Literature DB >> 25498838

Spine stereotactic body radiation therapy plans: Achieving dose coverage, conformity, and dose falloff.

Linda X Hong1, Viswanathan Shankar2, Jin Shen3, Hsiang-Chi Kuo4, Dinesh Mynampati3, Ravindra Yaparpalvi4, Lee Goddard3, Amar Basavatia4, Jana Fox4, Madhur Garg4, Shalom Kalnicki4, Wolfgang A Tomé4.   

Abstract

We report our experience of establishing planning objectives to achieve dose coverage, conformity, and dose falloff for spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plans. Patients with spine lesions were treated using SBRT in our institution since September 2009. Since September 2011, we established the following planning objectives for our SBRT spine plans in addition to the cord dose constraints: (1) dose coverage—prescription dose (PD) to cover at least 95% planning target volume (PTV) and 90% PD to cover at least 99% PTV; (2) conformity index (CI)—ratio of prescription isodose volume (PIV) to the PTV < 1.2; (3) dose falloff—ratio of 50% PIV to the PTV (R(50%)); (4) and maximum dose in percentage of PD at 2 cm from PTV in any direction (D(2cm)) to follow Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915. We have retrospectively reviewed 66 separate spine lesions treated between September 2009 and December 2012 (31 treated before September 2011 [group 1] and 35 treated after [group 2]). The χ(2) test was used to examine the difference in parameters between groups. The PTV V(100% PD) ≥ 95% objective was met in 29.0% of group 1 vs 91.4% of group 2 (p < 0.01) plans. The PTV V(90% PD) ≥ 99% objective was met in 38.7% of group 1 vs 88.6% of group 2 (p < 0.01) plans. Overall, 4 plans in group 1 had CI > 1.2 vs none in group 2 (p = 0.04). For D(2cm), 48.3% plans yielded a minor violation of the objectives and 16.1% a major violation for group 1, whereas 17.1% exhibited a minor violation and 2.9% a major violation for group 2 (p < 0.01). Spine SBRT plans can be improved on dose coverage, conformity, and dose falloff employing a combination of RTOG spine and lung SBRT protocol planning objectives.
Copyright © 2015 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Spine SBRT plans

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25498838     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2014.11.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  5 in total

1.  Cleaning the dose falloff in lung SBRT plan.

Authors:  Dharmin Desai; Ganesh Narayanasamy; Milan Bimali; Ivan Cordrey; Hisham Elasmar; Senthamizhchelvan Srinivasan; Ellis Lee Johnson
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 2.102

2.  Evaluating which plan quality metrics are appropriate for use in lung SBRT.

Authors:  Ravindra Yaparpalvi; Madhur K Garg; Jin Shen; William R Bodner; Dinesh K Mynampati; Aleiya Gafar; Hsiang-Chi Kuo; Amar K Basavatia; Nitin Ohri; Linda X Hong; Shalom Kalnicki; Wolfgang A Tome
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Dose Evaluation of Fractionated Schema and Distance From Tumor to Spinal Cord for Spinal SBRT with Simultaneous Integrated Boost: A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Hao Yang; Bo-ning Cai; Xiao-shen Wang; Xiao-hu Cong; Wei Xu; Jin-yuan Wang; Jun Yang; Shou-ping Xu; Zhong-jian Ju; Lin Ma
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-02-23

4.  Inverse treatment planning for spinal robotic radiosurgery: an international multi-institutional benchmark trial.

Authors:  Oliver Blanck; Lei Wang; Wolfgang Baus; Jimm Grimm; Thomas Lacornerie; Joakim Nilsson; Sergii Luchkovskyi; Isabel Palazon Cano; Zhenyu Shou; Myriam Ayadi; Harald Treuer; Romain Viard; Frank-Andre Siebert; Mark K H Chan; Guido Hildebrandt; Jürgen Dunst; Detlef Imhoff; Stefan Wurster; Robert Wolff; Pantaleo Romanelli; Eric Lartigau; Robert Semrau; Scott G Soltys; Achim Schweikard
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-05-08       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  A physically meaningful relationship between R50% and PTV surface area in lung SBRT.

Authors:  Dharmin D Desai; Ivan L Cordrey; E L Johnson
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-07-28       Impact factor: 2.102

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.