Article

Conformity index: a review.

Institut Curie, Orsay, France.
International Journal of Radiation OncologyBiologyPhysics (Impact Factor: 4.52). 03/2006; 64(2):333-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.028
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We present a critical analysis of the conformity indices described in the literature and an evaluation of their field of application. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, with or without intensity modulation, is based on medical imaging techniques, three-dimensional dosimetry software, compression accessories, and verification procedures. It consists of delineating target volumes and critical healthy tissues to select the best combination of beams. This approach allows better adaptation of the isodose to the tumor volume, while limiting irradiation of healthy tissues. Tools must be developed to evaluate the quality of proposed treatment plans. Dosimetry software provides the dose distribution in each CT section and dose-volume histograms without really indicating the degree of conformity. The conformity index is a complementary tool that attributes a score to a treatment plan or that can compare several treatment plans for the same patient. The future of conformal index in everyday practice therefore remains unclear.

10 Bookmarks
 · 
872 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate the effects of using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and/or voluntary moderate deep inspiration breath-hold (vmDIBH) in the radiation therapy (RT) of left-sided breast cancer including the regional lymph nodes. For 13 patients, four treatment combinations were compared; 3D-conformal RT (i.e., forward IMRT) in free-breathing 3D-CRT(FB), 3D-CRT(vmDIBH), 2 partial arcs VMAT(FB), and VMAT(vmDIBH). Prescribed dose was 42.56Gy in 16 fractions. For 10 additional patients, 3D-CRT and VMAT in vmDIBH only were also compared. Dose conformity, PTV coverage, ipsilateral and total lung doses were significantly better for VMAT plans compared to 3D-CRT. Mean heart dose (Dmean,heart) reduction in 3D-CRT(vmDIBH) was between 0.9 and 8.6Gy, depending on initial Dmean,heart (in 3D-CRT(FB) plans). VMAT(vmDIBH) reduced the Dmean,heart further when Dmean,heart was still >3.2Gy in 3D-CRT(vmDIBH). Mean contralateral breast dose was higher for VMAT plans (2.7Gy) compared to 3DCRT plans (0.7Gy). VMAT and 3D-CRT(vmDIBH) significantly reduced heart dose for patients treated with locoregional RT of left-sided breast cancer. When Dmean,heart exceeded 3.2Gy in 3D-CRT(vmDIBH) plans, VMAT(vmDIBH) resulted in a cumulative heart dose reduction. VMAT also provided better target coverage and reduced ipsilateral lung dose, at the expense of a small increase in the dose to the contralateral breast.
    Radiotherapy and Oncology 05/2014; · 4.52 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent clinical series suggest that treating patients with isotoxic twice-daily radiotherapy may be beneficial. This dosimetric planning study compared the use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DRT) to deliver isotoxic treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Twenty patients with stage II/III NSCLC were selected. A dose-escalated plan was produced retrospectively for each using three different methods: (i) three to five beams 3DRT; (ii) seven beams inverse-planned conformal radiotherapy; (iii) seven beams IMRT. The starting point for dose escalation was 55.8 Gy in 1.8 Gy per fraction twice-daily. The number of fractions was then increased until one or more organ at risk tolerance dose was exceeded or a maximum dose of 79.2 Gy was reached. The median escalated doses were 70.2, 66.6 and 64.8 Gy for IMRT, 3DRT and inverse-planned conformal radiotherapy, respectively. IMRT allowed a significant dose increase in comparison with the other two methods (P < 0.05), whereas no significant difference was found between 3DRT and inverse-planned conformal radiotherapy. IMRT was more successful at escalating dose in patients where the brachial plexus and spinal canal were close to the planning target volume. IMRT did not allow the escalation of dose beyond 70.2 Gy (82.8 Gy BED10, 69 Gy EQD2) due to the proximity of disease to the great vessels and the proximal bronchial tree. IMRT allows increased dose escalation compared with conformal radiotherapy. However, there is limited opportunity to escalate the prescription dose beyond 70.2 Gy twice-daily in disease close to the central mediastinal structures.
    Clinical Oncology 05/2014; · 2.86 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: High cure rates for Hodgkin's lymphoma must be balanced with long-term treatment-related toxicity. Here we report an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique that achieves adequate target coverage for mediastinal disease while minimizing high- and low-dose exposure of critical organs.Methods and materials: Treatment plans for IMRT and conventional anteroposterior-posteroanterior (AP-PA) techniques, with comparable coverage of the planning target volume (PTV), were generated for 9 female patients with mediastinal Hodgkin's lymphoma assuming use of inclined positioning, daily breath-hold, and CT-on-rails verification. Our "butterfly" IMRT beam arrangement involved anterior beams of 300[degree sign]-30[degree sign] and posterior beams of 160[degree sign]-210[degree sign]. Percentages of normal structures receiving 30 Gy (V30), 20 Gy (V20), and 5 Gy (V5) were tabulated for the right and left breasts, total lung, heart, left and right ventricles, left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD), and spinal cord. Differences in each variable, conformity index, homogeneity index, and V107% between the two techniques were calculated (IMRT minus conventional). Use of IMRT generally reduced the V30 and V20 to critical structures: -1.4% and +0.1% to the right breast, -1.7% and -0.9% to the left breast, -14.6% and -7.7% to the total lung, -12.2% and -10.5% to the heart, -2.4% and -14.2% to the left ventricle, -16.4% and -8.4% to the right ventricle, -7.0% and -14.2% to the LAD, and -52.2% and -13.4% to the spinal cord. Differences in V5 were +6.2% for right breast, +2.8% for left breast, +12.9% for total lung, -3.5% for heart, -8.2% for left ventricle, -1.5% for right ventricle, +0.1% for LAD, and -0.1% for spinal cord. Use of IMRT significantly reduced the volume of tissue receiving 107% of the dose (mean 754 cm3 reduction). This butterfly technique for IMRT avoids excess exposure of heart, breast, lung, and spinal cord to doses of 30 or 20 Gy; mildly increases V5 to the breasts; and decreases the V107%.
    Radiation Oncology 04/2014; 9(1):94. · 2.11 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
306 Downloads
Available from
Jun 1, 2014