Literature DB >> 20580111

Evaluation of the 'dose of the day' for IMRT prostate cancer patients derived from portal dose measurements and cone-beam CT.

Mathilda van Zijtveld1, Maarten Dirkx, Marcel Breuers, Ruud Kuipers, Ben Heijmen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: High geometrical and dosimetrical accuracies are required for radiotherapy treatments where IMRT is applied in combination with narrow treatment margins in order to minimize dose delivery to normal tissues. As an overall check, we implemented a method for reconstruction of the actually delivered 3D dose distribution to the patient during a treatment fraction, i.e., the 'dose of the day'. In this article results on the clinical evaluation of this concept for a group of IMRT prostate cancer patients are presented.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The actual IMRT fluence maps delivered to a patient were derived from measured EPID-images acquired during treatment using a previously described iterative method. In addition, the patient geometry was obtained from in-room acquired cone-beam CT images. For dose calculation, a mapping of the Hounsfield Units from the planning CT was applied. With the fluence maps and the modified cone-beam CT the 'dose of the day' was calculated. The method was validated using phantom measurements and evaluated clinically for 10 prostate cancer patients in 4 or 5 fractions.
RESULTS: The phantom measurements showed that the delivered dose could be reconstructed within 3%/3mm accuracy. For prostate cancer patients, the isocenter dose agreed within -0.4+/-1.0% (1 SD) with the planned value, while for on average 98.1% of the pixels within the 50% isodose surface the actually delivered dose agreed within 3% or 3mm with the planned dose. For most fractions, the dose coverage of the prostate volume was slightly deteriorated which was caused by small prostate rotations and small inaccuracies in fluence delivery. The dose that was delivered to the rectum remained within the constraints used during planning. However, for two patients a large degrading of the dose delivery was observed in two fractions. For one patient this was related to changes in rectum filling with respect to the planning CT and for the other to large intra-fraction motion during treatment delivery, resulting in mean underdosages of 16% in the prostate volume.
CONCLUSIONS: A method to accurately assess the 'dose of the day' was evaluated for prostate cancer patients treated with IMRT. To correct for observed dose deviations off-line dose-adaptive strategies will be developed. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20580111     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.05.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  12 in total

1.  Utilization of cone-beam CT for offline evaluation of target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment.

Authors:  Petr Paluska; Josef Hanus; Jana Sefrova; Lucie Rouskova; Jakub Grepl; Jan Jansa; Linda Kasaova; Miroslav Hodek; Milan Zouhar; Milan Vosmik; Jiri Petera
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2012-05-05

2.  Technical Note: Density correction to improve CT number mapping in thoracic deformable image registration.

Authors:  Jinzhong Yang; Yongbin Zhang; Zijian Zhang; Lifei Zhang; Peter Balter; Laurence Court
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Dosimetric Impact of the Positional Imaging Frequency for Hypofractionated Prostate Radiotherapy - A Voxel-by-Voxel Analysis.

Authors:  Mona Splinter; Ilias Sachpazidis; Tilman Bostel; Tobias Fechter; Constantinos Zamboglou; Christian Thieke; Oliver Jäkel; Peter E Huber; Jürgen Debus; Dimos Baltas; Nils H Nicolay
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 6.244

4.  Interfraction Anatomical Variability Can Lead to Significantly Increased Rectal Dose for Patients Undergoing Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Michael Wahl; Martina Descovich; Erin Shugard; Dilini Pinnaduwage; Atchar Sudhyadhom; Albert Chang; Mack Roach; Alexander Gottschalk; Josephine Chen
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-07-08

5.  Statistical simulations to estimate motion-inclusive dose-volume histograms for prediction of rectal morbidity following radiotherapy.

Authors:  Maria Thor; Aditya Apte; Joseph O Deasy; Ludvig Paul Muren
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 4.089

6.  Evaluation of combining bony anatomy and soft tissue position correction strategies for IMRT prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Marta Adamczyk; Tomasz Piotrowski; Ewa Adamiak
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2012-02-09

7.  Accurate IMRT fluence verification for prostate cancer patients using 'in-vivo' measured EPID images and in-room acquired kilovoltage cone-beam CT scans.

Authors:  Ali Sam Ali; Maarten L P Dirkx; Ruud M Cools; Ben J M Heijmen
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 3.481

8.  Utilization of cone beam CT for reconstruction of dose distribution delivered in image-guided radiotherapy of prostate carcinoma - bony landmark setup compared to fiducial markers setup.

Authors:  Petr Paluska; Josef Hanus; Jana Sefrova; Lucie Rouskova; Jakub Grepl; Jan Jansa; Linda Kasaova; Miroslav Hodek; Milan Zouhar; Milan Vosmik; Jiri Petera
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Dosimetric Impact of Interfractional Variations in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy-Implications for Imaging Frequency and Treatment Adaptation.

Authors:  Tilman Bostel; Ilias Sachpazidis; Mona Splinter; Nina Bougatf; Tobias Fechter; Constantinos Zamboglou; Oliver Jäkel; Peter E Huber; Dimos Baltas; Jürgen Debus; Nils H Nicolay
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 6.244

10.  Dosimetric Impact of Interfractional Variations for Post-prostatectomy Radiotherapy to the Prostatic Fossa-Relevance for the Frequency of Position Verification Imaging and Treatment Adaptation.

Authors:  Mona Splinter; Tilman Bostel; Ilias Sachpazidis; Tobias Fechter; Constantinos Zamboglou; Oliver Jäkel; Peter E Huber; Jürgen Debus; Dimos Baltas; Nils H Nicolay
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.