Literature DB >> 21070078

Apparatus-dependent dosimetric differences in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Lijun Ma1, Arjun Sahgal, Luca Cozzi, Eric Chang, Almon Shiu, Daniel Letourneau, Fang-Fang Yin, Antonella Fogliata, Wolfgang Kaissl, Derek Hyde, Normand J Laperriere, Dennis C Shrieve, David A Larson.   

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to study apparatus-dependent dose distribution differences specific to spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment planning. This multi-institutional study was performed evaluating an image-guided robotic radiosurgery system (CK), intensity modulated protons (IMP), multileaf collimator (MLC) fixed-field IMRT with 5 mm (11 field), 4 mm (9 field), and 2.5 mm (8- and 9-field) leaf widths and intensity modulated volumetric arc therapy (IMVAT) with a 2.5 mm MLC. Treatment plans were systematically developed for targets consisting of one, two and three consecutive thoracic vertebral bodies (VBs) with the esophagus and spinal cord contoured as the organs at risk. It was found that all modalities achieved acceptable treatment planning constraints. However, following normalization fixed field IMRT with a 2.5 mm MLC, IMVAT and IMP systems yielded the smallest ratio of maximum dose divided by the prescription dose (MD/PD) for one-, two- and three-VB PTVs (ranging from 1.1-1.16). The 2.5 mm MLC 9-field IMRT, IMVAT and CK plans resulted in the least dose to 0.1 cc volumes of spinal cord and esophagus. CK plans had the greatest degree of target dose inhomogeneity. As the level of complexity increased with an increasing number of vertebral bodies, distinct apparatus features such as the use of a high number of beams and a finer leaf size MLC were favored. Our study quantified apparatus-dependent dose-distribution differences specific to spine SBRT given strict, but realistic, constraints and highlights the need to benchmark physical dose distributions for multi-institutional clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21070078     DOI: 10.1177/153303461000900604

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 1533-0338


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of deliverable IMRT and VMAT for spine metastases using a simultaneous integrated boost.

Authors:  Y K Lee; J L Bedford; H A McNair; M A Hawkins
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  The era of stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastases and the multidisciplinary management of complex cases.

Authors:  Rachit Kumar; Anick Nater; Ahmed Hashmi; Sten Myrehaug; Young Lee; Lijun Ma; Kristin Redmond; Simon S Lo; Eric L Chang; Albert Yee; Charles G Fisher; Michael G Fehlings; Arjun Sahgal
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2015-07-27

Review 3.  Stereotactic body radiotherapy: a new paradigm in the management of spinal metastases.

Authors:  Zain A Husain; Isabelle Thibault; Daniel Letourneau; Lijun Ma; Harald Keller; John Suh; Veronica Chiang; Eric L Chang; Raja K Rampersaud; James Perry; David A Larson; Arjun Sahgal
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2013-05

4.  Esophageal toxicity from high-dose, single-fraction paraspinal stereotactic radiosurgery.

Authors:  Brett W Cox; Andrew Jackson; Margie Hunt; Mark Bilsky; Yoshiya Yamada
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2012-05-07       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  Evaluating dosimetric differences in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy: An international multi-institutional treatment planning study.

Authors:  Tomohisa Furuya; Hiroshi Tanaka; Mark Ruschin; Keiji Nihei; Dilini Pinnaduwage; Lijun Ma; Arjun Sahgal; Katsuyuki Karasawa
Journal:  J Radiosurg SBRT       Date:  2015

6.  Correlation between small-volume spinal cord doses for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

Authors:  Lijun Ma; Lei Wang; Young Lee; Chia-Lin Tseng; Scott Soltys; Steve Braunstein; Arjun Sahgal
Journal:  J Radiosurg SBRT       Date:  2018

7.  Comparison of four techniques for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy: Dosimetric and efficiency analysis.

Authors:  Saif Aljabab; Balamurugan Vellayappan; Eric Vandervoort; Jamie Bahm; Robert Zohr; John Sinclair; Jean-Michel Caudrelier; Janos Szanto; Shawn Malone
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.