In this study, the patient with localized prostate cancer who had previously been treated at Ajou University Hospital was randomly selected since March, 2009. we performed IMRT and 2RA plans and the same dose objectives were used for CTVs, PTVs, rectum, bladder, and femoral head of the respective plans. Arc optimizations and dose calculations were performed using Eclipse versions 8.6. In this paper, we evaluated the performance of IMRT and RA plans to investigate the clinical effect of RA for prostate cancer case. In our comparison of treatment techniques, RA was found to be superior to IMRT being better dose conformity of target volume. As for the rectum and bladder, RA was better than IMRT at decreasing the volume irradiated. RA has the ability to avoid critical organs selectively through applied same dose constraints while maximally treating the target dose. Therefore, this result suggests that there should be less rectal toxicity with RA compared with IMRT, with no compromise in tumor margin. These findings, which show more favorable rectal, bladder, and femoral head DVHs with RA, imply that should not result in excess risk of toxicity when this technique is used. Many experiences with RA have shown not only dosimetric advantage, but also improved clinical toxicity when comparing with IMRT. The main drawbacks of RA are the more complex and time-consuming treatment planning process and the need for more exact physics quality assurance (QA).

KeywordsRapidArc, IMRT, Prostate cancer, Double arcs planning, Quality assurance