Literature DB >> 15972982

Dosimetric impact of image-guided 3D conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer.

B Schaly1, G S Bauman, W Song, J J Battista, J Van Dyk.   

Abstract

The goal of this work is to quantify the impact of image-guided conformal radiation therapy (CRT) on the dose distribution by correcting patient setup uncertainty and inter-fraction tumour motion. This was a retrospective analysis that used five randomly selected prostate cancer patients that underwent approximately 15 computed tomography (CT) scans during their radiation treatment course. The beam arrangement from the treatment plan was imported into each repeat CT study and the dose distribution was recalculated for the new beam setups. Various setup scenarios were then compared to assess the impact of image guidance on radiation treatment precision. These included (1) daily alignment to skin markers, thus representing a conventional beam setup without image guidance, (2) alignment to bony anatomy for correction of daily patient setup error, thus representing on-line portal image guidance, and (3) alignment to the 'CTV of the day' for correction of inter-fraction tumour motion, thus representing on-line CT or ultrasound image guidance. Treatment scenarios (1) and (3) were repeated with a reduced CTV to PTV margin, where the former represents a treatment using small margins without daily image guidance. Daily realignment of the treatment beams to the prostate showed an average increase in minimum tumour dose of 1.5 Gy, in all cases where tumour 'geographic miss' without image guidance was apparent. However, normal tissue sparing did not improve unless the PTV margin was reduced. Daily realignment to the tumour combined with reducing the margin size by a factor of 2 resulted in an average escalation in tumour dose of 9.0 Gy for all five static plans. However, the prescription dose could be escalated by 13.8 Gy when accounting for changes in anatomy by accumulating daily doses using nonlinear image registration techniques. These results provide quantitative information on the effectiveness of image-guided radiation treatment of prostate cancer and demonstrate that the dosimetric impact is patient dependent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15972982     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/50/13/008

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


  10 in total

1.  Effect of daily setup errors on individual dose distribution in conventional radiotherapy: an initial study.

Authors:  Akihiro Takemura; Saori Shoji; Sinichi Ueda; Yuichi Kurata; Tomoyasu Kumano; Shigeyuki Takamatsu; Masayuki Suzuki
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2009-05-01

2.  Sensitivity of postplanning target and OAR coverage estimates to dosimetric margin distribution sampling parameters.

Authors:  Huijun Xu; J James Gordon; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Surface imaging, portal imaging, and skin marker set-up vs. CBCT for radiotherapy of the thorax and pelvis.

Authors:  Stefania Pallotta; Eleonora Vanzi; Gabriele Simontacchi; Livia Marrazzo; Marco Ceroti; Fabiola Paiar; Lorenzo Livi; Marta Bucciolini
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 3.621

4.  Tracking target position variability using intraprostatic fiducial markers and electronic portal imaging in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  F Munoz; C Fiandra; P Franco; A Guarneri; P Ciammella; P De Stefanis; N Rondi; F Moretto; S Badellino; C Iftode; R Ragona; U Ricardi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-02-10       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Impact of margin size on the predicted risk of radiogenic second cancers following proton arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laura A Rechner; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Wayne D Newhauser
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Comparison of various online IGRT strategies: The benefits of online treatment plan re-optimization.

Authors:  Derek Schulze; Jian Liang; Di Yan; Tiezhi Zhang
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2008-10-29       Impact factor: 6.280

7.  A retrospective study of late adverse events in proton beam therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hirokazu Makishima; Hitoshi Ishikawa; Keiichi Tanaka; Yutaro Mori; Masashi Mizumoto; Kayoko Ohnishi; Teruhito Aihara; Nobuyoshi Fukumitsu; Toshiyuki Okumura; Hideyuki Sakurai
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-08-11

8.  Development and clinical evaluation of a simple optical method to detect and measure patient external motion.

Authors:  Benigno Barbés; Juan Diego Azcona; Elena Prieto; José Manuel de Foronda; Marina García; Javier Burguete
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Prostate positioning errors associated with two automatic registration based image guidance strategies.

Authors:  D Ryan; C Rivest; Terence A Riauka; Albert D Murtha; B Gino Fallone
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Accumulating daily-varied dose distributions of prostate radiation therapy with soft-tissue-based kV CT guidance.

Authors:  Andrew Godley; Ergun Ahunbay; Cheng Peng; X Allen Li
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2012-05-10       Impact factor: 2.102

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.