| Literature DB >> 23634156 |
Katherine L Chapman1, Nitin Ohri, Timothy N Showalter, Laura A Doyle.
Abstract
Treatment of cervical cancer includes combination of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BRT). Traditionally, coronal images displaying dose distribution from a ring and tandem (R&T) implant aid in construction of parametrial boost fields. This research aimed to evaluate a method of shaping parametrial fields utilizing contours created from the high-dose-rate (HDR) BRT dose distribution. Eleven patients receiving HDR-BRT via R&T were identified. The BRT and EBRT CT scans were sent to FocalSim (v4.62)(®) and fused based on bony anatomy. The contour of the HDR isodose line was transferred to the EBRT scan. The EBRT scan was sent to CMS-XIO (v4.62)(®) for planning. This process provides an automated, potentially more accurate method of matching the medial parametrial border to the HDR dose distribution. This allows for a 3D-view of dose from HDR-BRT for clinical decision-making, utilizes a paperless process and saves time over the traditional technique.Entities:
Keywords: brachytherapy; cervical cancer; combined modality
Year: 2013 PMID: 23634156 PMCID: PMC3635048 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2013.34341
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Fig. 1Dose distribution of typical ring and tandem implant shown in axial, sagittal and coronal planes. Plan generated in brachytherapy module of Oncentra MasterPlan and dose normalized to point A
Fig. 2Axial slices showing fusion of external beam planning CT image-set and brachytherapy planning CT image-set in Focal-Sim. The 30% and 50% isodose surfaces are shown on brachytherapy planning CT
Field size as indicated by blocked equivalent square in CMS XIO
| Blocked Equivalent Square (cm) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial Boost | Replanned Boost | Difference | ||||||||||||||
| Right | Left | Right | Left | Right | Left | |||||||||||
| AP | PA | AP | PA | AP | PA | AP | PA | AP | PA | AP | PA | |||||
| Mean | 4.54 | 4.61 | 4.51 | 4.50 | 3.94 | 4.10 | 3.90 | 3.96 | 0.60 | 0.51 | 0.61 | 0.54 | ||||
| Standard deviation | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.53 | 0.59 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.70 | 0.61 | 0.78 | 0.75 | 0.63 | 0.56 | ||||
Fig. 3Left image shows original MLC aperture based on hardcopy images of coronal slices from HDR plan. Right image shows the same MLC aperture with medial border conformed to the contour of the 50% isodose surface
Change in volume of tissue encompassed by 95%, 90%, and 80% isodose surfaces after replan
| Mean | Standard deviation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Initial Boost | Right | 64.10 | 40.05 |
| Left | 65.78 | 42.14 | |
| Replanned Boost | Right | 50.10 | 48.18 |
| Left | 35.28 | 22.53 | |
| Difference | Right | 14.00 | 24.09 |
| Left | 30.51 | 30.51 | |
|
| |||
| Initial Boost | Right | 164.46 | 96.58 |
| Left | 159.64 | 76.13 | |
| Replanned Boost | Right | 124.30 | 107.30 |
| Left | 104.23 | 50.47 | |
| Difference | Right | 40.16 | 62.96 |
| Left | 55.40 | 48.02 | |
|
| |||
| Initial Boost | Right | 340.35 | 138.48 |
| Left | 305.78 | 83.10 | |
| Replanned Boost | Right | 263.02 | 138.23 |
| Left | 238.67 | 89.36 | |
| Difference | Right | 77.33 | 108.84 |
| Left | 67.11 | 59.34 |