Few‐field radiation therapy optimization in the phase space of complication‐free tumor control

The phase space of P+, describing the probability of achieving tumor control without causing severe complications in normal tissues, has been investigated for three different clinically relevant treatment geometries. These include tumors in the head and neck region, thorax, and pelvis. Some general conclusions about the shape and properties of the P+ phase space are given for the selected target volumes. The use of three different radiation beam types‐strictly homogeneous, wedged, and generally nonuniform beams‐has been investigated and the considerable differences in the P+ phase space are shown. One conclusion is that the exact selection of beam entry direction becomes gradually less important as the number of beam portals becomes larger. One of the most important results is that use of appropriately selected nonuniform beam profiles reduces the number of necessary beam portals to such a low level that the treatment technique becomes simple and reliable at the same time as the probability of achieving tumor control without severe complications is almost as high as with an unlimited number of beams This means that most ordinary treatment units equipped with beam compensating filters can be used for closely optimal radiation therapy.

[1]  A Brahme,et al.  Optimization of uncomplicated control for head and neck tumors. , 1990, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  A. Brahme,et al.  Calculation and application of point spread functions for treatment planning with high energy photon beams. , 1987, Acta oncologica.

[3]  A Brahme,et al.  Optimization of the dose delivery in a few field techniques using radiobiological objective functions. , 1993, Medical physics.

[4]  A Brahme,et al.  An algorithm for maximizing the probability of complication-free tumour control in radiation therapy , 1992, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  R Svensson,et al.  An analytical solution for the dynamic control of multileaf collimators. , 1994, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  Robert J. Shalek,et al.  Determination of Absorbed Dose in a Patient Irradiated by Beams of X or Gamma Rays in Radiotherapy Procedures , 1977 .

[7]  A Brahme,et al.  Photon field quantities and units for kernel based radiation therapy planning and treatment optimization. , 1992, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  B. Lind Properties of an algorithm for solving the inverse problem in radiation therapy , 1990 .

[9]  A Brahme,et al.  Shaping of arbitrary dose distributions by dynamic multileaf collimation. , 1988, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  H Svensson,et al.  A 22 MeV microtron for radiation therapy. , 1977, Acta radiologica: therapy, physics, biology.

[11]  R Svensson,et al.  Simultaneous optimization of dynamic multileaf collimation and scanning patterns or compensation filters using a generalized pencil beam algorithm. , 1995, Medical physics.

[12]  P. Källman,et al.  Optimization of radiation therapy planning using physical and biological objective functions , 1992 .

[13]  A Brahme,et al.  Photon beam energy deposition kernels for inverse radiotherapy planning. , 1990, Acta oncologica.

[14]  R L Siddon,et al.  Effective wedge angles with a universal wedge. , 1985, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  A. Brahme,et al.  A generalized pencil beam algorithm for optimization of radiation therapy. , 1994, Medical physics.

[16]  Anders Brahme,et al.  Treatment Optimization Using Physical and Radiobiological Objective Functions , 1995 .