Brachytherapy · 2017
Variability of treatment planning of seed implantation: A Japanese multicenter simulation study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание 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.
Ishiyama Hiromichi, Nakano Masahiro, Toya Kazuhito, Kota Ryuichi, Kikuchi Koyo, Yamaguchi Takahiro, Kono Naoaki, Kawakami Shogo, Tsutsumi Yuki, Tanaka Tomoki, Eriguchi Takahisa, Ohga Saiji, Yamaguchi Toshihiro, Takakawa Yoshiaki, Morita Masashi, Katayama Norihisa, Ohashi Toshio, Aoki Manabu, Yorozu Atsunori, Saito Siro
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the current variability of treatment planning of seed implantation in Japanese centers and the feasibility of two virtual trials.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two types of contour data were sent to 12 radiation oncologists with a request letter that asked them to make treatment plans on the data in the same manner as in their own practice. Five of the 12 radiation oncologists were asked to participate in the two virtual trials in which the D90 (dose to the hottest 90% of prostate volume) was 1) required to be set at just 180 Gy and 2) increased as much as possible without violating other limitations.
RESULTS: A relatively high dose with a small deviation was irradiated to the prostate in Japanese centers (mean D90 = 188 Gy; SD = 10 Gy). In the virtual trials, all five physicians could achieve 180 Gy for the D90 with a very small deviation, although the urethral dose showed relatively large deviations. Dose escalation without increase of urethral dose or V150 was difficult, although the rectum could be spared by most of the physicians.
CONCLUSION: Our study showed a relatively high dose with a small deviation was prescribed to the prostate in Japanese centers. Consolidated protocols such as D90 = 180 Gy could be available for future trials. Meanwhile, our study suggested that some cautions might be needed for urethral dose and the V150, even when a relatively low D90 was requested.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two types of contour data were sent to 12 radiation oncologists with a request letter that asked them to make treatment plans on the data in the same manner as in their own practice. Five of the 12 radiation oncologists were asked to participate in the two virtual trials in which the D90 (dose to the hottest 90% of prostate volume) was 1) required to be set at just 180 Gy and 2) increased as much as possible without violating other limitations.
RESULTS: A relatively high dose with a small deviation was irradiated to the prostate in Japanese centers (mean D90 = 188 Gy; SD = 10 Gy). In the virtual trials, all five physicians could achieve 180 Gy for the D90 with a very small deviation, although the urethral dose showed relatively large deviations. Dose escalation without increase of urethral dose or V150 was difficult, although the rectum could be spared by most of the physicians.
CONCLUSION: Our study showed a relatively high dose with a small deviation was prescribed to the prostate in Japanese centers. Consolidated protocols such as D90 = 180 Gy could be available for future trials. Meanwhile, our study suggested that some cautions might be needed for urethral dose and the V150, even when a relatively low D90 was requested.