Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) · 2020
Assessment of online adaptive MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy of liver cancers.
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.
Padgett Kyle R, Simpson Garrett, Asher David, Portelance Lorraine, Bossart Elizabeth, Dogan Nesrin
Аннотация
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Online Adaptive Radiotherapy (ART) with daily MR-imaging has the potential to improve dosimetric accuracy by accounting for inter-fractional anatomical changes. This study provides an assessment for the feasibility and potential benefits of online adaptive MRI-Guided Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) for treatment of liver cancer.
MATERIALS/METHODS: Ten patients with liver cancer treated with MR-Guided SBRT were included. Prescription doses ranged between 27 and 50 Gy in 3-5 fx. All SBRT fractions employed daily MR-guided setup while utilizing cine-MR gating. Organs-at-risk (OARs) included duodenum, bowel, stomach, kidneys and spinal cord. Daily MRIs and contours were utilized to create each adapted plan. Adapted plans used the beam-parameters and optimization-objectives from the initial plan. Planning target volume (PTV) coverage and OAR constraints were used to compare non-adaptive and adaptive plans.
RESULTS: PTV coverage for non-adapted treatment plans was below the prescribed coverage for 32/47 fractions (68%), with 11 fractions failing by more than 10%. All 47 adapted fractions met prescribed coverage. OAR constraint violations were also compared for several organs. The duodenum exceeded tolerance for 5/23 non-adapted and 0/23 for adapted fractions. The bowel exceeded tolerance for 5/34 non-adaptive and 1/34 adaptive fractions. The stomach exceeded tolerance for 4/19 non-adapted and 1/19 for adaptive fractions. Accumulated dose volume histograms were also generated for each patient.
CONCLUSION: Online adaptive MR-Guided SBRT of liver cancer using daily re-optimization resulted in better target conformality, coverage and OAR sparing compared with non-adaptive SBRT. Daily adaptive planning may allow for PTV dose escalation without compromising OAR sparing.
MATERIALS/METHODS: Ten patients with liver cancer treated with MR-Guided SBRT were included. Prescription doses ranged between 27 and 50 Gy in 3-5 fx. All SBRT fractions employed daily MR-guided setup while utilizing cine-MR gating. Organs-at-risk (OARs) included duodenum, bowel, stomach, kidneys and spinal cord. Daily MRIs and contours were utilized to create each adapted plan. Adapted plans used the beam-parameters and optimization-objectives from the initial plan. Planning target volume (PTV) coverage and OAR constraints were used to compare non-adaptive and adaptive plans.
RESULTS: PTV coverage for non-adapted treatment plans was below the prescribed coverage for 32/47 fractions (68%), with 11 fractions failing by more than 10%. All 47 adapted fractions met prescribed coverage. OAR constraint violations were also compared for several organs. The duodenum exceeded tolerance for 5/23 non-adapted and 0/23 for adapted fractions. The bowel exceeded tolerance for 5/34 non-adaptive and 1/34 adaptive fractions. The stomach exceeded tolerance for 4/19 non-adapted and 1/19 for adaptive fractions. Accumulated dose volume histograms were also generated for each patient.
CONCLUSION: Online adaptive MR-Guided SBRT of liver cancer using daily re-optimization resulted in better target conformality, coverage and OAR sparing compared with non-adaptive SBRT. Daily adaptive planning may allow for PTV dose escalation without compromising OAR sparing.