Literature DB >> 21992352

Physics strategies for sparing neural stem cells during whole-brain radiation treatments.

Neil Kirby1, Cynthia Chuang, Jean Pouliot, Andrew Hwang, Igor J Barani.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Currently, there are no successful long-term treatments or preventive strategies for radiation-induced cognitive impairments, and only a few possibilities have been suggested. One such approach involves reducing the dose to neural stem cell compartments (within and outside of the hippocampus) during whole-brain radiation treatments for brain metastases. This study investigates the fundamental physics issues associated with the sparing of neural stem cells during photon radiotherapy for brain metastases.
METHODS: Several factors influence the stem cell dose: intracranial scattering, collimator leakage, beam energy, and total number of beams. The relative importance of these factors is investigated through a set of radiation therapy plans, which are all variations of an initial 6 MV intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan designed to simultaneously deliver a whole-brain dose of 30 Gy and maximally reduce stem cell compartment dose. Additionally, an in-house leaf segmentation algorithm was developed that utilizes jaw motion to minimize the collimator leakage.
RESULTS: The plans are all normalized such that 50% of the PTV receives 30 Gy. For the initial 6 MV IMRT plan, 50% of the stem cells receive a dose greater than 6.3 Gy. Calculations indicate that 3.6 Gy of this dose originates from intracranial scattering. The jaw-tracking segmentation algorithm, used in conjunction with direct machine parameter optimization, reduces the 50% stem cell dose to 4.3 and 3.7 Gy for 6 and 10 MV treatment beams, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Intracranial scattering alone is responsible for a large dose contribution to the stem cell compartment. It is, therefore, important to minimize other contributing factors, particularly the collimator leakage, to maximally reduce dose to these critical structures. The use of collimator jaw tracking in conjunction with modern collimators can minimize this leakage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21992352     DOI: 10.1118/1.3633946

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  6 in total

Review 1.  Hippocampus sparing in whole-brain radiotherapy. A review.

Authors:  F Oskan; U Ganswindt; S B Schwarz; F Manapov; C Belka; M Niyazi
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2014-03-09       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  On the cutting edge of intensity modulated radiotherapy and simultaneous integrated boost (IMRT-SIB): The case of a patient with 8 brain metastases.

Authors:  Marica Ferro; Savino Cilla; Gabriella Macchia; Francesco Deodato; Antonio Pierro; Cinzia Digesu'; Gabriella Ferrandina; Matteo Ciuffreda; Giuseppina Sallustio; Alessio G Morganti
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2014-09-23

3.  Optimization of collimator angles in dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy planning for whole-brain radiotherapy with hippocampus and inner ear sparing.

Authors:  Wuji Sun; Kunzhi Chen; Yu Li; Wenming Xia; Lihua Dong; Yinghua Shi; Chao Ge; Xu Yang; Libo Wang; Huidong Wang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiotherapy using Elekta equipment.

Authors:  Alexander Nevelsky; Nantakan Ieumwananonthachai; Orit Kaidar-Person; Raquel Bar-Deroma; Haitam Nasrallah; Rahamim Ben-Yosef; Abraham Kuten
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Intensity-modulated radiation therapy combined with concomitant temozolomide for brain metastases from lung adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Jinli Li; Xiaoyan Chai; Ying Cao; Xiaochu Hu; Hongyu Zhu; Jianping Wang; Yiwei Wu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  A comparative study of identical VMAT plans with and without jaw tracking technique.

Authors:  Hao Wu; Fan Jiang; Haizhen Yue; Qiaoqiao Hu; Jian Zhang; Zhuolun Liu; Jian Gong; Sha Li; Jianhao Geng; Yibao Zhang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.