Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2017
MLC tracking for lung SABR reduces planning target volumes and dose to organs at risk.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Caillet Vincent, Keall Paul J, Colvill Emma, Hardcastle Nicholas, O'Brien Ricky, Szymura Kathryn, Booth Jeremy T
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Assess the dosimetric impact of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) tracking and mid-ventilation (midV) planning compared with the internal target volume (ITV)-based planning approach for lung Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy (SABR).
METHOD: Ten lung SABR patients originally treated with an ITV-based plan were re-planned according to MLC tracking and midV planning schemes. All plans were delivered on a linac to a motion phantom in a simulated treatment with real lung motions. Delivered dose was reconstructed in patient planning scans. ITV-based, tracking and midV regimes were compared at the planning and delivered stages based on PTV volume and dose metrics for the GTV and OAR.
RESULTS: MLC tracking and midV schemes yielded favourable outcomes compared with ITV-based plans. Average reduction in PTV volume was (MLC tracking/MidV) 33.9%/22%. GTV dose coverage performed better with MLC tracking than the other regimes. Reduction in dose to OAR were for the lung (mean lung dose, 0.8Gy/0.2Gy), oesophagus (D3cc, 1.9Gy/1.4Gy), great vessels (D10cc, 3.2Gy/1.3Gy), trachea (D4cc, 1.1Gy/0.9Gy), heart (D1cc, 2.0Gy/0.5Gy) and spinal cord (D0.03cc, 0.5Gy/-0.1Gy).
CONCLUSION: MLC tracking showed reduction in PTV volume, superior GTV dose coverage and organ dose sparing than MidV and ITV-based strategies.
METHOD: Ten lung SABR patients originally treated with an ITV-based plan were re-planned according to MLC tracking and midV planning schemes. All plans were delivered on a linac to a motion phantom in a simulated treatment with real lung motions. Delivered dose was reconstructed in patient planning scans. ITV-based, tracking and midV regimes were compared at the planning and delivered stages based on PTV volume and dose metrics for the GTV and OAR.
RESULTS: MLC tracking and midV schemes yielded favourable outcomes compared with ITV-based plans. Average reduction in PTV volume was (MLC tracking/MidV) 33.9%/22%. GTV dose coverage performed better with MLC tracking than the other regimes. Reduction in dose to OAR were for the lung (mean lung dose, 0.8Gy/0.2Gy), oesophagus (D3cc, 1.9Gy/1.4Gy), great vessels (D10cc, 3.2Gy/1.3Gy), trachea (D4cc, 1.1Gy/0.9Gy), heart (D1cc, 2.0Gy/0.5Gy) and spinal cord (D0.03cc, 0.5Gy/-0.1Gy).
CONCLUSION: MLC tracking showed reduction in PTV volume, superior GTV dose coverage and organ dose sparing than MidV and ITV-based strategies.