Background and Objectives: This study aimed to compare target volumes and organ-at-risk (OAR) doses using five different volume definitions in radiotherapy (RT) planning of patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Materials and Methods: Rigid image fusion was performed using simulation computed tomography and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans of 20 patients with GBM. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated according to three two-phase protocols—American Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC), North Central Cancer Treatment Group/Alliance (NCCTG/Alliance), and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/NRG (RTOG/NRG)—and two single-phase protocols—European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology–European Association of Neuro-Oncology (ESTRO/EANO)—each delivering a total dose of 60 Gy. OARs and dose constraints were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed using the paired sample t-test. Results: The ESTRO/EANO volume had the smallest median PTV overall (p < 0.001). The lowest brain-PTV Dmean in the initial phase was observed in the ABTC group, followed closely by ESTRO/EANO (p < 0.001). Among boost volumes, the ABTC volume was the smallest, and the median brain-PTV Dmean was lowest in the ESTRO/EANO volume. ESTRO/EANO provided the lowest doses for contralateral and ipsilateral cochlea Dmean, brainstem D1cc, and contralateral lens Dmax. Notably, both EORTC and ESTRO/EANO plans maintained OAR doses within acceptable constraints, with ESTRO/EANO achieving the most consistently minimised exposure. Conclusions: Reduced irradiated brain volume, acceptable OAR preservation and practical applicability, the use of ESTRO-EANO and EORTC target volumes in radiotherapy of glioblastoma multiforme may provide dosimetric advantages that require further validation in clinical outcome studies.

Background and Objectives: The bulboclitoral complex (BCC) is an essential organ for female sexual health. However, it is not defined as an organ at risk in any guideline defining target volumes in radiotherapy of gynecological cancers, and there is no information about dose constraint. Materials and Methods: Simulation computed tomography scans of 20 patients diagnosed with locally advanced cervical cancer were used retrospectively. The volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment plan with a total dose of 45 Gy in 25 fractions was created using the planning target volume (PTV)-standard, which was created without considering the BCC, and the PTV-BCC spared, which were contoured and included in the optimization. Bulboclitoral complex doses in PTV-standard and PTV-BCC spared plans were compared using the paired simple t test. Results: Median BCC volume was 17.6 cm³ (11.20–25.50). Bulboclitoral complex maximum dose (Dmax) was median 49.07 Gy (48.49–50.25) and 28.81 Gy (18.14–44.61) in the PTV-standard and PTV-BCC spared plans, respectively, and the BCC Dmax was statistically significantly lower in the PTV-BCC spared plan (p < 0.001). When comparing BCC percentage of volume receiving 45 Gy (V45), the median values for PTV-standard and PTV-BCC spared plans were 37.5% (13.3–82.6) and 0%, respectively (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: The bulboclitoral complex can be dosimetrically protected from radiation by contouring and optimizing it as an organ at risk in the radiotherapy plan. The clinical effects of protecting the BCC from radiation as an organ at risk on sexual health need to be investigated.