PURPOSE: Evidence is growing that incorrect field-shaping is a major cause of treatment failure in whole-brain irradiation (WBI). To evaluate the potential benefits of CT simulation in WBI we compared field-shaping based on 3D CT simulation to conventional 2D simulation. METHODS: CT head scans were obtained from 20 patients. Conventional 2D planning was imitated by drawing the block contours on digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) by four radiotherapists. Critical parts of the target and the eye lenses were subsequently marked and planning was repeated using 3D information ("3D planning"). The results of both methods were compared by evaluation of the minimal distance from the field edge according to each site. RESULTS: In conventional planning using DRR, major geographic mismatches (< -3 mm) occurred in the subfrontal region and both eye lenses with 1% each location. Minor mismatches (-3 to 0 mm) predominantly occurred in the contralateral lens (21%), ipsilateral lens (10%), and subfrontal region (9%). Close margins (0-5 mm) were most frequently noted at the contralateral lens (49%), ipsilateral lens (35 %), and the subfrontal region (28%). When 3D planning was used, mismatches were not found. However, close margins were inevitable at the ipsilateral lens (5%), subfrontal region (30%), and contralateral lens (70%). CONCLUSIONS: CT simulation in WBI is significantly superior to conventional simulation with respect to complete coverage of the target volume and protection of the eye lenses. The narrow passage between the ocular lenses and lamina cribrosa represents a serious limitation. These patients are safely identified with CT simulation and can be referred for modified irradiation techniques.
PURPOSE: Evidence is growing that incorrect field-shaping is a major cause of treatment failure in whole-brain irradiation (WBI). To evaluate the potential benefits of CT simulation in WBI we compared field-shaping based on 3D CT simulation to conventional 2D simulation. METHODS: CT head scans were obtained from 20 patients. Conventional 2D planning was imitated by drawing the block contours on digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) by four radiotherapists. Critical parts of the target and the eye lenses were subsequently marked and planning was repeated using 3D information ("3D planning"). The results of both methods were compared by evaluation of the minimal distance from the field edge according to each site. RESULTS: In conventional planning using DRR, major geographic mismatches (< -3 mm) occurred in the subfrontal region and both eye lenses with 1% each location. Minor mismatches (-3 to 0 mm) predominantly occurred in the contralateral lens (21%), ipsilateral lens (10%), and subfrontal region (9%). Close margins (0-5 mm) were most frequently noted at the contralateral lens (49%), ipsilateral lens (35 %), and the subfrontal region (28%). When 3D planning was used, mismatches were not found. However, close margins were inevitable at the ipsilateral lens (5%), subfrontal region (30%), and contralateral lens (70%). CONCLUSIONS: CT simulation in WBI is significantly superior to conventional simulation with respect to complete coverage of the target volume and protection of the eye lenses. The narrow passage between the ocular lenses and lamina cribrosa represents a serious limitation. These patients are safely identified with CT simulation and can be referred for modified irradiation techniques.
Authors: B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; Kai-Ping Liao; Sharon H Giordano; Linda S Elting; Thomas A Buchholz; Ya-Chen Tina Shih Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2014-04-22 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Kathy Pope; David Fitzpatrick; Andrew Potter; Michael Holwell; Lisa Wang; Michelle Lau; Wilfred Levin; Michael McLean; Laura Zurawel Balaura; Andrea Bezjak; Rebecca K S Wong Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-03-16 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Hosang Jin; Wen Hsi; Daniel Yeung; Zuofeng Li; Nancy P Mendenhall; Robert B Marcus Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 2.243