I don't know why Glenn feels it necessary to personally attack my posts but I have been in the radiological medical device industry for almost 30 years. Historically speaking 3D conformal (3DCRT) preceeded IMRT and like conventional XRT, is still useful for certain conditions. The efficacy claims made for it and the indications for use are essentially identical to IMRT, by the way. I know it was overlooked but my opening line was "Not all are candidates for IMRT...". I take great care to insure that my technical posts about therapuetic radiation are as factually accurate as possible for the purpose of educating people that there are CHOICES and alternatives that can be made and they can have very different outcomes.

Actually the first successful treatment of a head & neck cancer with radiation (radioactive source) was in 1899 at the Curie institute in Paris.

I hate to say this but at many institutions (particularly the more regional hospitals), the treatment options offered and promoted will be based strictly on the technology available there (this is a profit making industry after all). It wouldn't be in their financial best interest to send you somewhere else. The comprehensive cancer centers (CCC) listed in the NCI or NCCN lists typically have ALL of the available treatment modalities with the exception of PBT (Proton Beam Therapy) which is only available at 2 sites in the US. MD Anderson is investing 200 million dollars to build a new facility for it currently. This is why we consistently recommend a comprehensive cancer center on the NCI or NCCN list.

I found a fairly non technical comparison of IMRT and 3DCRT.

"What is IMRT?

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is an advanced form of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). It uses sophisticated software and hardware to vary the shape and intensity of radiation delivered to different parts of the treatment area. It is one of the most precise forms of external beam radiation therapy available.

Like conventional 3DCRT, IMRT links CT scans to treatment planning software that allows the cancerous area to be visualized in three dimensions. However, regular 3DCRT and IMRT differ in how the pattern and volume of radiation delivered to the tumor is determined. In conventional 3DCRT, clinicians input delivery patterns into the computer. In IMRT, the physician designates specific doses of radiation (constraints) that the tumor and normal surrounding tissues should receive. The physics team then uses a sophisticated computer program to develop an individualized plan to meet the constraints. This process is termed