Intensity modulating and other radiation therapy devices for dose painting.

The introduction of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the early 1990s created the possibility of generating dramatically improved dose distributions that could be tailored to fit a complex geometric arrangement of targets that push against or even surround healthy critical structures. IMRT is a new treatment paradigm that goes beyond the capabilities of the earlier technology called three-dimensional radiation therapy (3DCRT). IMRT took the older approach of using fields that conformed to the silhouette of the target to deliver a relatively homogeneous intensity of radiation and separated the conformal fields into many subfields so that intensity could be varied to better control the final dose distribution. This technique makes it possible to generate radiation dose clouds that have indentations in their surface. Initially, this technology was mainly used to avoid and thus control the dose delivered to critical structures so that they are not seriously damaged in the process of irradiating nearby targets to an appropriately high dose. Avoidance of critical structures allowed homogeneous dose escalation that led to improved local control for small tumors. However, the normal tissue component of large tumors often prohibits homogeneous dose escalation. A newer concept of dose-painting IMRT is aimed at exploiting inhomogeneous dose distributions adapted to tumor heterogeneity. Tumor regions of increased radiation resistance receive escalated dose levels, whereas radiation-sensitive regions receive conventional or even de-escalated dose levels. Dose painting relies on biologic imaging such as positron emission tomography, functional magnetic resonance imaging, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy. This review will describe the competing techologies for dose painting with an emphasis on their commonalities.

[1]  Y. Itai,et al.  Radiation tolerance of cirrhotic livers in relation to the preserved functional capacity: analysis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated by focused proton beam radiotherapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  H. Thierens,et al.  [18F]fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography ([18F]FDG-PET) voxel intensity-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer. , 2006, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[3]  Barbara Kaser-Hotz,et al.  Estimation of radiation-induced cancer from three-dimensional dose distributions: Concept of organ equivalent dose. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  D Followill,et al.  Estimates of whole-body dose equivalent produced by beam intensity modulated conformal therapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  E. Hall,et al.  Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT. , 2003, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  A R Smith,et al.  Evaluation of multileaf collimator design for a photon beam. , 1992, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  Cai Grau,et al.  Dose painting: art or science? , 2006, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[8]  D. Convery,et al.  The generation of intensity-modulated fields for conformal radiotherapy by dynamic collimation , 1992 .

[9]  Chester R. Ramsey,et al.  Out‐of‐field dosimetry measurements for a helical tomotherapy system† , 2006, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[10]  V. Smith,et al.  Peripheral doses in CyberKnife radiosurgery. , 2006, Medical physics.

[11]  J M Galvin,et al.  Combining multileaf fields to modulate fluence distributions. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  P. C. Williams,et al.  The design and performance characteristics of a multileaf collimator , 1994, Physics in medicine and biology.