Jian Liang1, Qiuwen Wu, Di Yan. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48073, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: For patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer, the seminal vesicles (SVs) are included in the clinical target volume (CTV). The purposes of this study are to investigate interfraction motion characteristics of the SVs and determine proper margins for online computed tomography image guidance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-four patients, each with 16 daily helical computed tomography scans, were included in this study. A binary image mask was used for image registration to determine daily organ motion. Two online image-guided radiotherapy strategies (prostate only and prostate + SVs) were simulated in a hypofractionated scheme. Three margin designs were studied for both three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). In prostate-only guidance, Margin A was uniformly applied to the whole CTV, and Margin B was applied to the SVs with a fixed 3-mm prostate margin. In prostate plus SV guidance, Margin C was uniformly applied to the CTV. The minimum margins were sought to satisfy the criterion that minimum cumulative CTV dose be more than those of the planning target volume in the plan for greater than 95% of patients. RESULTS: The prostate and SVs move significantly more in the anterior-posterior and superior-inferior than right-left directions. The anterior-posterior motion of the prostate and SVs correlated (R(2) = 0.7). The SVs move significantly more than the prostate. The minimum margins found were 2.5 mm for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and 4.5, 4.5, and 3.0 mm for Margins A, B, and C for IMRT, respectively. Margins for IMRT were larger, but the irradiated volume and doses to critical structures were smaller. Minimum margins of 4.5 mm to the SVs and 3 mm to the prostate are recommended for IMRT with prostate-only guidance. CONCLUSIONS: The SVs move independently from the prostate gland, and additional margins are necessary for image-guided radiotherapy.
PURPOSE: For patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer, the seminal vesicles (SVs) are included in the clinical target volume (CTV). The purposes of this study are to investigate interfraction motion characteristics of the SVs and determine proper margins for online computed tomography image guidance. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-four patients, each with 16 daily helical computed tomography scans, were included in this study. A binary image mask was used for image registration to determine daily organ motion. Two online image-guided radiotherapy strategies (prostate only and prostate + SVs) were simulated in a hypofractionated scheme. Three margin designs were studied for both three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). In prostate-only guidance, Margin A was uniformly applied to the whole CTV, and Margin B was applied to the SVs with a fixed 3-mm prostate margin. In prostate plus SV guidance, Margin C was uniformly applied to the CTV. The minimum margins were sought to satisfy the criterion that minimum cumulative CTV dose be more than those of the planning target volume in the plan for greater than 95% of patients. RESULTS: The prostate and SVs move significantly more in the anterior-posterior and superior-inferior than right-left directions. The anterior-posterior motion of the prostate and SVs correlated (R(2) = 0.7). The SVs move significantly more than the prostate. The minimum margins found were 2.5 mm for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and 4.5, 4.5, and 3.0 mm for Margins A, B, and C for IMRT, respectively. Margins for IMRT were larger, but the irradiated volume and doses to critical structures were smaller. Minimum margins of 4.5 mm to the SVs and 3 mm to the prostate are recommended for IMRT with prostate-only guidance. CONCLUSIONS: The SVs move independently from the prostate gland, and additional margins are necessary for image-guided radiotherapy.
Authors: Monique H P Smitsmans; Josien de Bois; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Anja Betgen; Lambert J Zijp; David A Jaffray; Joos V Lebesque; Marcel van Herk Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-11-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Larry Kestin; Neal Goldstein; Frank Vicini; Di Yan; Howard Korman; Alvaro Martinez Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Kirsten E I Deurloo; Roel J H M Steenbakkers; Lambert J Zijp; Josien A de Bois; Peter J C M Nowak; Coen R N Rasch; Marcel van Herk Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Monique H P Smitsmans; Jochem W H Wolthaus; Xavier Artignan; Josien de Bois; David A Jaffray; Joos V Lebesque; Marcel van Herk Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J C Roeske; J D Forman; C F Mesina; T He; C A Pelizzari; E Fontenla; S Vijayakumar; G T Chen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1995-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038