Linda J Bell1, Jennifer Cox, Thomas Eade, Marianne Rinks, Andrew Kneebone. 1. Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology Department, Royal North Shore Hospital, Australia; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is little data to guide radiation oncologists on appropriate margin selection in the post-prostatectomy setting. The aim of this study was to quantify interfraction variation in motion of the prostate bed to determine these margins. METHODS: The superior and inferior surgical clips in the prostate bed were tracked on pretreatment cone beam CT images (n = 377) for 40 patients who had receivedpost-prostatectomy radiotherapy. Prostate bed motion was calculated for the upper and lower segments by measuring the position of surgical clips located close to midline relative to bony anatomy in the axial (translational) and sagittal (tilt) planes. The frequency of potential geographic misses was calculated for either 1 cm or 0.5 cm posterior planning target volume margins. RESULTS: The mean magnitude of movement of the prostate bed in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right planes, respectively, were as follows: upper portion, 0.50 cm, 0.28 cm, 0.10 cm; lower portion, 0.18 cm, 0.18 cm, 0.08 cm. The random and systematic errors, respectively, of the prostate bed motion in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right planes, respectively, were as follows: upper portion, 0.47 cm and 0.50 cm, 0.28 cm and 0.27 cm, 0.11 cm and 0.11 cm; lower portion, 0.17 cm and 0.18 cm, 0.17 cm and 0.19 cm, 0.08 cm and 0.10 cm. Most geographic misses occurred in the upper prostate bed in the anterior-posterior plane. The median prostate bed tilt was 1.8° (range -23.4° to 42.3°). CONCLUSIONS:Variability was seen in all planes for the movement of both surgical clips. The greatest movement occurred in the anterior-posterior plane in the upper prostate bed, which could cause geographic miss of treatment delivery. The variability in the movement of the superior and inferior clips indicates a prostate bed tilt that would be difficult to correct with standard online matching techniques. This creates a strong argument for using anisotropic planning target volume margins in post-prostatectomy radiotherapy.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: There is little data to guide radiation oncologists on appropriate margin selection in the post-prostatectomy setting. The aim of this study was to quantify interfraction variation in motion of the prostate bed to determine these margins. METHODS: The superior and inferior surgical clips in the prostate bed were tracked on pretreatment cone beam CT images (n = 377) for 40 patients who had received post-prostatectomy radiotherapy. Prostate bed motion was calculated for the upper and lower segments by measuring the position of surgical clips located close to midline relative to bony anatomy in the axial (translational) and sagittal (tilt) planes. The frequency of potential geographic misses was calculated for either 1 cm or 0.5 cm posterior planning target volume margins. RESULTS: The mean magnitude of movement of the prostate bed in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right planes, respectively, were as follows: upper portion, 0.50 cm, 0.28 cm, 0.10 cm; lower portion, 0.18 cm, 0.18 cm, 0.08 cm. The random and systematic errors, respectively, of the prostate bed motion in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right planes, respectively, were as follows: upper portion, 0.47 cm and 0.50 cm, 0.28 cm and 0.27 cm, 0.11 cm and 0.11 cm; lower portion, 0.17 cm and 0.18 cm, 0.17 cm and 0.19 cm, 0.08 cm and 0.10 cm. Most geographic misses occurred in the upper prostate bed in the anterior-posterior plane. The median prostate bed tilt was 1.8° (range -23.4° to 42.3°). CONCLUSIONS: Variability was seen in all planes for the movement of both surgical clips. The greatest movement occurred in the anterior-posterior plane in the upper prostate bed, which could cause geographic miss of treatment delivery. The variability in the movement of the superior and inferior clips indicates a prostate bed tilt that would be difficult to correct with standard online matching techniques. This creates a strong argument for using anisotropic planning target volume margins in post-prostatectomy radiotherapy.
Authors: Linda J Bell; Jennifer Cox; Thomas Eade; Marianne Rinks; Alan Herschtal; Andrew Kneebone Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-07-26 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Florent Vilotte; Mickael Antoine; Maxime Bobin; Igor Latorzeff; Stéphane Supiot; Pierre Richaud; Laurence Thomas; Nicolas Leduc; Stephane Guérif; Jone Iriondo-Alberdi; Renaud de Crevoisier; Paul Sargos Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Sara Elakshar; James Man Git Tsui; Michael Jonathan Kucharczyk; Nada Tomic; Ziad Simon Fawaz; Boris Bahoric; Joseph Papayanatos; Ahmad Chaddad; Tamim Niazi Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-01-01
Authors: Mona Splinter; Tilman Bostel; Ilias Sachpazidis; Tobias Fechter; Constantinos Zamboglou; Oliver Jäkel; Peter E Huber; Jürgen Debus; Dimos Baltas; Nils H Nicolay Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 6.244