Literature DB >> 20166402

Dosimetric impact of daily setup variations during treatment of canine nasal tumors using intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Michael A Deveau1, Alonso N Gutiérrez, Thomas R Mackie, Wolfgang A Tomé, Lisa J Forrest.   

Abstract

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) can be employed to yield precise dose distributions that tightly conform to targets and reduce high doses to normal structures by generating steep dose gradients. Because of these sharp gradients, daily setup variations may have an adverse effect on clinical outcome such that an adjacent normal structure may be overdosed and/or the target may be underdosed. This study provides a detailed analysis of the impact of daily setup variations on optimized IMRT canine nasal tumor treatment plans when variations are not accounted for due to the lack of image guidance. Setup histories of ten patients with nasal tumors previously treated using helical tomotherapy were replanned retrospectively to study the impact of daily setup variations on IMRT dose distributions. Daily setup shifts were applied to IMRT plans on a fraction-by-fraction basis. Using mattress immobilization and laser alignment, mean setup error magnitude in any single dimension was at least 2.5 mm (0-10.0 mm). With inclusions of all three translational coordinates, mean composite offset vector was 5.9 +/- 3.3 mm. Due to variations, a loss of equivalent uniform dose for target volumes of up to 5.6% was noted which corresponded to a potential loss in tumor control probability of 39.5%. Overdosing of eyes and brain was noted by increases in mean normalized total dose and highest normalized dose given to 2% of the volume. Findings suggest that successful implementation of canine nasal IMRT requires daily image guidance to ensure accurate delivery of precise IMRT distributions when non-rigid immobilization techniques are utilized. Unrecognized geographical misses may result in tumor recurrence and/or radiation toxicities to the eyes and brain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20166402      PMCID: PMC2826715          DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2009.01629.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound        ISSN: 1058-8183            Impact factor:   1.363


  28 in total

1.  Optically guided intensity modulated radiotherapy.

Authors:  W A Tomé; S L Meeks; T R McNutt; J M Buatti; F J Bova; W A Friedman; M Mehta
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 6.280

2.  Intensity-modulated radiotherapy of head-and-neck cancer: encouraging early results.

Authors:  Avraham Eisbruch
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2002-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Comparison of the accuracy of positioning devices for radiation therapy of canine and feline head tumors.

Authors:  H Kippenes; P R Gavin; R D Sande; D Rogers; V Sweet
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2000 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.363

Review 4.  Dose-volume specification: new challenges with intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  James A Purdy
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 5.934

Review 5.  Image guidance for precise conformal radiotherapy.

Authors:  Thomas Rockwell Mackie; Jeff Kapatoes; Ken Ruchala; Weiguo Lu; Chuan Wu; Gustavo Olivera; Lisa Forrest; Wolfgang Tome; Jim Welsh; Robert Jeraj; Paul Harari; Paul Reckwerdt; Bhudatt Paliwal; Mark Ritter; Harry Keller; Jack Fowler; Minesh Mehta
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2003-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Evaluation of dosimetric margins in prostate IMRT treatment plans.

Authors:  J J Gordon; J V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  The effect of setup uncertainty on normal tissue sparing with IMRT for head-and-neck cancer.

Authors:  M A Manning; Q Wu; R M Cardinale; R Mohan; A D Lauve; B D Kavanagh; M M Morris; R K Schmidt-Ullrich
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2001-12-01       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  A high-precision system for conformal intracranial radiotherapy.

Authors:  W A Tome; S L Meeks; J M Buatti; F J Bova; W A Friedman; Z Li
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2000-07-01       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Radiobiological and treatment planning study of a simultaneously integrated boost for canine nasal tumors using helical tomotherapy.

Authors:  Alonso N Gutíerrez; Michael Deveau; Lisa J Forrest; Wolfgang A Tomé; Thomas R Mackie
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.363

10.  On cold spots in tumor subvolumes.

Authors:  Wolfgang A Tomé; Jack F Fowler
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  4 in total

1.  Proof of principle of ocular sparing in dogs with sinonasal tumors treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Jessica A Lawrence; Lisa J Forrest; Michelle M Turek; Paul E Miller; T Rockwell Mackie; Hazim A Jaradat; David M Vail; Richard R Dubielzig; Richard Chappell; Minesh P Mehta
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2010 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.363

2.  Helical tomotherapy setup variations in canine nasal tumor patients immobilized with a bite block.

Authors:  Lyndsay N Kubicek; Songwon Seo; Richard J Chappell; Robert Jeraj; Lisa J Forrest
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 1.363

3.  Estimation of planning organ at risk volumes for ocular structures in dogs undergoing three-dimensional image-guided periocular radiotherapy with rigid bite block immobilization.

Authors:  Friederike Wolf; Carla Rohrer Bley; Jürgen Besserer; Valeria Meier
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 1.363

Review 4.  Ocular and periocular radiation toxicity in dogs treated for sinonasal tumors: A critical review.

Authors:  Friederike Wolf; Valeria S Meier; Simon A Pot; Carla Rohrer Bley
Journal:  Vet Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-04-12       Impact factor: 1.644

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.