Literature DB >> 22809590

Comparison of dose decrement from intrafraction motion for prone and supine prostate radiotherapy.

Jeffrey R Olsen1, Parag J Parikh, Michael Watts, Camille E Noel, Kenneth W Baker, Lakshmi Santanam, Jeff M Michalski.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Dose effects of intrafraction motion during prone prostate radiotherapy are unknown. We compared prone and supine treatment using real-time tracking data to model dose coverage.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electromagnetic tracking data were analyzed for 10 patients treated prone, and 15 treated supine, with IMRT for localized prostate cancer. Plans were generated using 0 mm, 3 mm, and 5mm PTV expansions. Manual beam-hold interventions were applied to reposition the patient when translations exceeded a predetermined threshold. A custom software application (SWIFTER) used intrafraction tracking data acquired during beam-on model delivered prostate dose, by applying rigid body transformations to the prostate structure contoured at simulation within the planned dose cloud. The delivered minimum prostate dose as a percentage of planned dose (Dmin%), and prostate volume covered by the prescription dose as a percentage of the planned volume (VRx%) were compared for prone and supine treatment.
RESULTS: Dmin% was reduced for prone treatment for 0 (p=0.02) and 3 mm (p=0.03) PTV margins. VRx% was reduced for prone treatment only for 0mm margins (p=0.002). No significant differences were found using 5 mm margins.
CONCLUSIONS: Intrafraction motion has a greater impact on target coverage for prone compared to supine prostate radiotherapy. PTV margins of 3 mm or less correlate with a significant decrease in delivered dose for prone treatment.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22809590      PMCID: PMC3423556          DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2012.06.008

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


  24 in total

1.  Measurements and clinical consequences of prostate motion during a radiotherapy fraction.

Authors:  Aart J Nederveen; Uulke A van der Heide; Homan Dehnad; R Jeroen A van Moorselaar; Pieter Hofman; Jan J W Lagendijk
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2002-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Integrating a MRI scanner with a 6 MV radiotherapy accelerator: impact of the surface orientation on the entrance and exit dose due to the transverse magnetic field.

Authors:  A J E Raaijmakers; B W Raaymakers; S van der Meer; J J W Lagendijk
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-01-22       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Pretreatment nomogram for prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; J Fondurulia; M H Chen; I Kaplan; C J Beard; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; A Wein; C N Coleman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Patient positioning in prostate radiotherapy: is prone better than supine?

Authors:  D C Weber; P Nouet; M Rouzaud; R Miralbell
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2000-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  A comparison of ventilatory prostate movement in four treatment positions.

Authors:  L A Dawson; D W Litzenberg; K K Brock; M Sanda; M Sullivan; H M Sandler; J M Balter
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2000-09-01       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Target localization and real-time tracking using the Calypso 4D localization system in patients with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Twyla R Willoughby; Patrick A Kupelian; Jean Pouliot; Katsuto Shinohara; Michelle Aubin; Mack Roach; Lisa L Skrumeda; James M Balter; Dale W Litzenberg; Scott W Hadley; John T Wei; Howard M Sandler
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2006-06-01       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  A magnetic resonance imaging study of prostate deformation relative to implanted gold fiducial markers.

Authors:  Alan M Nichol; Kristy K Brock; Gina A Lockwood; Douglas J Moseley; Tara Rosewall; Padraig R Warde; Charles N Catton; David A Jaffray
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2006-11-02       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Three-dimensional intrafractional movement of prostate measured during real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy in supine and prone treatment positions.

Authors:  Kei Kitamura; Hiroki Shirato; Yvette Seppenwoolde; Rikiya Onimaru; Makoto Oda; Katsuhisa Fujita; Shinichi Shimizu; Nobuo Shinohara; Toru Harabayashi; Kazuo Miyasaka
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2002-08-01       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  A randomized trial of supine vs. prone positioning in patients undergoing escalated dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Andrew John Bayley; Charles Nicholas Catton; Tara Haycocks; Valerie Kelly; Hamideh Alasti; Robert Bristow; Pamela Catton; Juanita Crook; Mary Krystyna Gospodarowicz; Michael McLean; Michael Milosevic; Pardraig Warde
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.280

10.  The use of rectal balloon during the delivery of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer: more than just a prostate gland immobilization device?

Authors:  Bin S Teh; John E McGary; Lei Dong; Wei-Yuan Mai; L Steve Carpenter; Hsin H Lu; J Kam Chiu; Shiao Y Woo; Walter H Grant; E Brian Butler
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.360

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.