Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • The effect of photon energy on dose distribution in volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning for head and neck cancer

  • Trang Hong Thi Nguyen, Akihiro Takemura, Shinichi Ueda, Kimiya Noto, Hironori Kojima, Naoki Isomura
  • Journal:
    Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice / Volume 20 / Issue 3 / September 2021
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    14 May 2020, pp. 316-320
  • Aim:

    To investigate the effect of different energies on dose distribution in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for head and neck cancer.

    Materials and methods:

    Data from nine patients undergoing VMAT plans using 6 MV, 10 MV and dual-energy X-ray beams with the Pinnacle 3 V 9.10 treatment planning system (Philips Medical System, Fitchburg, WI, USA) were analysed for quality using the conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for planning target volume (PTV), and for mean and maximum dose to the organs at risk (OARs): parotid glands, brainstem, spinal cord and optic nerves.

    Results:

    There were no clear differences in the HIs of the PTV dose among the different plans. The CIs for 10 MV and dual-energy VMAT plans were superior to that of the 6 MV VMAT plan (0·8 ± 0·3, 0·8 ± 0·3, and 0·7 ± 0·2, respectively; p = 0·001). There were no significant differences in mean/maximum dose to the OARs among the three VMAT plans.

    Findings:

    Compared with the 6 MV VMAT plan, the dual-energy VMAT plan slightly increased the coverage of the PTV with the prescribed dose but did not decrease dose to the OARs.