COMPARISON OF TREATMENT PLANS FOR HEAD AND NECK CANCER PATIENTS BY THE METHOD OF RADIOBIOLOGICAL

Purpose/Objective: Radiation is one of the most common cancer treatments for cancers at different stages. The challenge of radiotherapy and all other cancer treatments is finding the right balance between tumor removal and minimizing the impact on surrounding healthy tissue. The application of a biological radiation model to evaluate radiation treatment plans is considered as the optimal method to identify the above-mentioned problems. Biological radiation models are used to convert absorbed dose into relevant clinical dose data such as probability of tumor control, and probability of complications of healthy tissue surrounding the tumor. The purpose of this work is to use biological radiation indicators to compare and evaluate two treatment plans of 3D-CRT and IMRT for 23 patients with head and neck cancer. Methods and Materials: We proceed to use biological radiation models to compare plans 3D-CRT and IMRT of patients with head and neck cancer. We conducted a comparison of the differences between the two plans. If the result is less than 5%, it is acceptable according to IAEA standards. Results: IMRT is better suited for protecting healthy tissue and has a higher probability of tumor control. The dose delivered to the tumor from the IMRT plan is more optimal than 3D-CRT. Doses to organs surrounding the tumor in the IMRT plan are always safer than that of 3D-CRT. The radiometric biological method allows a physical engineer to predict the probability of tumor control and the complications of healthy organs surrounding the tumor. From the radiobiological approach, we can clearly see that the IMRT plan is more suitable for evaluating of complication rates and tumor control probabilities for patients than the 3D-CRT plan.