Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak ( for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 9, Number S2, 2004

Are standard quality parameters useful in comparison of conventional and IMSRT plans?

A. Grządziel, G. Anca-Ligia, P. Kneschaurek


Objective: Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is the technique, which has a potential to improve conformity in dose distributions and to increase the protection of organs at risk (OARs) at the same time, compared to conventional conformal technique. IMRT may also improve the dose distribution in stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). The combination of these two techniques was called (IMSRT). This study presents a comparison of dose distribution in conformal stereotactic radiotherapy
versus IMSRT for lesions located in base of scull. The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of conformal and IMSRT treatment plans and to assess the usefulness of several quality factors in planning evaluation.
Material and methods: Four patients with meningeoma and one with pituitary adenoma have been selected for analysis.
For each case ten different plans were created and compared. The first one (TP) was the plan used for patient treatment. The second conformal plan (SP) was created using invariable beam arrangement, the same for all patients. Eight IMSRT plans were generated with different OARs prioritization, on the base of TP and SP beams arrangement, using “step and shoot” delivery method. The results were evaluated by analysis of consecutive factors: PTV minimum and maximum dose, homogeneity index (HI), coverage index (CovI), conformity index (CI) as well as tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). These quantities were incorporated into ten degrees scale of ranking factors and
assigned for each plan.
Results: HI shows better homogeneity in conformal plans and IMSRT plans with high PTV priority in optimization process and consequently higher probability of tumor control. CI and coverage index are higher with higher importance of PTV too. Better protection of OARs, thereby lower normal tissue complication probability is achieved in plans with their increased weighting.
Conclusions: The test carried out for five patients showed efficiency as well as some limitation of IMSRT techniques. The use of number of quality factors allowed to assess dose distribution in more depth. It was also confirmed that decision about the best treatment plan depends largely on the means chosen for the evaluation process in the sense that all means employed during plans evaluation consider different aspects of plan quality.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2004; 9(S2) : 293-293


« back


Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.