Literature DB >> 17183139

A motion phantom study on helical tomotherapy: the dosimetric impacts of delivery technique and motion.

Brian Kanagaki1, Paul W Read, Janelle A Molloy, James M Larner, Ke Sheng.   

Abstract

Helical tomotherapy (HT) can potentially be used for lung cancer treatment including stereotactic radiosurgery because of its advanced image guidance and its ability to deliver highly conformal dose distributions. However, previous theoretical and simulation studies reported that the effect of respiratory motion on statically planned tomotherapy treatments may cause substantial differences between the calculated and actual delivered radiation isodose distribution, particularly when the treatment is hypofractionated. In order to determine the dosimetric effects of motion upon actual HT treatment delivery, phantom film dosimetry measurements were performed under static and moving conditions using a clinical HT treatment unit. The motion phantom system was constructed using a programmable motor, a base, a moving platform and a life size lung heterogeneity phantom with wood inserts representing lung tissue with a 3.0 cm diameter spherical tumour density equivalent insert. In order to determine the effects of different motion and tomotherapy delivery parameters, treatment plans were created using jaw sizes of 1.04 cm and 2.47 cm, with incremental gantry rotation periods between the minimum allowed (10 s) and the maximum allowed (60 s). The couch speed varied from 0.009 cm s(-1) to 0.049 cm s(-1), and delivered to a phantom under static and dynamic conditions with peak-to-peak motion amplitudes of 1.2 cm and 2 cm and periods of 3 and 5 s to simulate human respiratory motion of lung tumours. A cylindrical clinical target volume (CTV) was contoured to tightly enclose the tumour insert. 2.0 Gy was prescribed to 95% of the CTV. Two-dimensional dose was measured by a Kodak EDR2 film. Dynamic phantom doses were then quantitatively compared to static phantom doses in terms of axial dose profiles, cumulative dose volume histograms (DVH), percentage of CTV receiving the prescription dose and the minimum dose received by 95% of the CTV. The larger motion amplitude resulted in more under-dosing at the ends of the CTV in the axis of motion, and this effect was greater for the smaller jaw size plans. Due to the size of the penumbra, the 2.47 cm jaw plans provide adequate coverage for smaller amplitudes of motion, +/-0.6 cm in our experiment, without adding any additional margin in the axis of motion to the treatment volume. The periodic heterogeneous patterns described by previous studies were not observed from the single fraction of the phantom measurement. Besides the jaw sizes, CTV dose coverage is not significantly dependent on machine and phantom motion periods. The lack of adverse synchronization patterns from both results validate that HT is a safe technique for treating moving target and hypofractionation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17183139     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/52/1/016

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


  19 in total

1.  Reduction of dosimetric impact of intrafractional prostate motion during helical tomotherapy.

Authors:  V Prokic; H Geinitz; P Kneschaurek
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-02-16       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 2.  The radiation techniques of tomotherapy & intensity-modulated radiation therapy applied to lung cancer.

Authors:  Zhengfei Zhu; Xiaolong Fu
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2015-06

3.  Erratum to: Molecular and cellular mechanisms that initiate pain and itch.

Authors:  Jialie Luo; Jing Feng; Shenbin Liu; Edgar T Walters; Hongzhen Hu
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 9.261

4.  Surface dose in the treatment of breast cancer with helical tomotherapy.

Authors:  Felix Zibold; Florian Sterzing; Gabriele Sroka-Perez; Kai Schubert; Katja Wagenknecht; Gerald Major; Jürgen Debus; Klaus Herfarth
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2009-09-12       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  On the impact of longitudinal breathing motion randomness for tomotherapy delivery.

Authors:  Michael W Kissick; Ryan T Flynn; David C Westerly; Peter W Hoban; Xiaohu Mo; Emilie T Soisson; Keisha C McCall; Thomas R Mackie; Robert Jeraj
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-08-18       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Multimodality Treatment With Helical Tomotherapy Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, Capecitabine, and Photodynamic Therapy is Feasible and Well Tolerated in Patients With Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Joseph M Baisden; Michel Kahaleh; Geoffrey R Weiss; Hilary Sanfey; Christopher A Moskaluk; Paul Yeaton; Eduard E de Lange; Tyvin A Rich
Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res       Date:  2008-09

7.  Evaluation of the target dose coverage of stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer using helical tomotherapy: A dynamic phantom study.

Authors:  Masahide Saito; Hidekazu Suzuki; Naoki Sano; Kazunari Ashizawa; Kazuya Yoshizawa; Yuki Shibata; Koji Ueda; Takafumi Komiyama; Kan Marino; Shinichi Aoki; Ryo Saito; Yoshiyasu Maehata; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2020-01-14

8.  Dosimetric selection for helical tomotherapy based stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer or lung metastases.

Authors:  Alexander Chi; Zhongxing Liao; Nam P Nguyen; Jiahong Xu; James S Welsh; Si Young Jang; Carol Howe; Ritsuko Komaki
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Dose delivery accuracy on helical tomotherapy for 4-dimensional tumor motion - a phantom study.

Authors:  Raghavendra Holla; David Khanna; V K Sathiya Narayanan
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2021-06-09

10.  Intensity-modulated radiation therapy using static ports of tomotherapy (TomoDirect): comparison with the TomoHelical mode.

Authors:  Taro Murai; Yuta Shibamoto; Yoshihiko Manabe; Rumi Murata; Chikao Sugie; Akihiro Hayashi; Hiroya Ito; Yoshihito Miyoshi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.