Pitfalls in normalization for intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning

Three-dimensional (3D) treatment planning often involves complex combinations of beam energies, treatment fields, and beam modifying devices. Even when a plan is devised that meets many treatment-planning objectives, limitations in the planner's ability to further adjust beam characteristics may require the radiation dose prescription to be normalized to an isodose level that best covers the target volume. While these normalizations help meet the volume coverage goals, they also result in adjustment of the dose delivered to the normal tissues and must be carefully evaluated. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning allows combinations of complex dose patterns, in order to achieve the desired treatment planning goals. These dose patterns are created by defining a set of treatment planning objectives and then allowing the treatment planning computer to create intensity patterns, through the use of moving multileaf collimation that will meet the requested goals. Often, when an IMRT treatment plan is created that meets many of the treatment planning goals but falls short of volume coverage requirements, the planner is tempted to apply normalization principles similar to those utilized with 3D treatment planning. Again, these normalizations help meet the volume coverage goals, but unlike 3D planning situations, may result in avoidable delivery of additional doses to the normal tissues. The focus of this study is to evaluate the effect of application of normalization for IMRT planning using multiple patient situations. Recommendations would favor re-optimization over normalization in most planning situations. (c) 2005 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.