A multi-institutional initiative on patient-related quality assurance: Independent computational dose verification of fluence-modulated treatment techniques.

PURPOSE: This multi-institutional study investigates whether computational verification of fluence-modulated treatment plans using independent software with its own Strahlerkopfmodel is an appropriate method for patient-related quality assurance (PRQA) in the context of various combinations of linear accelerators (linacs), treatment techniques and treatment planning systems (TPS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PRQA-software's (Mobius3D) recalculations of 9 institutions' treatment plans were analyzed for a horseshoe-shaped planning target volume (PTV) inside a phantom. The recomputed dose distributions were compared to a) the dose distributions as calculated by all TPS's and b) the measured dose distributions, which were acquired using the same independent measuring system for all institutions. Furthermore, dose volume histograms were examined. The penumbra deviations and mean gamma values were quantified using Verisoft (PTW). Additionally, workflow requirements for computational verification were discussed. RESULTS: Mobius3D is compatible with all examined TPSs, treatment techniques and linacs. The mean PTV dose differences (Mobius3D-TPS, <3.0%) and 3D gamma passing rates (>95.0%) led to a positive plan acceptance result in all cases. These results are similar to the outcome of the dosimetric measurements with one exception. The mean gamma values (<0.5) show a good agreement between Mobius3D and the TPS dose distributions. CONCLUSION: Using Mobius3D was proven to be an appropriate computational PRQA method for the tested combinations of linacs, treatment techniques and TPS's. The clinical use of Mobius3D has to be complemented with regular dosimetric measurements and thorough linac and TPS QA. Mobius3D's computational verification reduced measurement effort and personnel needs in comparison to dosimetric verifications.

Prostate cancer treated with image-guided helical TomoTherapy® and image-guided LINAC-IMRT : Correlation between high-dose bladder volume, margin reduction, and genitourinary toxicity.

BACKGROUND: We compared different image-guidance (IG) strategies for prostate cancer with high-precision IG intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using TomoTherapy® (Accuray Inc., Madison, WI, USA) and linear accelerator (LINAC)-IMRT and their impact on planning target volume (PTV) margin reduction. Follow-up data showed reduced bladder toxicity in TomoTherapy patients compared to LINAC-IMRT. The purpose of this study was to quantify whether the treatment delivery technique and decreased margins affect reductions in bladder toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Setup corrections from 30 patients treated with helical TomoTherapy and 30 treated with a LINAC were analyzed. These data were used to simulate three IG protocols based on setup error correction and a limited number of imaging sessions. For all patients, gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity was documented and correlated with the treatment delivery technique. RESULTS: For fiducial marker (FM)-based RT, a margin reduction of up to 3.1, 3.0, and 4.8 mm in the left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions, respectively, could be achieved with calculation of a setup correction from the first three fractions and IG every second day. Although the bladder volume was treated with mean doses of 35 Gy in the TomoTherapy group vs. 22 Gy in the LINAC group, we observed less GU toxicity after TomoTherapy. CONCLUSION: Intraprostate FMs allow for small safety margins, help decrease imaging frequency after setup correction, and minimize the dose to bladder and rectum, resulting in lower GU toxicity. In addition, IMRT delivered with TomoTherapy helps to avoid hotspots in the bladder neck, a critical anatomic structure associated with post-RT urinary toxicity.

Intensity-modulated Total Body Irradiation (TBI) with TomoDirect™.

BACKGROUND: The new TomoDirect™ modality offers a non-rotational option with discrete beam angles. We have investigated this mode for TBI with the intention to test the feasibility and to establish it as a clinical routine method. Special foci were directed onto treatment planning, dosimetric accuracy and practical aspects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: TBI plans were calculated with TomoDirect™ for a Rando™ phantom and all patients with an intended fractionated total body irradiation between November 2013 and May 2014 (n = 8). Finally, four of these patients were irradiated with TomoDirect™. Additionally we studied variations in the modulation factor, pitch, field width of Y-jaws and dose grid during optimization. Dose measurements were performed using thermoluminescent rods in the Rando™ phantom, with the Delta4® and with ionization chambers in a solid water phantom. RESULTS: For all eight calculated plans with a prescribed dose of 12 Gy Dmean was 12.09-12.33 Gy (12,25 ± 0.08 Gy), D98 11.2-11.6 Gy (11.45 ± 0.12 Gy) and D2 12.6-13.1 Gy (12.94 ± 0.13 Gy). Dmean of inner lungs was 8.73 ± 0.22 Gy on the left side and 8.69 ± 0.27 Gy on the right side. When single planning parameters are varied with otherwise constant parameters, the modulation factor showed the greatest impact on dose homogeneity and treatment time. The impact of the pitch was marginally, and almost equal homogeneity can be obtained with field width of Y-jaws 5 cm and 2.5 cm. Measurements with thermoluminescent rods (n = 25) in the Rando™ phantom showed a mean dose deviation between measured and calculated dose of 0.66 ± 2.26%. 18 of 25 TLDs had a deviation below 3%, seven of 25 TLDs between 3% and 5%. CONCLUSION: TBI with TomoDirect™ allows a superior homogeneity compared to conventional methods, where lung blocks are widely accepted. The treatment is performed only in supine position and is robust and comfortable for the patient. TomoDirect™ allows the implementation of organ-specific dose prescriptions. So the discussion about the balance between the need for aggressive treatment and limited toxicity can be renewed with the new potentials of TomoDirect™ - for children as well as for adults - and possibly yield a better clinical outcome in the future.

Does IMRT increase the peripheral radiation dose? A comparison of treatment plans 2000 and 2010.

It has been reported in several papers and textbooks that IMRT treatments increase the peripheral dose in comparison with non-IMRT fields. But in clinical practice not only open fields have been used in the pre-IMRT era, but also fields with physical wedges or composed fields. The aim of this work is to test the hypothesis of increased peripheral dose when IMRT is used compared to standard conformal radiotherapy. Furthermore, the importance of the measured dose differences in clinical practice is discussed and compared with other new technologies for the cases where an increase of the peripheral dose was observed. For cancers of the head and neck, the cervix, the rectum and for the brain irradiation due to acute leukaemia, one to four plans have been calculated with IMRT or conformal standard technique (non-IMRT). In an anthropomorphic phantom the dose at a distance of 30cm in cranio-caudal direction from the target edge was measured with TLDs using a linear accelerator Oncor (®) (Siemens) for both techniques. IMRT was performed using step-and-shoot technique (7 to 11 beams), non-IMRT plans with different techniques. The results depended on the site of irradiation. For head and neck cancers IMRT resulted in an increase of 0.05 - 0.09% of the prescribed total dose (Dptv) or 40 - 70 mGy (Dptv=65Gy), compared to non-IMRT technique without wedges or a decrease of 0.16% (approx. 100 mGy) of the prescribed total dose compared to non-IMRT techniques with wedges. For the cervical cancer IMRT resulted in an increased dose in the periphery (+ 0.07% - 0.15% of Dptv or 30 - 70 mGy at Dptv=45Gy), for the rectal cancer in a dose reduction (0.21 - 0.26% of Dptv or 100 - 130 mGy at Dptv=50Gy) and for the brain irradiation in an increase dose (+ 0.05% of Dptv=18Gy or 9 mSv). In summary IMRT does not uniformly cause increased radiation dose in the periphery in the model used. It can be stated that these dose values are smaller than reported in earlier papers. Slightly increased additional radiation dose in the periphery is likely to be counterbalanced by the much higher conformity and the often better homogeneity.

Rotational IMRT techniques compared to fixed gantry IMRT and tomotherapy: multi-institutional planning study for head-and-neck cases.

BACKGROUND: Recent developments enable to deliver rotational IMRT with standard C-arm gantry based linear accelerators. This upcoming treatment technique was benchmarked in a multi-center treatment planning study against static gantry IMRT and rotational IMRT based on a ring gantry for a complex parotid gland sparing head-and-neck technique. METHODS: Treatment plans were created for 10 patients with head-and-neck tumours (oropharynx, hypopharynx, larynx) using the following treatment planning systems (TPS) for rotational IMRT: Monaco (ELEKTA VMAT solution), Eclipse (Varian RapidArc solution) and HiArt for the helical tomotherapy (Tomotherapy). Planning of static gantry IMRT was performed with KonRad, Pinnacle and Panther DAO based on step&shoot IMRT delivery and Eclipse for sliding window IMRT. The prescribed doses for the high dose PTVs were 65.1Gy or 60.9Gy and for the low dose PTVs 55.8Gy or 52.5Gy dependend on resection status. Plan evaluation was based on target coverage, conformity and homogeneity, DVHs of OARs and the volume of normal tissue receiving more than 5Gy (V5Gy). Additionally, the cumulative monitor units (MUs) and treatment times of the different technologies were compared. All evaluation parameters were averaged over all 10 patients for each technique and planning modality. RESULTS: Depending on IMRT technique and TPS, the mean CI values of all patients ranged from 1.17 to 2.82; and mean HI values varied from 0.05 to 0.10. The mean values of the median doses of the spared parotid were 26.5Gy for RapidArc and 23Gy for VMAT, 14.1Gy for Tomo. For fixed gantry techniques 21Gy was achieved for step&shoot+KonRad, 17.0Gy for step&shoot+Panther DAO, 23.3Gy for step&shoot+Pinnacle and 18.6Gy for sliding window.V5Gy values were lowest for the sliding window IMRT technique (3499 ccm) and largest for RapidArc (5480 ccm). The lowest mean MU value of 408 was achieved by Panther DAO, compared to 1140 for sliding window IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: All IMRT delivery technologies with their associated TPS provide plans with satisfying target coverage while at the same time respecting the defined OAR criteria. Sliding window IMRT, RapidArc and Tomo techniques resulted in better target dose homogeneity compared to VMAT and step&shoot IMRT. Rotational IMRT based on C-arm linacs and Tomotherapy seem to be advantageous with respect to OAR sparing and treatment delivery efficiency, at the cost of higher dose delivered to normal tissues. The overall treatment plan quality using Tomo seems to be better than the other TPS technology combinations.

Experimental determination of peripheral photon dose components for different IMRT techniques and linear accelerators.

PURPOSE: To quantify the relative peripheral photon doses (PD) to healthy tissues outside the treated region for different IMRT technologies and linac head designs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Measurements were performed on an Elekta linac for various energies (6 MV, 10 MV, 25 MV) at different depths at a distance of 29 cm off-axis (vertical measurements) and different distances from the field edge at constant depth of 10 cm (horizontal measurements). These measurements were compared with results obtained on a Siemens linac at 6 MV and 15 MV. TLD-700 detectors were used to quantify the PDs relative to the dose in the volume exposed with the primary beam. Intensity modulated (IM)-beams with identical fluence patterns were generated with a segmental multileaf (sMLC) technique and with lead-containing cerrobend compensators (MCP96). PD values of IM beams were compared with open beam values. All measurement results of the two different linacs, the different IM methods and the different energies were normalized to the same mean dose. RESULTS: PD values were distinctly higher near the surface (0.5-20 mm) than at larger depth and showed the same trend for all photon beam energies. In comparison with the open field, the photon dose component of PD for IM beams delivered with a segmental MLC technique were increased by a factor varying from 1.2 to 1.8, depending on photon energy and depth. This ratio was around 2 for compensator based IMRT. Depending on depth and distance from the field edge the PD on the Siemens machine was about 30% to 50% higher than on the Elekta machine for the same nominal photon energy. CONCLUSION: The treatment head design of a linac has a large impact on PD in IMRT as well as for open beams. PD can be minimized by proper selection of treatment delivery method and photon beam energy.

Dynamic MRI and CAD vs. choline MRS: where is the detection level for a lesion characterisation in prostate cancer?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of pre-interventional fused high resolution T2-weighted images with parametrically analysed dynamic contrast enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images (DCE-MRI) and 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) for a precise biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer and for the delineation of intraprostatic subvolumes for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). INCLUSION CRITERIA: Pathological prostate-specific antigen values (PSA) and/or previously negative transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. Standardised biopsy of the prostate divided into 20 regions. Image fusion of coloured parametric maps derived from DCE-MRI and MRS (single voxel spectroscopy, SVS; chemical shift imaging, CSI) with T2 images for morphological localisation using the MR-workstation, a separate CAD-workstation (CAD: computer aided diagnosis) or a radiation treatment planning system. Correlation of these intraprostatic subvolumes with histology and cytokeratin-positive areas in prostatectomy species. RESULTS: DCE-MRI: Sensitivity 82%, specificity 89%, accuracy 88%, positive predictive value 61%, negative predictive value 96%. SVS: Sensitivity 55%, specificity 62%. CSI: Sensitivity 68%, specificity 67%. False positive findings due to prostatitis, adenomatous hyperplasia, false negative findings due to low signal (PIN (prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia), cut-off level for DCE-MRI: lesions smaller 3 mm and less than 30% cancer cells, for SVS: lesions smaller 8 mm and less than 50% cancer cells), for CSI: lesions smaller 4 mm and less than 40% cancer cells. Our MR data are correlated with published choline PET/CT data (PET/CT: hybrid scanner of positron emission tomography and computed tomography). CONCLUSIONS: DCE-MRI and MRS are helpful for a precise biopsy of the prostate. The European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) guidelines 2006 for radiation treatment planning of the prostate have to be revised, if the standardised biopsy will be replaced by a lesion-orientated biopsy. Until now it is unclear, if the parametric maps of DCE-MRI and MRS can be used for radiation treatment planning of the prostate.

Experimental determination of peripheral doses for different IMRT techniques delivered by a Siemens linear accelerator.

PURPOSE: To quantify the relative peripheral doses (PD) to healthy tissues outside the treated region for different intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) technologies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: On a linear accelerator (linac) Oncor Impression (Siemens OCS) with two photon energies (6 MV, 15 MV), point dose measurements were performed at different depths in a solid phantom at 29 cm off-axis distance inplane. PD associated with artificial fluence distributions were compared with open beam contributions, where intensity-modulated (IM) beams were generated by segmented multileaf-modulated (sMLM) IMRT, by tin+wax compensators (TWComp), and by lead-containing cerrobend compensators (CComp). The field size of the open field and the maximum area (isocenter distance) exposed with the primary beam for the IMRT fields was 20 x 22 cm2. Measurements were performed with two kinds of thermoluminescence dosimeters to quantify photon and neutron components separately. Furthermore, experiments were done with and without phantom material in the direct beam to separate different scatter dose components. RESULTS: The results for the photon components and the neutron components are reverse. For the open field, the photon components increase with decreasing photon energy. In comparison with the open field, the photon components are further (factor 1.2-1.8 depending on energy and depth) increased when delivering IMRT with sMLM. When using CComp or TWComp, this factor is even higher and reaches a maximum of 2.4. At depths beyond 20 mm, photon component values slightly decrease with increasing photon energy for all types of IMRT techniques. Near the surface (10 mm depth), photon component values are distinctly higher than those at larger depth, and they increase with increasing photon energy. As expected, neutron components could be detected only for 15 MV. For sMLM and compensators, neutron components increased by factors 4 and 1.5 relative to the open field. The experiments with different scatter conditions show that about 50-70% of the photon components and all neutron components NPD are caused by radiation emanating from the linac head. CONCLUSION: PD in IMRT can be minimized by proper selection of treatment delivery method and photon beam energy. When selecting the IMRT technique in centers where compensator IMRT and MLC IMRT is available, PD burden should be taken into account. The large amount of photon components and neutron components caused by leakage radiation from the treatment head leads to the recommendation that radiation protection aspects for patients undergoing IMRT should be considered in linac design. For further clarification, additional experiments have to be carried out on other types of linacs.

3D-conformal-intensity modulated radiotherapy with compensators for head and neck cancer: clinical results of normal tissue sparing.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the potential of parotic gland sparing of intensity modulated radiotherapy (3D-c-IMRT) performed with metallic compensators for head and neck cancer in a clinical series by analysis of dose distributions and clinical measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 39 patients with squamous cell cancer of the head and neck irradiated using 3D-c-IMRT were evaluable for dose distribution within PTVs and at one parotid gland and 38 patients for toxicity analysis. 10 patients were treated primarily, 29 postoperatively, 19 received concomitant cis-platin based chemotherapy, 20 3D-c-IMRT alone. Initially the dose distribution was calculated with Helax and photon fluence was modulated using metallic compensators made of tin-granulate (n = 22). Later the dose distribution was calculated with KonRad and fluence was modified by MCP 96 alloy compensators (n = 17). Gross tumor/tumor bed (PTV 1) was irradiated up to 60-70 Gy, [5 fractions/week, single fraction dose: 2.0-2.2 (simultaneously integrated boost)], adjuvantly irradiated bilateral cervical lymph nodes (PTV 2) with 48-54 Gy [single dose: 1.5-1.8]). Toxicity was scored according the RTOG scale and patient-reported xerostomia questionnaire (XQ). RESULTS: Mean of the median doses at the parotid glands to be spared was 25.9 (16.3-46.8) Gy, for tin granulate 26 Gy, for MCP alloy 24.2 Gy. Tin-granulate compensators resulted in a median parotid dose above 26 Gy in 10/22, MCP 96 alloy in 0/17 patients. Following acute toxicities were seen (degree 0-2/3): xerostomia: 87%/13%, dysphagia: 84%/16%, mucositis: 89%/11%, dermatitis: 100%/0%. No grade 4 reaction was encountered. During therapy the XQ forms showed (degree 0-2/3): 88%/12%. 6 months postRT chronic xerostomia degree 0-2/3 was observed in 85%/15% of patients, none with degree 4 xerostomia. CONCLUSION: 3D-c-IMRT using metallic compensators along with inverse calculation algorithm achieves sufficient parotid gland sparing in virtually all advanced head and neck cancers. Since the concept of lower single (and total) doses in the adjuvantly treated volumes reduces acute morbidity 3D-c-IMRT nicely meets demands of concurrent chemotherapy protocols.

IMRT with compensators for head-and-neck cancers treatment technique, dosimetric accuracy, and practical experiences.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: With three-dimensional conformal intensity-modulated radiotherapy (3D-c-IMRT) a heterogeneous dose distribution can be achieved in both planning treatment volume and in adjacent normal tissues and organs to be spared. 3D-c-IMRT demands for modified photon fluence profiles which can be accomplished with different techniques. This report deals with the commissioning of metal compensators and the first experiences in clinical use. Dosimetric accuracy, dose coverage and practical experience like treatment delivery time, monitor units and dose outside the treated volume are evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2002 to April 2004, 24 patients with head-and-neck cancers were treated with 3D-c-IMRT using tin-wax compensators. The dose prescription included a simultaneously integrated boost (SIB). High-dose volume was irradiated with 60-70 Gy (median 66 Gy), low-dose volume with 48-54 Gy (median 52 Gy) administered by a standardized seven- portal coplanar beam arrangement. Dose at one parotid gland was aimed at 26 Gy. The compensators used consisted of tin granules embedded in wax; recalculation was performed with compensators made of the alloy MCP96 as well. RESULTS: In 21 of 24 patients 3D-c-IMRT with tin-wax compensators reduced the median dose to one parotid gland to < 30 Gy. Recalculation with compensators with higher density which allowed higher attenuation revealed better protection of the parotid gland. The treatment delivery time per fraction was between 6 and 12 min (plus time for patient positioning), approximately 300 MU per 2 Gy were applied. The dose outside the treated volume was increased with regard to open fields and comparable with a physical wedge of 15-30 degrees . Quality assurance and treatment of patient were fast and simple. It was shown, that calculated dose distribution corresponded to measured dose distribution with high accuracy. CONCLUSION: The described method offers facilities for a good dose coverage of irregular target volumes with different prescribed doses and a considerable dose reduction in adjacent organs at risk. The dose sparing of organs at risk can be further improved, if a compensator material with higher density is used.

Dosimetric quality assurance for intensity-modulated radiotherapy feasibility study for a filmless approach.

PURPOSE: Test and comparison of various 2-D real-time detectors for dosimetric quality assurance (QA) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with the vision to replace radiographic films for 2-D dosimetry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All IMRT treatment plans were created with the Konrad software (Siemens OCS). The final dose calculation was also carried out in Konrad. A Mevatron Primus (Siemens OCS) linear accelerator which provides 6-MV and 15-MV highenergy photon beams was used for the delivery of segmented multileaf-modulated IMRT. Three different 2-D detectors, each based on a different physical (interaction) principle, were tested for the field-related IMRT verification: (1) the MapCheck diode system (Sun Nuclear), (2) the I'mRT QA scintillation detector (Scanditronix/Wellhöfer), and the Seven29 ionization chamber array (PTW). The performance of these detector arrays was evaluated against IMRT dose distributions created and calculated with Konrad and the results obtained were compared with film measurements performed with radiographic films (EDR2, Kodak). Additionally, measurements were performed with point detectors, such as diamond, diodes (PTW) and ionization chambers (PTW, Scanditronics/ Wellhöfer) and radiochromic films (GafChromic film MD55, ISP). RESULTS: The results obtained with all three 2-D detector systems were in good agreement with calculations performed with the treatment-planning system and with the standard dosimetric tools, i.e., films or various point dose detectors. It could be shown that all three systems offer dosimetric characteristics required for performing field-related IMRT QA with relative dose measurements. The accuracy of the 2-D detectors was mostly +/- 3% normalized to dose maximum for a wide dynamic range. The maximum deviations did not exceed +/- 5% even in regions with a steep dose gradient. The main differences between the detector systems were the spatial resolution, the maximal field size, and the ability to perform absolute dosimetric measurements. CONCLUSION: Commercial 2-D detectors have the potential to replace films as an "area detector" for field-related verification of IMRT. The on-line information provided by the respective systems can even improve the efficiency of the QA procedures.

VERIDOS: a new tool for quality assurance for intensity modulated radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The use of intensity modulated radiation fields needs an extended quality assurance concept. This consists of a linac related part and a case related part. Case related means the verification of an individual treatment plan, optimized on a CT data set of an individual patient and prepared for the treatment of this patient. This part of the quality assurance work is usually time consuming, delivers only partially quantitative results and is uncomfortable without additional help. It will be shown in this paper how the software VERIDOS will improve the optimization of the case related part of the quality assurance work. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The main function of the software is the quantitative comparison of the calculated dose distribution from the treatment planning software with the measured dose distribution of an irradiated phantom. Several additional functions will be explained. Two self-developed phantoms made of RW3 (solid water) and GAFCHROMIC films or Kodak EDR2 films for the measurement of the dose distributions were used. VERIDOS was tested with the treatment planning systems Helay-TMS and Brainscan. RESULTS: VERIDOS is a suitable tool for the import of calculated dose matrices from the treatment planning systems Helax-TMS and Brainscan and of measured dose matrices exported from the dosimetry software Mephysto (PTW). The import from other treatment planning systems and scanning software applications for film dosimetry is generally possible. In such case the import function has to be adapted to the special header of the import matrix. All other functions of this software tool like normalization (automatically, manually), working with corrections (ground substraction, factors), overlay/comparison of dose distributions, difference matrix, cutting function (profiles) and export functions work reliable. CONCLUSIONS: VERIDOS improves the optimization of the case related part of the quality assurance work for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The diverse functions of the software offer the radiation physicist a wide base to verify the IMRT plan independent from the mode of its delivery (compensator technology or MLC technology).

[Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with compensators]. / Intensitätsmodulierte Strahlentherapie (IMRT) mit Kompensatoren.

The irradiation with intensity-modulated fields is possible with static as well as dynamic methods. In our university hospital, the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with compensators was prepared and used for the first time for patient irradiation in July 2001. The compensators consist of a mixture of tin granulate and wax, which is filled in a milled negative mould. The treatment planning is performed with Helax-TMS (MDS Nordion). An additional software is used for editing the modulation matrix ("Modifix"). Before irradiation of the first patient, extensive measurements have been carried out in terms of quality assurance of treatment planning and production of compensators. The results of the verification measurements have shown that IMRT with compensators possesses high spatial and dosimetric exactness. The calculated dose distributions are applied correctly. The accuracy of the calculated monitor units is normally better than 3%; in small volumes, further dosimetric inaccuracies between calculated and measured dose distributions are mostly less than 3%. Therefore, the compensators contribute to the achievement of high-level IMRT even when apparatuses without MLC are used. This paper describes the use of the IMRT with compensators, presents the limits of this technology, and discusses the first practical experiences.