Encrypted login | home

Program Information

Investigation of Lower Energy (< 6 MV) Photon Beams for Cancer Radiotherapy

no image available
Y Zhang

Y Zhang1,2*, Y Feng1,3 , X Ming1,2 , L Zhou2,4 ,M Ahmad2 ,K Nguyen5, M Griffin5, J Deng2 , (1) Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, (2)Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT, USA (3) East Carolina University, Rockville, MD, USA (4) West China Hospital,Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China,(5) William Backus Hospital,Norwich, CT, USA


SU-E-T-221 Sunday 3:00PM - 6:00PM Room: Exhibit Hall

Purpose: To study the potential applications of the lower energy (< 6MV) photon beams in the radiotherapeutic management of pediatric cancer and lung cancer patients.

Methods: Photon beams of 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6MV were first simulated with EGS4/BEAM and then used for Monte-Carlo dose calculations. For four pediatric patients with abdominal and brain lesions, six 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) plans were generated using single photon energy (2 to 6MV) or mixed energies (3 and 6MV). Furthermore, a virtual machine of 3 and 6MV was commissioned in a treatment planning system (TPS) based on Monte-Carlo simulated data. Three IMRT plans of a lung cancer patient were generated on this virtual machine. All plans were normalized to D95% of target dose for 6MV plan and then compared in terms of integral dose and OAR sparing.

Results: For the four pediatric patients, the integral dose for the 2, 3, 4 and 5MV plans increased by 9%, 5%, 3.5%, 1.7%, respectively as compared to 6MV. Almost all OARs in the 2MV plan received more than 10% more doses than 6MV. Mixed energy 3DCRT plans were of the same quality as 6MV plans. For the lung IMRT plans, both the 3MV plan and the mixed beam plan showed better OAR sparing in comparison to 6MV plan. Specifically, the maximum and mean doses to the spinal cord in the mixed energy plan were lower by 21% and 16%, respectively.

Conclusion: Single lower energy photon beam was found to be inferior to 6MV in the radiotherapy of pediatric patients and lung cancer patients when the integral doses and the doses to the OARs were considered. However, mixed energy plans combining low with high energy beams showed significant OAR sparing while maintaining the same PTV coverage. Investigation with more patient data is ongoing for further confirmation.

Contact Email: