Literature DB >> 11098907

The width of margins in radiotherapy treatment plans.

A L McKenzie1, M van Herk, B Mijnheer.   

Abstract

Publication of ICRU Reports 50 and 62 has highlighted the need to devise protocols for the process of drawing the planning target volume (PTV) around the clinical target volume (CTV). The margin surrounding the CTV should be wide enough to account for all geometric errors so that no part of the CTV accumulates a dose less than, for instance, 95% of that prescribed. One approach to the problem has been to draw a margin around the CTV delineated at the treatment preparation stage which is sufficiently wide that the mean position of the CTV will be encompassed in a specific percentage of cases, for example 90%. This accounts for the systematic errors. A further margin is then drawn to account for random set-up and organ-motion uncertainties during treatment. The width of this second margin has previously been shown to be 1.64(sigma - sigmap). Here sigma, a vector quantity, is the standard deviation which results from convolving the penumbra spread function of standard deviation sigmap with the Gaussian distributions of the daily positional uncertainties of organ motion and set-up error. However, it is shown in this paper that the calculation should take into account the beam configuration of the treatment plan. In a typical coplanar multibeam plan, usually in the transverse plane, any given edge of the target volume is normally defined by a single beam or two parallel and opposed beams. However, because of the presence of the other beams, the effect of the blurring of the edge-defining beam(s) is reduced, which changes the value of the required margin to beta (sigma - sigmap) where, for example, beta can be as low as 1.04 in the transverse plane of a three-beam plan. The width of the required margins is calculated for up to six beams and presented in a table. It is shown that, while the table was derived using an idealized plan of equally weighted plane beams irradiating a spherical target, it is also valid for non-uniform beam weightings, wedged-beam plans, target volumes of general shape and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11098907     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/45/11/315

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  18 in total

1.  Evaluation of dosimetric margins in prostate IMRT treatment plans.

Authors:  J J Gordon; J V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  PET/CT-guided treatment planning for paediatric cancer patients: a simulation study of proton and conventional photon therapy.

Authors:  J S Kornerup; N P Brodin; T Björk-Eriksson; C Birk Christensen; A Kiil-Berthelsen; M C Aznar; C Hollensen; E Markova; P Munck Af Rosenschöld
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Correction of systematic set-up error in breast and head and neck irradiation through a no-action level (NAL) protocol.

Authors:  Eva M Lozano; Luis A Pérez; Javier Torres; Carmen Carrascosa; Miguel Sanz; Fermín Mendicote; Antonio Gil
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.405

4.  Quality of patient positioning during cerebral tomotherapy irradiation using different mask systems.

Authors:  C Leitzen; T Wilhelm-Buchstab; S Garbe; C Lütter; T Müdder; B Simon; H H Schild; H Schüller
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  Interobserver delineation variation in lung tumour stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Authors:  G F Persson; D E Nygaard; C Hollensen; P Munck af Rosenschöld; L S Mouritsen; A K Due; A K Berthelsen; J Nyman; E Markova; A P Roed; H Roed; S Korreman; L Specht
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  A strategy for the use of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) on linear accelerators and its impact on treatment margins for prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Olaf Nairz; Florian Merz; Heinz Deutschmann; Peter Kopp; Helmut Schöller; Franz Zehentmayr; Karl Wurstbauer; Gerhard Kametriser; Felix Sedlmayer
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 3.621

7.  On the determination of planning target margins due to motion for mice lung tumours using a four-dimensional MOBY phantom.

Authors:  Ana Vaniqui; Brent van der Heyden; Isabel P Almeida; Lotte Ejr Schyns; Stefan J van Hoof; Frank Verhaegen
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 8.  Target margins in radiotherapy of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Slav Yartsev; Glenn Bauman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Tumor delineation: The weakest link in the search for accuracy in radiotherapy.

Authors:  C F Njeh
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2008-10

10.  Optimizing image guidance frequency and implications on margins for gynecologic malignancies.

Authors:  Carmen Stromberger; Arne Gruen; Waldemar Wlodarczyk; Volker Budach; Christhardt Koehler; Simone Marnitz
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.