BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

British Journal of Radiology (2006) 79, 734-739
© 2006 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/80814021

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Venables, K
Right arrow Articles by Hoskin, P J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Venables, K
Right arrow Articles by Hoskin, P J

Full paper

What is the optimum breast plan: a study based on the START trial plans

K Venables, PhD, MIPEM1, E A Miles, MPhil, DCR(T)1, E G A Aird, PhD, FIPEM2 and P J Hoskin, FCRP, FRCR1

1 Marie Curie Research Wing, 2 Medical Physics Department, Mount Vernon Hospital, Rickmansworth Road, Northwood, Middlesex HA6 2RN, UK

Each year thousands of women within the UK are treated with radiotherapy for breast cancer. The majority of these women are treated using a medial and lateral tangential field. This study evaluates the plans submitted to the quality assurance (QA) team of the START trial and investigates some of the differences between departments. Throughout the START trial, hardcopies of the radiotherapy dose distribution on the central slice for one in three women were submitted to the QA team for analysis. The QA team measured physical parameters including breast size and lung depth as well as noting parameters used for the radiotherapy delivery including beam energy, field size and wedge angle. Over 1400 plans from 36 centres were analysed. The mean patient separation was 19.7 cm (SD 2.7 cm) with a mean lung depth of 1.5 cm (SD 0.7 cm). The modal beam energy was 6 MV and the mean wedge angle was 23°. Significant differences in the choice of wedge angle between departments were noted; however, in 90% of cases the resultant plan complied with the maximum dose gradient of 10% on the central axis specified by the trial protocol. Less than 3% (37 plans) had dose gradients of greater than 12%. This resulted in a mean dose gradient for all patients on the central axis of 5.7% (SD 2.9%).




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
E J ADAMS and A P WARRINGTON
A comparison between cobalt and linear accelerator-based treatment plans for conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy
Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2008; 81(964): 304 - 310.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2006 by the British Institute of Radiology.