated by fixed-field IMRT was computed using the DOSXYZnrc. The simulated dose distributions were then compared with the ones calculated by the Collapsed Cone Convolution (CCC) algorithm on the TPS, using the relative dose error comparison and the gamma index using global methods implemented in PTW-VeriSoft with 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 1%/1 mm criteria. RESULTS: There is a good agreement between the MC and TPS dose. The average gamma passing rates were 93.3 ± 3.1%, 92.8 ± 3.2%, 92.4 ± 3.4% based on the 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 1%/1 mm criteria, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results, it is concluded that the CCC algorithm was adequate for most of the IMRT H&N cases where the target was not immediately adjacent to the critical structures.

Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison in head-and-neck radiotherapy using JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT.

Introduction: Dosimetric and radiobiological evaluations for the Jaws-only Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (JO-IMRT) technique for head and neck jaws-only intensity-modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) and 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). To compare the head-and-neck therapeutic approaches utilizing JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT techniques, different radiation dose indices were calculated, including: conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and radiobiological variables like Niemierko's equivalent uniform dose based tumor control probability (TCP) of planning target volume (PTV), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of organs at risk (OAR) (brainstem, spinal cord, and parotid grand). Materials and methods: Twenty-five nasopharynx patients were studied using the Prowess Panther Treatment Planning System (Prowess Inc). The results were compared with the dose distribution obtained using 3D-CRT. Results: Regarding tumor coverage and CI, JO-IMRT showed better results than 3D-CRT. The average doses received by the PTVs were quite similar: 72.1 ± 0.8 Gy by 3D-CRT and 72.5 ± 0.6 Gy by JO-IMRT plans (p > 0.05). The mean doses received by the parotid gland were 56.7 ± 0.7 Gy by 3D-CRT and 26.8 ± 0.3 Gy by JO-IMRT (p > 0.05). The HI and CI were 0.13 ± 0.01 and 0.14 ± 0.05 and (p > 0.05) by 3D-CRT and 0.83 ± 0.05 and 0.73 ± 0.10 by JO-IMRT (p < 0.05). The average TCP of PTV was 0.82 ± 0.08 by 3D-CRT and 0.92 ± 0.02 by JO-IMRT. Moreover, the NTCP of the parotid glands, brain stem, and spinal cord were lower using the JO-IMRT than 3D-CRT plans. In comparison to the 3D-CRT approach, the JO-IMRT technique was able to boost dose coverage to the PTV, improve the target's CI and HI, and spare the parotid glands. This suggests the power of the JO-IMRT over 3D-CRT in head-and-neck radiotherapy.