BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate the incorporation of data from single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) or hyperpolarized helium-3 magnetic resonance imaging ((3)He-MRI) into intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seven scenarios were simulated that represent cases of NSCLC with significant functional lung defects. Two independent IMRT plans were produced for each scenario; one to minimise total lung volume receiving >or=20Gy (V(20)), and the other to minimise only the functional lung volume receiving >or=20Gy (FV(20)). Dose-volume characteristics and a plan quality index related to planning target volume coverage by the 95% isodose (V(PTV95)/FV(20)) were compared between anatomical and functional plans using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test. RESULTS: Compared to anatomical IMRT plans, functional planning reduced FV(20) (median 2.7%, range 0.6-3.5%, p=0.02), and total lung V(20) (median 1.5%, 0.5-2.7%, p=0.02), with a small reduction in mean functional lung dose (median 0.4Gy, 0-0.7Gy, p=0.03). There were no significant differences in target volume coverage or organ-at-risk doses. Plan quality index was improved for functional plans (median increase 1.4, range 0-11.8, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant reductions in FV(20), V(20) and mean functional lung dose are possible when IMRT planning is supplemented by functional information derived from SPECT or (3)He-MRI.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate the incorporation of data from single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) or hyperpolarized helium-3 magnetic resonance imaging ((3)He-MRI) into intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seven scenarios were simulated that represent cases of NSCLC with significant functional lung defects. Two independent IMRT plans were produced for each scenario; one to minimise total lung volume receiving >or=20Gy (V(20)), and the other to minimise only the functional lung volume receiving >or=20Gy (FV(20)). Dose-volume characteristics and a plan quality index related to planning target volume coverage by the 95% isodose (V(PTV95)/FV(20)) were compared between anatomical and functional plans using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test. RESULTS: Compared to anatomical IMRT plans, functional planning reduced FV(20) (median 2.7%, range 0.6-3.5%, p=0.02), and total lung V(20) (median 1.5%, 0.5-2.7%, p=0.02), with a small reduction in mean functional lung dose (median 0.4Gy, 0-0.7Gy, p=0.03). There were no significant differences in target volume coverage or organ-at-risk doses. Plan quality index was improved for functional plans (median increase 1.4, range 0-11.8, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant reductions in FV(20), V(20) and mean functional lung dose are possible when IMRT planning is supplemented by functional information derived from SPECT or (3)He-MRI.
Authors: W Sause; P Kolesar; I V Taylor S; D Johnson; R Livingston; R Komaki; B Emami; W Curran; R Byhardt; A R Dar; A Turrisi Journal: Chest Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: M K Martel; R K Ten Haken; M B Hazuka; M L Kessler; M Strawderman; A T Turrisi; T S Lawrence; B A Fraass; A S Lichter Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: L B Marks; D P Spencer; G W Sherouse; G Bentel; R Clough; K Vann; R Jaszczak; R E Coleman; L R Prosnitz Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1995-08-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Hasan Murshed; H Helen Liu; Zhongxing Liao; Jerry L Barker; Xiaochun Wang; Susan L Tucker; Anurag Chandra; Thomas Guerrero; Craig Stevens; Joe Y Chang; Melinda Jeter; James D Cox; Ritsuko Komaki; Radhe Mohan; Joe Y Change Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: H Helen Liu; Xiaochun Wang; Lei Dong; Qiuwen Wu; Zhongxing Liao; Craig W Stevens; Thomas M Guerrero; Ritsuko Komaki; James D Cox; Radhe Mohan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: R W Byhardt; C Scott; W T Sause; B Emami; R Komaki; B Fisher; J S Lee; C Lawton Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1998-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Yvette Seppenwoolde; Martijn Engelsman; Katrien De Jaeger; Sara H Muller; Paul Baas; Daniel L McShan; Benedick A Fraass; Marc L Kessler; José S A Belderbos; Liesbeth J Boersma; Joos V Lebesque Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Konstantin Lavrenkov; Shalini Singh; Judith A Christian; Mike Partridge; Elena Nioutsikou; Gary Cook; James L Bedford; Michael Brada Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2008-11-06 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Shuanghu Tiger Yuan; Kirk A Frey; Milton D Gross; James A Hayman; Doug Arenberg; Jeffrey L Curtis; Xu-Wei Cai; Nithya Ramnath; Gregory P Kalemkerian; Randall K Ten Haken; Avraham Eisbruch; Feng-Ming Spring Kong Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Stanley J Kruger; Scott K Nagle; Marcus J Couch; Yoshiharu Ohno; Mitchell Albert; Sean B Fain Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2015-07-27 Impact factor: 4.813