Picking pitch, modulation factor and field width
Three numbers decide most of a helical plan. There is a published Pareto front and a rule for pitch — use them instead of the defaults.
Built in·updated 2026-08-03
A 450-plan study across five head-and-neck patients mapped the trade-off directly. For a 5 cm field width the Pareto-optimal region is pitch 0.23–0.45 with modulation factor above 2.0, which corresponded to treatment times from 4 min 05 s down to 2 min 45 s.
Pitch is not free to choose. The standard rule is pitch = 0.86 / n for integer n, which suppresses the thread effect — the helical ripple you get when the couch advance and the beam width beat against each other. That is why the common vendor setting is 0.430 with MF ≈ 3.0: it is 0.86/2.
Modulation factor behaves differently either side of pitch 0.20.
- At pitch ≤ 0.20 the gantry is already at maximum speed, so MF does not change treatment time at all. Lowering it only costs you plan quality, for nothing.
- At pitch ≥ 0.25 lowering MF shortens the treatment and degrades the plan, until maximum gantry speed is reached.
The minimum useful MF for a given pitch fits MF = 20·pitch² − 21·pitch + 6.8 over pitch 0.25–0.50.
Dynamic jaws are a time feature, not a quality feature. TomoEdge cut treatment time by nearly half against a 2.5 cm field width, but produced no improvement in plan quality over that same 2.5 cm plan, because the jaws only move at the edges of the target.
Where the numbers come from
- Evaluation of the optimal combinations of modulation factor and pitch for helical TomoTherapy plans made with TomoEdge using Pareto optimal fronts
Radiat Oncol · 2015
450 plans; Pareto-optimal pitch 0.23–0.45 with MF > 2.0 at FW 5 cm; MF = 20·pitch² − 21·pitch + 6.8
- Interfacility variation in treatment planning parameters in tomotherapy: field width, pitch, and modulation factor
J Radiat Res · 2018
Wide variation between centres in the three parameters for the same indications