Literature DB >> 18439767

What CTV-to-PTV margins should be applied for prostate irradiation? Four-dimensional quantitative assessment using model-based deformable image registration techniques.

Gert J Meijer1, Jeroen de Klerk, Karl Bzdusek, Hetty A van den Berg, Rogier Janssen, Michael R Kaus, Patrick Rodrigus, Peter-Paul van der Toorn.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To quantify adequate anisotropic clinical target volume (CTV)-to-planning target volume (PTV) margins for three different setup strategies used during prostate irradiation: (1) no setup corrections, (2) on-line corrections determined from bony anatomy, and (3) on-line corrections determined from gold markers. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Three radiation oncologists independently delineated the CTV on computed tomography images of 30 prostate cancer patients. Eight repeat scans were acquired to allow simulation of the delivered dose distributions in changing geometry. Different registration approaches were taken to mimic the different setup strategies. A surface model-based deformable image registration system was used to warp the delivered dose distributions back to the dose in the planning computed tomography scan. On the basis of the geometric extent of the underdosed areas, a set of anisotropic margins was derived to ensure a minimal dose to the CTV of 95% for 90% of the patients.
RESULTS: Without setup correction, margins of approximately 11 mm for the corpus of the prostate and 15 mm for the seminal vesicles were required. These margins could be reduced to 8 and 13 mm when aligning the patient to the bony anatomy and to 3 and 8 mm aligning the patient to implanted gold markers. A larger margin at the apex was required to account for the significant observer variability and steep dose gradients at this location (11 mm using skin marker registration, 9 mm using bony anatomy registration, and 6 mm using gold marker registration).
CONCLUSIONS: Novel voxel tracking techniques have enabled us to calculate accumulated dose distributions and design accurate three-dimensional CTV-to-PTV margins for prostate irradiation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18439767     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  17 in total

1.  Uncertainties and CTV to PTV margins quantitative assessment using cone-beam CT technique in clinical application for prostate, and head and neck irradiation tumours.

Authors:  X J Juan-Senabre; J López-Tarjuelo; A Conde-Moreno; A Santos-Serra; A L Sánchez-Iglesias; J D Quirós-Higueras; N de Marco Blancas; S Calzada-Feliu; C Ferrer-Albiach
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.405

2.  CTV to PTV margins for prostate irradiation. Three-dimensional quantitative assessment of interfraction uncertainties using portal imaging and serial CT scans.

Authors:  Luis A Pérez-Romasanta; Eva Lozano-Martín; Joaquín Velasco-Jiménez; Fermín Mendicote-León; Miguel Sanz-Martín; Javier Torres-Donaire; Carmen Carrascosa-Fernández; Juan Carlos Zapata-Jimínez; Jacinto Arjona-Gutiérrez; Antonio Gil-Agudo
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.405

3.  Planning target volume margins for prostate radiotherapy using daily electronic portal imaging and implanted fiducial markers.

Authors:  David Skarsgard; Pat Cadman; Ali El-Gayed; Robert Pearcey; Patricia Tai; Nadeem Pervez; Jackson Wu
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 3.481

4.  The "PROCAINA (PROstate CAncer INdication Attitudes) Project" (Part II)--a survey among Italian radiation oncologists on radical radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Berardino De Bari; Filippo Alongi; Pierfrancesco Franco; Patrizia Ciammella; Tarik Chekrine; Lorenzo Livi; Barbara A Jereczek-Fossa; Andrea Riccardo Filippi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  A dosimetric selectivity intercomparison of HDR brachytherapy, IMRT and helical tomotherapy in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  Johanne Hermesse; Sylvie Biver; Nicolas Jansen; Eric Lenaerts; Nathalie De Patoul; Stefaan Vynckier; Philippe Coucke; Pierre Scalliet; Philippe Nickers
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 3.621

6.  Schedule for CT image guidance in treating prostate cancer with helical tomotherapy.

Authors:  G Beldjoudi; S Yartsev; G Bauman; J Battista; J Van Dyk
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Constrained non-rigid registration for use in image-guided adaptive radiotherapy.

Authors:  W H Greene; S Chelikani; K Purushothaman; J P S Knisely; Z Chen; X Papademetris; L H Staib; J S Duncan
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2009-07-16       Impact factor: 8.545

8.  Coverage-based treatment planning to accommodate deformable organ variations in prostate cancer treatment.

Authors:  Huijun Xu; Douglas J Vile; Manju Sharma; J James Gordon; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Single blind randomized phase III trial to investigate the benefit of a focal lesion ablative microboost in prostate cancer (FLAME-trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Irene M Lips; Uulke A van der Heide; Karin Haustermans; Emile N J T van Lin; Floris Pos; Stefan P G Franken; Alexis N T J Kotte; Carla H van Gils; Marco van Vulpen
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Seminal vesicle interfraction displacement and margins in image guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Daisy Mak; Suki Gill; Roxby Paul; Alison Stillie; Annette Haworth; Tomas Kron; Jim Cramb; Kellie Knight; Jessica Thomas; Gillian Duchesne; Farshad Foroudi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2012-08-13       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.