EVALUATION OF INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY (IMRT) DELIVERY ERROR DUE TO IMRT TREATMENT PLAN COMPLEXITY AND IMPROPERLY MATCHED DOSIMETRY DATA

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a technique that delivers a highly conformal dose distribution to a target volume while attempting to maximally spare the surrounding normal tissues. IMRT is a common treatment modality used for treating head and neck (H&N) cancers, and the presence of many critical structures in this region requires accurate treatment delivery. The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) acts as both a remote and on-site quality assurance agency that credentials institutions participating in clinical trials. To date, about 30% of all IMRT participants have failed the RPC’s remote audit using the IMRT H&N phantom. The purpose of this project is to evaluate possible causes of H&N IMRT delivery errors observed by the RPC, specifically IMRT treatment plan complexity and the use of improper dosimetry data from machines that were thought to be matched but in reality were not. Eight H&N IMRT plans with a range of complexity defined by total MU (1460-3466), number of segments (54-225), and modulation complexity scores (MCS) (0.181-0.609) were created in Pinnacle v.8m. These plans were delivered to the RPC’s H&N phantom on a single Varian Clinac. One of the IMRT plans (1851 MU, 88 segments, and MCS=0.469) was equivalent to the median H&N plan from 130 previous RPC H&N phantom irradiations. This average IMRT plan was also delivered on four matched Varian Clinac machines and the dose distribution calculated using a different 6MV beam model. Radiochromic film and TLD within the phantom were used to analyze the dose profiles and absolute doses, respectively. The measured and calculated were compared to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy. All deliveries met the RPC acceptance criteria of ±7% absolute dose difference and 4 mm distance-to-agreement (DTA). Additionally, gamma index analysis was performed for all deliveries using a ±7%/4mm and ±5%/3mm criteria. Increasing the treatment plan complexity by varying the MU, number of segments, or varying the MCS resulted in no clear trend toward an increase in dosimetric error determined by the absolute dose difference, DTA, or gamma index. Varying the delivery machines as well as the beam model (use of a Clinac 6EX 6MV beam model vs. Clinac 21EX 6MV model), also did not show any clear trend towards an increased dosimetric error using the same criteria indicated above.

Is a 3-mm intrafractional margin sufficient for daily image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy of prostate cancer?

PURPOSE: To determine whether a 3-mm isotropic target margin adequately covers the prostate and seminal vesicles (SVs) during administration of an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment fraction, assuming that daily image-guided setup is performed just before each fraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In-room computed tomographic (CT) scans were acquired immediately before and after a daily treatment fraction in 46 patients with prostate cancer. An eight-field IMRT plan was designed using the pre-fraction CT with a 3-mm margin and subsequently recalculated on the post-fraction CT. For convenience of comparison, dose plans were scaled to full course of treatment (75.6 Gy). Dose coverage was assessed on the post-treatment CT image set. RESULTS: During one treatment fraction (21.4+/-5.5 min), there were reductions in the volumes of the prostate and SVs receiving the prescribed dose (median reduction 0.1% and 1.0%, respectively, p<0.001) and in the minimum dose to 0.1 cm(3) of their volumes (median reduction 0.5 and 1.5 Gy, p<0.001). Of the 46 patients, three patients' prostates and eight patients' SVs did not maintain dose coverage above 70 Gy. Rectal filling correlated with decreased percentage-volume of SV receiving 75.6, 70, and 60 Gy (p<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The 3-mm intrafractional margin was adequate for prostate dose coverage. However, a significant subset of patients lost SV dose coverage. The rectal volume change significantly affected SV dose coverage. For advanced-stage prostate cancers, we recommend to use larger margins or improve organ immobilization (such as with a rectal balloon) to ensure SV coverage.

Assessment of Collimator Jaw Optimization in Reducing Normal Tissue Irradiation with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

Purpose: To evaluate normal tissue dose reduction in step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) on the Varian 2100 platform by tracking the multileaf collimator (MLC) apertures with the accelerator jaws. Methods: Clinical radiation treatment plans for 10 thoracic, 3 pediatric and 3 head and neck patients were converted to plans with the jaws tracking each segment’s MLC apertures. Each segment was then renormalized to account for the change in collimator scatter to obtain target coverage within 1% of that in the original plan. The new plans were compared to the original plans in a commercial radiation treatment planning system (TPS). Reduction in normal tissue dose was evaluated in the new plan by using the parameters V5, V10, and V20 in the cumulative dose-volume histogram for the following structures: total lung minus GTV (gross target volume), heart, esophagus, spinal cord, liver, parotids, and brainstem. In order to validate the accuracy of our beam model, MLC transmission measurements were made and compared to those predicted by the TPS. Results: The greatest change between the original plan and new plan occurred at lower dose levels. The reduction in V20 was never more than 6.3% and was typically less than 1% for all patients. The reduction in V5 was 16.7% maximum and was typically less than 3% for all patients. The variation in normal tissue dose reduction was not predictable, and we found no clear parameters that indicated which patients would benefit most from jaw tracking. Our TPS model of MLC transmission agreed with measurements with absolute transmission differences of less than 0.1 % and thus uncertainties in the model did not contribute significantly to the uncertainty in the dose determination. Conclusion: The amount of dose reduction achieved by collimating the jaws around each MLC aperture in step-and-shoot IMRT does not appear to be clinically significant.

Improving Cervical Cancer Nodal Boost Radiation Therapy by Quantifying Uncertainties and Exploring Advanced Radiation Therapy Modalities

Radiation therapy for patients with intact cervical cancer is frequently delivered using primary external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) followed by two fractions of intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT). Although the tumor is the primary radiation target, controlling microscopic disease in the lymph nodes is just as critical to patient treatment outcome. In patients where gross lymphadenopathy is discovered, an extra EBRT boost course is delivered between the two ICBT fractions. Since the nodal boost is an addendum to primary EBRT and ICBT, the prescription and delivery must be performed considering previously delivered dose. This project aims to address the major issues of this complex process for the purpose of improving treatment accuracy while increasing dose sparing to the surrounding normal tissues. Because external beam boosts to involved lymph nodes are given prior to the completion of ICBT, assumptions must be made about dose to positive lymph nodes from future implants. The first aim of this project was to quantify differences in nodal dose contribution between independent ICBT fractions. We retrospectively evaluated differences in the ICBT dose contribution to positive pelvic nodes for ten patients who had previously received external beam nodal boost. Our results indicate that the mean dose to the pelvic nodes differed by up to 1.9 Gy between independent ICBT fractions. The second aim is to develop and validate a volumetric method for summing dose of the normal tissues during prescription of nodal boost. The traditional method of dose summation uses the maximum point dose from each modality, which often only represents the worst case scenario. However, the worst case is often an exaggeration when highly conformal therapy methods such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) are used. We used deformable image registration algorithms to volumetrically sum dose for the bladder and rectum and created a voxel-by-voxel validation method. The mean error in deformable image registration results of all voxels within the bladder and rectum were 5 and 6 mm, respectively. Finally, the third aim explored the potential use of proton therapy to reduce normal tissue dose. A major physical advantage of protons over photons is that protons stop after delivering dose in the tumor. Although theoretically superior to photons, proton beams are more sensitive to uncertainties caused by interfractional anatomical variations, and must be accounted for during treatment planning to ensure complete target coverage. We have demonstrated a systematic approach to determine population-based anatomical margin requirements for proton therapy. The observed optimal treatment angles for common iliac nodes were 90° (left lateral) and 180° (posterior-anterior [PA]) with additional 0.8 cm and 0.9 cm margins, respectively. For external iliac nodes, lateral and PA beams required additional 0.4 cm and 0.9 cm margins, respectively. Through this project, we have provided radiation oncologists with additional information about potential differences in nodal dose between independent ICBT insertions and volumetric total dose distribution in the bladder and rectum. We have also determined the margins needed for safe delivery of proton therapy when delivering nodal boosts to patients with cervical cancer.

Electron intensity modulation for mixed-beam radiation therapy with an x-ray multi-leaf collimator

The current standard treatment for head and neck cancer at our institution uses intensity-modulated x-ray therapy (IMRT), which improves target coverage and sparing of critical structures by delivering complex fluence patterns from a variety of beam directions to conform dose distributions to the shape of the target volume. The standard treatment for breast patients is field-in-field forward-planned IMRT, with initial tangential fields and additional reduced-weight tangents with blocking to minimize hot spots. For these treatment sites, the addition of electrons has the potential of improving target coverage and sparing of critical structures due to rapid dose falloff with depth and reduced exit dose. In this work, the use of mixed-beam therapy (MBT), i.e., combined intensity-modulated electron and x-ray beams using the x-ray multi-leaf collimator (MLC), was explored. The hypothesis of this study was that addition of intensity-modulated electron beams to existing clinical IMRT plans would produce MBT plans that were superior to the original IMRT plans for at least 50% of selected head and neck and 50% of breast cases. Dose calculations for electron beams collimated by the MLC were performed with Monte Carlo methods. An automation system was created to facilitate communication between the dose calculation engine and the treatment planning system. Energy and intensity modulation of the electron beams was accomplished by dividing the electron beams into 2x2-cm2 beamlets, which were then beam-weight optimized along with intensity-modulated x-ray beams. Treatment plans were optimized to obtain equivalent target dose coverage, and then compared with the original treatment plans. MBT treatment plans were evaluated by participating physicians with respect to target coverage, normal structure dose, and overall plan quality in comparison with original clinical plans. The physician evaluations did not support the hypothesis for either site, with MBT selected as superior in 1 out of the 15 head and neck cases (p=1) and 6 out of 18 breast cases (p=0.95). While MBT was not shown to be superior to IMRT, reductions were observed in doses to critical structures distal to the target along the electron beam direction and to non-target tissues, at the expense of target coverage and dose homogeneity. ^

Thoracic target volume delineation using various maximum-intensity projection computed tomography image sets for stereotactic body radiation therapy

The motion of lung tumors during respiration makes the accurate delivery of radiation therapy to the thorax difficult because it increases the uncertainty of target position. The adoption of four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) has allowed us to determine how a tumor moves with respiration for each individual patient. Using information acquired during a 4D-CT scan, we can define the target, visualize motion, and calculate dose during the planning phase of the radiotherapy process. One image data set that can be created from the 4D-CT acquisition is the maximum-intensity projection (MIP). The MIP can be used as a starting point to define the volume that encompasses the motion envelope of the moving gross target volume (GTV). Because of the close relationship that exists between the MIP and the final target volume, we investigated four MIP data sets created with different methodologies (3 using various 4D-CT sorting implementations, and one using all available cine CT images) to compare target delineation. It has been observed that changing the 4D-CT sorting method will lead to the selection of a different collection of images; however, the clinical implications of changing the constituent images on the resultant MIP data set are not clear. There has not been a comprehensive study that compares target delineation based on different 4D-CT sorting methodologies in a patient population. We selected a collection of patients who had previously undergone thoracic 4D-CT scans at our institution, and who had lung tumors that moved at least 1 cm. We then generated the four MIP data sets and automatically contoured the target volumes. In doing so, we identified cases in which the MIP generated from a 4D-CT sorting process under-represented the motion envelope of the target volume by more than 10% than when measured on the MIP generated from all of the cine CT images. The 4D-CT methods suffered from duplicate image selection and might not choose maximum extent images. Based on our results, we suggest utilization of a MIP generated from the full cine CT data set to ensure a representative inclusive tumor extent, and to avoid geometric miss.

The Role of Cell Sterilization in Population Based Studies of Radiogenic Second Cancers Following Radiation Therapy

Advances in radiotherapy have generated increased interest in comparative studies of treatment techniques and their effectiveness. In this respect, pediatric patients are of specific interest because of their sensitivity to radiation induced second cancers. However, due to the rarity of childhood cancers and the long latency of second cancers, large sample sizes are unavailable for the epidemiological study of contemporary radiotherapy treatments. Additionally, when specific treatments are considered, such as proton therapy, sample sizes are further reduced due to the rareness of such treatments. We propose a method to improve statistical power in micro clinical trials. Specifically, we use a more biologically relevant quantity, cancer equivalent dose (DCE), to estimate risk instead of mean absorbed dose (DMA). Our objective was to demonstrate that when DCE is used fewer subjects are needed for clinical trials. Thus, we compared the impact of DCE vs. DMA on sample size in a virtual clinical trial that estimated risk for second cancer (SC) in the thyroid following craniospinal irradiation (CSI) of pediatric patients using protons vs. photons. Dose reconstruction, risk models, and statistical analysis were used to evaluate SC risk from therapeutic and stray radiation from CSI for 18 patients. Absorbed dose was calculated in two ways: with (1) traditional DMA and (2) with DCE. DCE and DMA values were used to estimate relative risk of SC incidence (RRCE and RRMA, respectively) after proton vs. photon CSI. Ratios of RR for proton vs. photon CSI (RRRCE and RRRMA) were then used in comparative estimations of sample size to determine the minimal number of patients needed to maintain 80% statistical power when using DCE vs. DMA. For all patients, we found that protons substantially reduced the risk of developing a second thyroid cancer when compared to photon therapy. Mean RRR values were 0.052±0.014 and 0.087±0.021 for RRRMA and RRRCE, respectively. However, we did not find that use of DCE reduced the number of patents needed for acceptable statistical power (i.e, 80%). In fact, when considerations were made for RRR values that met equipoise requirements and the need for descriptive statistics, the minimum number of patients needed for a micro-clinical trial increased from 17 using DMA to 37 using DCE. Subsequent analyses revealed that for our sample, the most influential factor in determining variations in sample size was the experimental standard deviation of estimates for RRR across the patient sample. Additionally, because the relative uncertainty in dose from proton CSI was so much larger (on the order of 2000 times larger) than the other uncertainty terms, it dominated the uncertainty in RRR. Thus, we found that use of corrections for cell sterilization, in the form of DCE, may be an important and underappreciated consideration in the design of clinical trials and radio-epidemiological studies. In addition, the accurate application of cell sterilization to thyroid dose was sensitive to variations in absorbed dose, especially for proton CSI, which may stem from errors in patient positioning, range calculation, and other aspects of treatment planning and delivery.

Tumors in the contralateral breast following radiation therapy for breast cancer

The proportional distribution of independent malignant tumors in the contralateral breast following treatment for breast cancer was investigated to assess the influence of scattered radiation as a cause of these tumors. In a population of 172 patients the proportion of contralateral tumors in each quadrant and the center (the nipple-areolar complex) was compared with the expected, or natural, distribution found in the general population, in the absence of radiation. The observed/expected ratio for contralateral tumors was 1.43 for the upper-inner quadrant; 0.97, lower-inner quadrant; 1.51, center; 0.76, upper-outer quadrant; and 0.64, lower-outer quadrant. In each quadrant, except the lower-inner, the observed/expected ratio differed from 1.00 with statistical significance at the 5% level (one-tail). The same analysis, stratified by age and menopausal status, showed a similar shift of tumors, with more than expected in the inner quadrants and center and less than expected in the outer quadrants, although the results did not show statistical significance at the 5% level for all strata. For each patient the mean absorbed radiation dose for each quadrant and center of the breast was estimated, based on measurements in a tissue-equivalent phantom. Among patients the doses ranged from 0.5 to 8 Gy; within individuals, doses to the inner quadrants typically were a factor of three times higher than doses to the outer quadrants. The results suggest that radiation may be a risk factor for contralateral breast tumors and warrants further investigation. ^

Primary lung cancer after breast cancer: The role of radiation therapy and cigarette smoking

The magnitude of the interaction between cigarette smoking, radiation therapy, and primary lung cancer after breast cancer remains unresolved. This case control study further examines the main and joint effects of cigarette smoking and radiation therapy (XRT) among breast cancer patients who subsequently developed primary lung cancer, at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) in Houston, Texas. Cases (n = 280) were women diagnosed with primary lung cancer between 1955 and 1970, between 30–89 years of age, who had a prior history of breast cancer, and were U.S. residents. Controls (n = 300) were randomly selected from 37,000 breast cancer patients at MDACC and frequency matched to cases on age at diagnosis (in 5-year strata), ethnicity, year of breast cancer diagnosis (in 5-year strata), and had survived at least as long as the time interval for lung cancer diagnosis in the cases. Stratified analysis and unconditional logistic regression modeling were used to calculate the main and joint effects of cigarette smoking and radiation treatment on lung cancer risk. Medical record review yielded smoking information on 93% of cases and 84% of controls, and among cases 45% received XRT versus 44% of controls. Smoking increased the odds of lung cancer in women who did not receive XRT (OR = 6.0, 95%CI, 3.5–10.1) whereas XRT was not associated with increased odds (OR = 0.5, 95%CI, 0.2–1.1) in women who did not smoke. Overall the odds ratio for both XRT and smoking together compared with neither exposure was 9.00 (9 5% CI, 5.1–15.9). Similarly, when stratifying on laterality of the lung cancer in relation to the breast cancer, and when the time interval between breast and lung cancers was >10 years, there was an increased odds for both smoking and XRT together for lung cancers on the same side as the breast cancer (ipsilateral) (OR = 11.5, 95% CI, 4.9–27.8) and lung cancers on the opposite side of the breast cancer (contralateral) (OR= 9.6, 95% CI, 2.9–0.9). After 20 years the odds for the ipsilateral lung were even more pronounced (OR = 19.2, 95% CI, 4.2–88.4) compared to the contralateral lung (OR = 2.6, 95% CI, 0.2–2.1). In conclusion, smoking was a significant independent risk factor for lung cancer after breast cancer. Moreover, a greater than multiplicative effect was observed with smoking and XRT combined being especially evident after 10 years for both the ipsilateral and contralateral lung and after 20 years for the ipsilateral lung. ^

Reduction of setup uncertainties and tumor motion in the radiation therapy of lung tumors

Because the goal of radiation therapy is to deliver a lethal dose to the tumor, accurate information on the location of the tumor needs to be known. Margins are placed around the tumor to account for variations in the daily position of the tumor. If tumor motion and patient setup uncertainties can be reduced, margins that account for such uncertainties in tumor location in can be reduced allowing dose escalation, which in turn could potentially improve survival rates. ^ In the first part of this study, we monitor the location of fiducials implanted in the periphery of lung tumors to determine the extent of non-gated and gated fiducial motion, and to quantify patient setup uncertainties. In the second part we determine where the tumor is when different methods of image-guided patient setup and respiratory gating are employed. In the final part we develop, validate, and implement a technique in which patient setup uncertainties are reduced by aligning patients based upon fiducial locations in projection images. ^ Results from the first part indicate that respiratory gating reduces fiducial motion relative to motion during normal respiration and setup uncertainties when the patients were aligned each day using externally placed skin marks are large. The results from the second part indicate that current margins that account for setup uncertainty and tumor motion result in less than 2% of the tumor outside of the planning target volume (PTV) when the patient is aligned using skin marks. In addition, we found that if respiratory gating is going to be used, it is most effective if used in conjunction with image-guided patient setup. From the third part, we successfully developed, validated, and implemented on a patient a technique for aligning a moving target prior to treatment to reduce the uncertainties in tumor location. ^ In conclusion, setup uncertainties and tumor motion are a significant problem when treating tumors located within the thoracic region. Image-guided patient setup in conjunction with treatment delivery using respiratory gating reduces these uncertainties in tumor locations. In doing so, margins around the tumor used to generate the PTV can be reduced, which may allow for dose escalation to the tumor. ^

Design and Optimization of Four-dimensional Cone-beam Computed Tomography in Image-guided Radiation Therapy

The influence of respiratory motion on patient anatomy poses a challenge to accurate radiation therapy, especially in lung cancer treatment. Modern radiation therapy planning uses models of tumor respiratory motion to account for target motion in targeting. The tumor motion model can be verified on a per-treatment session basis with four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (4D-CBCT), which acquires an image set of the dynamic target throughout the respiratory cycle during the therapy session. 4D-CBCT is undersampled if the scan time is too short. However, short scan time is desirable in clinical practice to reduce patient setup time. This dissertation presents the design and optimization of 4D-CBCT to reduce the impact of undersampling artifacts with short scan times. This work measures the impact of undersampling artifacts on the accuracy of target motion measurement under different sampling conditions and for various object sizes and motions. The results provide a minimum scan time such that the target tracking error is less than a specified tolerance. This work also presents new image reconstruction algorithms for reducing undersampling artifacts in undersampled datasets by taking advantage of the assumption that the relevant motion of interest is contained within a volume-of-interest (VOI). It is shown that the VOI-based reconstruction provides more accurate image intensity than standard reconstruction. The VOI-based reconstruction produced 43% fewer least-squares error inside the VOI and 84% fewer error throughout the image in a study designed to simulate target motion. The VOI-based reconstruction approach can reduce acquisition time and improve image quality in 4D-CBCT.

AN EVALUATION OF THE CONSISTENCY OF IMRT PATIENT-SPECIFIC QA TECHNIQUES

To ensure the integrity of an intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment, each plan must be validated through a measurement-based quality assurance (QA) procedure, known as patient specific IMRT QA. Many methods of measurement and analysis have evolved for this QA. There is not a standard among clinical institutions, and many devices and action levels are used. Since the acceptance criteria determines if the dosimetric tools’ output passes the patient plan, it is important to see how these parameters influence the performance of the QA device. While analyzing the results of IMRT QA, it is important to understand the variability in the measurements. Due to the different form factors of the many QA methods, this reproducibility can be device dependent. These questions of patient-specific IMRT QA reproducibility and performance were investigated across five dosimeter systems: a helical diode array, radiographic film, ion chamber, diode array (AP field-by-field, AP composite, and rotational composite), and an in-house designed multiple ion chamber phantom. The reproducibility was gauged for each device by comparing the coefficients of variation (CV) across six patient plans. The performance of each device was determined by comparing each one’s ability to accurately label a plan as acceptable or unacceptable compared to a gold standard. All methods demonstrated a CV of less than 4%. Film proved to have the highest variability in QA measurement, likely due to the high level of user involvement in the readout and analysis. This is further shown by how the setup contributed more variation than the readout and analysis for all of the methods, except film. When evaluated for ability to correctly label acceptable and unacceptable plans, two distinct performance groups emerged with the helical diode array, AP composite diode array, film, and ion chamber in the better group; and the rotational composite and AP field-by-field diode array in the poorer group. Additionally, optimal threshold cutoffs were determined for each of the dosimetry systems. These findings, combined with practical considerations for factors such as labor and cost, can aid a clinic in its choice of an effective and safe patient-specific IMRT QA implementation.

Comparison of Tumor Shrinkage and Cumulative Dose Distribution for Lung Cancers

Background: The physical characteristic of protons is that they deliver most of their radiation dose to the target volume and deliver no dose to the normal tissue distal to the tumor. Previously, numerous studies have shown unique advantages of proton therapy over intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in conforming dose to the tumor and sparing dose to the surrounding normal tissues and the critical structures in many clinical sites. However, proton therapy is known to be more sensitive to treatment uncertainties such as inter- and intra-fractional variations in patient anatomy. To date, no study has clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of proton therapy compared with the conventional IMRT under the consideration of both respiratory motion and tumor shrinkage in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Purpose: This thesis investigated two questions for establishing a clinically relevant comparison of the two different modalities (IMRT and proton therapy). The first question was whether or not there are any differences in tumor shrinkage between patients randomized to IMRT versus passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT). Tumor shrinkage is considered a standard measure of radiation therapy response that has been widely used to gauge a short-term progression of radiation therapy. The second question was whether or not there are any differences between the planned dose and 5D dose under the influence of inter- and intra-fractional variations in the patient anatomy for both modalities. Methods: A total of 45 patients (25 IMRT patients and 20 PSPT patients) were used to quantify the tumor shrinkage in terms of the change of the primary gross tumor volume (GTVp). All patients were randomized to receive either IMRT or PSPT for NSCLC. Treatment planning goals were identical for both groups. All patients received 5 to 8 weekly repeated 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scans during the course of radiation treatments. The original GTVp contours were propagated to T50 of weekly 4DCT images using deformable image registration and their absolute volumes were measured. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the distribution of tumor shrinkage between the two population groups. In order to investigate the difference between the planned dose and the 5D dose with consideration of both breathing motion and anatomical change, we re-calculated new dose distributions at every phase of the breathing cycle for all available weekly 4DCT data sets which resulted 50 to 80 individual dose calculations for each of the 7 patients presented in this thesis. The newly calculated dose distributions were then deformed and accumulated to T50 of the planning 4DCT for comparison with the planned dose distribution. Results: At the end of the treatment, both IMRT and PSPT groups showed mean tumor volume reductions of 23.6% ( 19.2%) and 20.9% ( 17.0 %) respectively. Moreover, the mean difference in tumor shrinkage between two groups is 3% along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval, [-8%, 14%]. The rate of tumor shrinkage was highly correlated with the initial tumor volume size. For the planning dose and 5D dose comparison study, all 7 patients showed a mean difference of 1 % in terms of target coverage for both IMRT and PSPT treatment plans. Conclusions: The results of the tumor shrinkage investigation showed no statistically significant difference in tumor shrinkage between the IMRT and PSPT patients, and the tumor shrinkage between the two modalities is similar based on the 95% confidence interval. From the pilot study of comparing the planned dose with the 5D dose, we found the difference to be only 1%. Overall impression of the two modalities in terms of treatment response as measured by the tumor shrinkage and 5D dose under the influence of anatomical change that were designed under the same protocol (i.e. randomized trial) showed similar result.