Helical tomotherapy represents both a novel radiation treatment device and an innovative means of delivering radiotherapy. The helical tomotherapy unit itself is essentially a hybrid between a linear accelerator and a helical CT scanner for the purpose of delivering intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The imaging capacity conferred by the CT component allows targeted regions to be visualized prior to, during, and immediately after each treatment. The megavoltage CT (MVCT) images supplant the port-films used in conventional radiotherapy, providing unprecedented anatomical detail. Image-guidance through MVCT will allow the development and refinement of the concept of “adaptive radiotherapy”, the reconstruction of the actual daily delivered dose (as opposed to planned dose) accompanied by prescription and delivery adjustments when appropriate. In addition to this unique feature, helical tomotherapy appears capable of further improvements over 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy and non-helical IMRT in the specific avoidance of critical normal structures, i.e. “conformal avoidance”, the counterpart of conformal radiation therapy. Based on radiobiological principles that exploit the physical advantages of helical tomotherapy, several dosimetric and clinical investigations are underway.
References
1.
MackieT. R., HolmesT., SwerdloffS.Tomotherapy: A new concept for the delivery of dynamic conformal radiotherapy. Med Phys20, 1709–19 (1993).
2.
MackieT. R., BalogJ., RuchalaK.Tomotherapy. Semin Radiat Oncol9, 108–117 (1999).
3.
RuchalaK. J., OliveraG. H., KapatoesJ. M., SchloesserE. A., ReckwerdtP. J., and MackieT. R.Megavoltage CT image reconstruction during tomotherapy treatments. Phys Med. Biol.45, 3545–3562 (2000).
4.
KapatoesJ. M., OliveraG. H., RuchalaK. J., SmilowitzJ. B., ReckwerdtP. J., MackieT. R.A feasible method for clinical delivery verification and dose reconstruction in tomotherapy. Med Phys.28, 528–542 (2001).
5.
McNuttT. R., MackieT. R., PaliwalB. R.Analysis and convergence of the iterative convolution/superposition dose reconstruction technique for multiple beams and tomotherapy. Med Phys.24, 1465–1476 (1997).
6.
KapatoesJ. M., OliveraG. H., BalogJ. P., KellerH., ReckwerdtP. J., MackieT. R.On the accuracy and effectiveness of dose reconstruction for tomotherapy. Phys Med Biol.46, 943–966 (2001).
7.
OliveraG. H., ShepardD. M., RuchalaK., AldridgeJ. S., KapatoesJ., FitchardE. E., ReckwerdtP. J., FangG., BalogJ., ZachmanJ., MackieT. R.Tomotherapy. Ch. 15 pp 521–587. In: Van DykJ., editor. Modern Technology of Radiation Oncology. Madison, Wisconsin: Medical Physics Publishing (1999).
8.
MackieT. R.Tomotherapy: Rethinking the process of radiotherapy. In: XII International Conference on the Use of Computers in Radiation Therapy. (LeavittD. D., StarkshallG., eds). Salt Lake City, UT, USA: Medical Physics Publishing (1997).
9.
YangJ. N., MackieT. R., ReckwerdtP., DeasyJ. O., ThomadsenB. R.An investigation of tomotherapy beam delivery. Med Phys24, 25–36 (1997).
10.
KapatoesJ. M., OliveraG. H., RuchalaK. J., and MackieT. R.On the verification of the incident energy fluence in tomotherapy IMRT. Phys Med Biol.46, 2953–2965 (2001).
11.
YanD., ZiagaE., JaffrayD.The use of adaptive radiation therapy to reduce setup error: A prospective clinical study. Int J Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys.41, 715–720 (1998).
12.
HanksG. E., HanlonA. L., SchultheissT. E.Dose escalation with 3D conformal treatment: Five year outcomes, treatment optimization, and future directions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys41, 501–10 (1998).
13.
ZelefskyM. J., LeibelS. A., GaudinP. B.Dose escalation with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy affects the outcome in prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys41, 491–500 (1998).
14.
PollackA., ZagarsG. K., SmithL. G.Preliminary results of a randomized radiotherapy dose-escalation study comparing 70 Gy with 78 Gy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol18, 3904–11 (2000).
15.
MichalskiJ. M., PurdyJ. A., WinterK.Preliminary report of toxicity following 3D radiation therapy for prostate cancer on 3DOG/RTOG 9406. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys46, 391–402 (2000).
16.
StoreyM. R., PollackA., ZagarsG.Complications from radiotherapy dose escalation in prostate cancer: Preliminary results of a randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.48, 635–42 (2000).
17.
DearnaleyD. P., KhooV. S., NormanA. R.Comparison of radiation side-effects of conformal and conventional radiotherapy in prostate cancer: A randomised trial. Lancet353, 267–72 (1999).
18.
KoperP. C., StroomJ. C., van PuttenW. L.Acute morbidity reduction using 3DCRT for prostate carcinoma: A randomized study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys43, 727–34 (1999).
19.
ZelefskyM., FuksZ., HappersettL.Improved conformality and reduced toxicity with high-dose intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for patients with prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.45, 170 (1999).
20.
TehB. S., MaiW. Y., UhlB. M.Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer with the use of a rectal balloon for prostate immobilization: Acute toxicity and dose-volume analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.49, 705–1 (2001).
21.
LattanziJ., McNeeleyS., PinoverW.A comparison of daily CT localization to a daily ultrasound-based system in prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.43, 719–25 (1999).
22.
D'AmicoA. V., ManolaJ., LoffredoM.A practical method to achieve prostate gland immobilization and target verification for daily treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.51, 1431–6 (2001).
23.
HallE. J., Radiobiology for the Radiobiologist, Edition 5: 401, Lippincott Williams and Williams, Philadelphia, PA (2000).
24.
HaustermansK. M., HoflandI., VanP. H., OyenR., Van de VoordeW.Cell kinetic measurements in prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.37, 1067–70 (1997).
25.
PollackA., ZagarsG. K., and KavadiV. S.Prostate specific antigen doubling time and disease relapse after radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Cancer, 74, 670–8, 670–8 (1994).
26.
BrennerD. J., and HallE. J.Fractionation and protraction for radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 43, 1095–101 (1999).
27.
FowlerJ., ChappellR., and RitterM. A.Is α/ß for prostate tumors really low?Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.50, 1021–1031 (2001).
28.
DuchesneG. M., and PetersL. J.What is the alpha/beta ratio for prostate cancer? Rationale for hypofractionated high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.44, 747–8 (1999).
29.
SaundersM., DischeS., BarrettA.Continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) versus conventional radiotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized multicenter trial. Lancet350, 161–165 (1997).
30.
FowlerJ. F., ChappellR.Non-small cell lung tumors repopulate rapidly during radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.46, 516–7 (2000).
31.
JonesB., DaleR. G.Mathematical models of tumour and normal tissue response. Acta Oncol.38, 883–93 (1999).
32.
MehtaM., ScrimgerR., MackieT. R., PaliwalB., ChappellR., FowlerJ.: A New Approach to Dose Escalation in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.49, 23–33 (2001).
