Literature DB >> 18538499

Estimation of setup uncertainty using planar and MVCT imaging for gynecologic malignancies.

Lakshmi Santanam1, Jacqueline Esthappan, Sasa Mutic, Eric E Klein, S Murty Goddu, Summer Chaudhari, Sasha Wahab, Issam M El Naqa, Daniel A Low, Perry W Grigsby.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This prospective study investigates gynecologic malignancy online treatment setup error corrections using planar kilovoltage/megavoltage (KV/MV) imaging and helical MV computed tomography (MVCT) imaging. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty patients were divided into two groups. The first group (10 patients) was imaged and treated using a conventional linear accelerator (LINAC) with image-guidance capabilities, whereas the second group (10 patients) was treated using tomotherapy with MVCT capabilities. Patients treated on the LINAC underwent planar KV and portal MV imaging and a two-dimensional image registration algorithm was used to match these images to digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs). Patients that were treated using tomotherapy underwent MVCT imaging, and a three-dimensional image registration algorithm was used to match planning CT to MVCT images. Subsequent repositioning shifts were applied before each treatment and recorded for further analysis. To assess intrafraction motion, 5 of the 10 patients treated on the LINAC underwent posttreatment planar imaging and DRR matching. Based on these data, patient position uncertainties along with estimated margins based on well-known recipes were determined.
RESULTS: The errors associated with patient positioning ranged from 0.13 cm to 0.38 cm, for patients imaged on LINAC and 0.13 cm to 0.48 cm for patients imaged on tomotherapy. Our institutional clinical target volume-PTV margin value of 0.7 cm lies inside the confidence interval of the margins established using both planar and MVCT imaging.
CONCLUSION: Use of high-quality daily planar imaging, volumetric MVCT imaging, and setup corrections yields excellent setup accuracy and can help reduce margins for the external beam treatment of gynecologic malignancies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18538499     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.070

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


  11 in total

1.  Dynamic stochastic deep learning approaches for predicting geometric changes in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Julia M Pakela; Martha M Matuszak; Randall K Ten Haken; Daniel L McShan; Issam El Naqa
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and Image-Guided Adapted Brachytherapy for Cervix Cancer.

Authors:  Alexander J Lin; Elizabeth Kidd; Farrokh Dehdashti; Barry A Siegel; Sasa Mutic; Premal H Thaker; Leslie S Massad; Matthew A Powell; David G Mutch; Stephanie Markovina; Julie Schwarz; Perry W Grigsby
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  A dosimetric analysis of 6 MV versus 15 MV photon energy plans for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of carcinoma of cervix.

Authors:  Atul Tyagi; Sanjay S Supe; Man P Singh
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2010-09-22

4.  Impact of the frequency of online verifications on the patient set-up accuracy and set-up margins.

Authors:  Volker Rudat; Mohamed Hammoud; Yogin Pillay; Abdul Aziz Alaradi; Adel Mohamed; Saleh Altuwaijri
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Positioning accuracy during VMAT of gynecologic malignancies and the resulting dosimetric impact by a 6-degree-of-freedom couch in combination with daily kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Lihong Yao; Lihong Zhu; Junjie Wang; Lu Liu; Shun Zhou; ShuKun Jiang; Qianqian Cao; Ang Qu; Suqing Tian
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-04-26       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Setup error analysis in helical tomotherapy based image-guided radiation therapy treatments.

Authors:  Bhagyalakshmi Akkavil Thondykandy; Jamema V Swamidas; Jayprakash Agarwal; Tejpal Gupta; Sarbani G Laskar; Umesh Mahantshetty; Shrinivasan S Iyer; Indrani U Mukherjee; Shyam K Shrivastava; Deepak D Deshpande
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2015 Oct-Dec

7.  Immobilization versus no immobilization for pelvic external beam radiotherapy.

Authors:  Avinash H Udayashankar; Shibina Noorjahan; Nirmala Srikantia; K Ravindra Babu; Sandeep Muzumder
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2018-05-17

8.  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

9.  Retrospective feasibility study of simultaneous integrated boost in cervical cancer using Tomotherapy: the impact of organ motion and tumor regression.

Authors:  Fernanda G Herrera; Sharon Callaway; Ela Delikgoz-Soykut; Mehtap Coskun; Laetitia Porta; Jean-Yves Meuwly; Joao Soares-Rodrigues; Leonie Heym; Raphael Moeckli; Mahmut Ozsahin
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Macarena Cubillos Mesías; Judit Boda-Heggemann; Johannes Thoelking; Frank Lohr; Frederik Wenz; Hansjoerg Wertz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.