Literature DB >> 10719700

The dosimetric consequences of inter-fractional patient movement on conventional and intensity-modulated breast radiotherapy treatments.

C L Hector1, S Webb, P M Evans.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: A method has been developed to enable a comparison to be made between the effects of movement on conventional tangential breast treatments and intensity-modulated treatments delivered using compensators.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The effects of set-up error and organ motion were studied for a set of six patients. Images were taken of these patients over the course of their treatment and conventional wedged and compensated treatment plans were designed for each. Dose-volume statistics were used to evaluate each of the treatment plans by examining the volume outside the dose range 95-105%. To assess the effects of movement alone, the volume change from day 1 was also calculated.
RESULTS: Thirty-six estimated CT-sets were available for evaluation. Measurements of breast volume showed the volume to increase to a peak between fraction 4 and 8 and then decrease back below the initial volume. The standard treatment was found to yield 29/36 plans (81%) with greater than 5% volume outside the dose range 95-105%. For the compensated plans this dropped to 11/36 plans (31%). The analysis of the volume changes from day 1 showed that for both standard and compensated treatments 7/30 plans (23%) had an increase in volume outside the dose range 95-105% of greater than 5% of the total planning target volume.
CONCLUSIONS: The compensated treatment is more susceptible to patient movement. However, the actual volume of tissue outside 95-105% dose is less when compared to standard treatment implying the compensated treatment is still superior.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10719700     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(99)00167-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  8 in total

1.  A simulation technique for computation of the dosimetric effects of setup, organ motion and delineation uncertainties in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Bongile Mzenda; Mir Hosseini-Ashrafi; Antony Palmer; Honghai Liu; David J Brown
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Magnetic resonance imaging for adaptive cobalt tomotherapy: A proposal.

Authors:  Tomas Kron; David Eyles; L John Schreiner; Jerry Battista
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2006-10

3.  Optimization of Adjuvant Radiation in Breast Conservation Therapy: Can We Minimize without Compromise?

Authors:  Sophia M Edwards-Bennett; Candace R Correa; Eleanor E Harris
Journal:  Int J Breast Cancer       Date:  2011-10-05

4.  Optimization of treatment planning workflow and tumor coverage during daily adaptive magnetic resonance image guided radiation therapy (MR-IGRT) of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Sven Olberg; Olga Green; Bin Cai; Deshan Yang; Vivian Rodriguez; Hao Zhang; Jin Sung Kim; Parag J Parikh; Sasa Mutic; Justin C Park
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Dosimetric consequences of image guidance techniques on robust optimized intensity-modulated proton therapy for treatment of breast Cancer.

Authors:  Xiaoying Liang; Raymond B Mailhot Vega; Zuofeng Li; Dandan Zheng; Nancy Mendenhall; Julie A Bradley
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  On-line dose-guidance to account for inter-fractional motion during proton therapy.

Authors:  Kia Busch; Ludvig P Muren; Sara Thörnqvist; Andreas G Andersen; Jesper Pedersen; Lei Dong; Jørgen B B Petersen
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-12-19

7.  Clinical applicability of deep learning-based respiratory signal prediction models for four-dimensional radiation therapy.

Authors:  Sangwoon Jeong; Wonjoong Cheon; Sungkoo Cho; Youngyih Han
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-18       Impact factor: 3.752

8.  Dosimetric effects of swelling or shrinking tissue during helical tomotherapy breast irradiation. A phantom study.

Authors:  Rudolf Klepper; Sebastian Höfel; Ulrike Botha; Peter Köhler; Felix Zwicker
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.