PURPOSE: To assess the hypothesis that the volume of whole brain that receives a certain dose level is primarily dependent on the treated volume rather than on the number, shape, or location of the lesions. This would help a physician validate the suitability of GammaKnife(®) based stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSR) prior to treatment. METHODS: Simulation studies were performed to establish the hypothesis for both oblong and spherical shaped lesions of various numbers and sizes. Forty patients who underwent GKSR [mean age of 54 years (range 7-80), mean number of lesions of 2.5 (range 1-6), and mean lesion volume of 4.4 cm(3) (range 0.02-22.2 cm(3))] were also studied retrospectively. Following recommendations of QUANTEC, the volume of brain irradiated by the 12 Gy (VB12) isodose line was measured and a power-law based relation is proposed here for estimating VB12 from the known tumor volume and the prescription dose. RESULTS: In the simulation study on oblong, spherical, and multiple lesions, the volume of brain irradiated by 50%, 10%, and 1% of maximum dose was found to have linear, linear, and exponentially increasing dependence on the volume of the treated region, respectively. In the retrospective study on 40 GKSR patients, a similar relationship was found to predict the brain dose with a Spearman correlation coefficient >0.9. In both the studies, the volume of brain irradiated by a certain dose level does not have a statistically significant relationship (p ≥ 0.05) with the number, shape, or position of the lesions. The measured VB12 agrees with calculation to within 1.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the simulation and the retrospective clinical studies indicate that the volume of whole brain that receives a certain percentage of the maximum dose is primarily dependent on the treated volume and less on the number, shape, and location of the lesions.
PURPOSE: To assess the hypothesis that the volume of whole brain that receives a certain dose level is primarily dependent on the treated volume rather than on the number, shape, or location of the lesions. This would help a physician validate the suitability of GammaKnife(®) based stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSR) prior to treatment. METHODS: Simulation studies were performed to establish the hypothesis for both oblong and spherical shaped lesions of various numbers and sizes. Forty patients who underwent GKSR [mean age of 54 years (range 7-80), mean number of lesions of 2.5 (range 1-6), and mean lesion volume of 4.4 cm(3) (range 0.02-22.2 cm(3))] were also studied retrospectively. Following recommendations of QUANTEC, the volume of brain irradiated by the 12 Gy (VB12) isodose line was measured and a power-law based relation is proposed here for estimating VB12 from the known tumor volume and the prescription dose. RESULTS: In the simulation study on oblong, spherical, and multiple lesions, the volume of brain irradiated by 50%, 10%, and 1% of maximum dose was found to have linear, linear, and exponentially increasing dependence on the volume of the treated region, respectively. In the retrospective study on 40 GKSR patients, a similar relationship was found to predict the brain dose with a Spearman correlation coefficient >0.9. In both the studies, the volume of brain irradiated by a certain dose level does not have a statistically significant relationship (p ≥ 0.05) with the number, shape, or position of the lesions. The measured VB12 agrees with calculation to within 1.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the simulation and the retrospective clinical studies indicate that the volume of whole brain that receives a certain percentage of the maximum dose is primarily dependent on the treated volume and less on the number, shape, and location of the lesions.
Authors: Yaacov Richard Lawrence; X Allen Li; Issam el Naqa; Carol A Hahn; Lawrence B Marks; Thomas E Merchant; Adam P Dicker Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Ajay K Bhatnagar; John C Flickinger; Douglas Kondziolka; L Dade Lunsford Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-12-09 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Brian J Blonigen; Ryan D Steinmetz; Linda Levin; Michael A Lamba; Ronald E Warnick; John C Breneman Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2009-09-23 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David W Andrews; Charles B Scott; Paul W Sperduto; Adam E Flanders; Laurie E Gaspar; Michael C Schell; Maria Werner-Wasik; William Demas; Janice Ryu; Jean-Paul Bahary; Luis Souhami; Marvin Rotman; Minesh P Mehta; Walter J Curran Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-05-22 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Alan C Hartford; Anthony J Paravati; William J Spire; Zhongze Li; Lesley A Jarvis; Camilo E Fadul; C Harker Rhodes; Kadir Erkmen; Jonathan Friedman; David J Gladstone; Eugen B Hug; David W Roberts; Nathan E Simmons Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2012-07-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mark Ruschin; Arjun Sahgal; Hany Soliman; Sten Myrehaug; May Tsao; Collins Yeboah; Arman Sarfehnia; Brige Chugh; Alex Kiss; Young Lee Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Alexandra Hellerbach; Klaus Luyken; Mauritius Hoevels; Andreas Gierich; Daniel Rueß; Wolfgang W Baus; Martin Kocher; Maximilian I Ruge; Harald Treuer Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-08-17 Impact factor: 3.481