Biomedical subjects

S V Spirou

Publications and source records attributed to S V Spirou.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2001

Treatment planning and delivery of intensity-modulated radiation therapy for primary nasopharynx cancer.

PURPOSE: To implement intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for primary nasopharynx cancer and to compare this technique with conventional treatment methods. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between May 1998 and June 2000, 23 patients with primary nasopharynx cancer were treated with IMRT delivered with dynamic multileaf collimation. Treatments were designed using an inverse planning algorithm, which accepts dose and dose-volume constraints for targets and normal structures. The IMRT plan was compared with a traditional plan consisting of phased lateral fields and a three-dimensional (3D) plan consisting of a combination of lateral fields and a 3D conformal plan. RESULTS: Mean planning target volume (PTV) dose increased from 67.9 Gy with the traditional plan, to 74.6 Gy and 77.3 Gy with the 3D and IMRT plans, respectively. PTV coverage improved in the parapharyngeal region, the skull base, and the medial aspects of the nodal volumes using IMRT and doses to all normal structures decreased compared to the other treatment approaches. Average maximum cord dose decreased from 49 Gy with the traditional plan, to 44 Gy with the 3D plan and 34.5 Gy with IMRT. With the IMRT plan, the volume of mandible and temporal lobes receiving more than 60 Gy decreased by 10-15% compared to the traditional and 3D plans. The mean parotid gland dose decreased with IMRT, although it was not low enough to preserve salivary function. CONCLUSION: Lower normal tissue doses and improved target coverage, primarily in the retropharynx, skull base, and nodal regions, were achieved using IMRT. IMRT could potentially improve locoregional control and toxicity at current dose levels or facilitate dose escalation to further enhance locoregional control.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2001

Inverse planning algorithms for external beam radiation therapy.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a new treatment technique that has the potential to produce superior dose distributions to those of conventional techniques. An important step in IMRT is inverse planning, or optimization. This is a process by which the optimum intensity distribution is determined by minimizing (or maximizing) an objective function. For radiation therapy, the objective function is used to describe the clinical goals, which can be expressed in terms of dose and dose/volume requirements, or in terms of biological indices. There are 2 types of search algorithms, stochastic and deterministic. Typical algorithms that are currently in use are presented. For clinical implementations, other issues are also discussed, such as global minimum vs. local minima, dose uniformity in the target and sparing of normal tissues, smoothing of the intensity profile, and skin flash. To illustrate the advantages of IMRT, clinical examples for the treatment of the prostate, nasopharynx, and breast are presented. IMRT is an emerging technique that has shown encouraging results thus far. However, the technique is still in its infancy and more research and improvements are needed. For example, the effects of treatment uncertainties on the planning and delivery of IMRT requires further study. As with any new technology, IMRT should be used with great caution.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2001

Smoothing intensity-modulated beam profiles to improve the efficiency of delivery.

Intensity-modulated beam profiles are generated by an inverse planning or optimization algorithm, a process that, being computationally complex and intensive, is inherently susceptible to noise and numerical artifacts. These artifacts make delivery of the beams more difficult, oftentimes for little, if any, observable improvement in the dose distributions. In this work we examine two approaches for smoothing the beam profiles. The first approach is to smooth the beam profiles subsequent to each iteration in the optimization process (method A). The second approach is to include a term within the objective function that specifies the smoothness of the profiles as an optimization criterion (method B). The two methods were applied to a phantom study as well as three clinical sites: paraspinal, nasopharynx, and prostate. For the paraspinal and nasopharynx cases, which have critical organs with low tolerance doses in close proximity, method B produced sharper dose gradients, better target dose homogeneity, and more critical organ sparing. In the less demanding prostate case, the two methods give similar results. In addition, method B is more efficient during optimization, requiring fewer iterations, but less efficient during DMLC delivery, requiring a longer beam-on time.

Algorithms↗

PubMed1998

A gradient inverse planning algorithm with dose-volume constraints.

An inverse planning algorithm for determining the intensity-modulated beams that will most closely generate a desired dose distribution is presented. The algorithm is three-dimensional and does not explicitly depend on beam energies and modalities. It allows a single prescription dose or a window of acceptable doses to be specified for the target, with additional constraints to account for under- or over-dosing. For the protection of organs at risk, it provides maximum-dose and dose-volume constraints. The latter apply to the entire volume of the organ exposed to the corresponding dose levels. Several levels of each type of constraint, with varying penalty weights, may be specified for each organ. The objective function that serves as the measure of the goodness of the solution is of the least-squares type and is minimized using conjugate gradient methods. Typical clinical cases involving 40,000 points and 4000 rays to be determined require about 10 min of CPU time on a DEC AlphaStation. Results are presented for two clinical sites, prostate and lung. The optimization algorithm yielded plans that featured higher target dose homogeneity, compared with the human planner's plan, while selectively sparing more of the normal organs at the desired dose regions.

Aged↗

PubMed1996

Generation of arbitrary intensity profiles by combining the scanning beam with dynamic multileaf collimation.

An algorithm, which combines the scanning beam with dynamic collimation to generate any arbitrary intensity profile, is presented. The desired intensity profile is assumed to be piecewise linear. The dynamic collimation method used is the "sliding window." The algorithm can be used either for a given scanning beam profile or to simultaneously determine the scanning beam profile and the leaf motions required to generate the desired intensity profile, which minimize the total treatment time. The limitations imposed by the physics of an elementary beam are taken into account. The algorithm is an iterative one, with typical calculation times being of the order of a few milliseconds.

Algorithms↗

PubMed1994

Generation of arbitrary intensity profiles by dynamic jaws or multileaf collimators.

An algorithm, which calculates the motions of the collimator jaws required to generate a given arbitrary intensity profile, is presented. The intensity profile is assumed to be piecewise linear, i.e., to consist of segments of straight lines. The jaws move unidirectionally and continuously with variable speed during radiation delivery. During each segment, at least one of the jaws is set to move at the maximum permissible speed. The algorithm is equally applicable for multileaf collimators (MLC), where the transmission through the collimator leaves is taken into account. Examples are presented for different intensity profiles with varying degrees of complexity. Typically, the calculation takes less than 10 ms on a VAX 8550 computer.

Algorithms↗