Paper detail

Evaluation of the clinical usefulness of modulated Arc treatment

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical usefulness of modulated arc (mARC) treatment techniques. The mARC treatment plans of the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were performed in order to verify the clinical usefulness of mARC. A pre study was conducted to find the most competent plan condition of mARC treatment and the usefulness of mARC treatment plan was evaluated by comparing it with the other Arc treatment plans such as Tomotherapy and RapidArc. In the case of mARC, the optimal condition for the mARC plan was determined by comparing the dosimetric performance of the mARC plans with the use of various parameters. The various parameters includes the photon energies (6 MV, 10 MV), optimization point angle (6°-10° intervals), and total segment number (36-59 segment). The best dosimetric performance of mARC was observed at 10 MV photon energy and the point angle 6 degree, and 59 segments. The each treatment plans of three different techniques were compared with the following parameters: conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), target coverage, dose in the OARs, monitor units (MU), beam on time and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). As a result, all three different treatment techniques show the similar target coverage. The mARC results the lowest V20 and MU per fraction compared with both RapidArc and Tomotherapy plan. The mARC plan reduces the beam on time as well. Therefore, the results of this study provided a satisfactory result which mARC technique is considered as a useful clinical technique for radiation treatment.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access13 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.