On the performances of different IMRT treatment planning systems for selected paediatric cases

被引:16
|
作者
Fogliata, Antonella [1 ]
Nicolini, Giorgia [1 ]
Alber, Markus [3 ]
Asell, Mats [4 ]
Clivio, Alessandro [1 ]
Dobler, Barbara [2 ]
Larsson, Malin [5 ]
Lohr, Frank [2 ]
Lorenz, Friedlieb [2 ]
Muzik, Jan [3 ]
Polednik, Martin [2 ]
Vanetti, Eugenio [1 ]
Wolff, Dirk [2 ]
Wyttenbach, Rolf [6 ]
Cozzi, Luca [1 ]
机构
[1] Oncol Inst So Switzerland, Med Phys Unit, Bellinzona, Switzerland
[2] Univ Klinikum Mannheim, Klin Strahlentherapie & Radioonkol, Mannheim, Germany
[3] Uniklin Radioonkol Tubingen, Biomed Phys Radiooncol Dept, Tubingen, Germany
[4] Nucletron Scandinavia AB, Uppsala, Sweden
[5] RaySearch Labs, Stockholm, Sweden
[6] Osped Reg Bellinzona & Valli, Dept Radiol, Bellinzona, Switzerland
关键词
D O I
10.1186/1748-717X-2-7
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: To evaluate the performance of seven different TPS (Treatment Planning Systems: Corvus, Eclipse, Hyperion, KonRad, Oncentra Masterplan, Pinnacle and PrecisePLAN) when intensity modulated (IMRT) plans are designed for paediatric tumours. Methods: Datasets (CT images and volumes of interest) of four patients were used to design IMRT plans. The tumour types were: one extraosseous, intrathoracic Ewing Sarcoma; one mediastinal Rhabdomyosarcoma; one metastatic Rhabdomyosarcoma of the anus; one Wilm's tumour of the left kidney with multiple liver metastases. Prescribed doses ranged from 18 to 54.4 Gy. To minimise variability, the same beam geometry and clinical goals were imposed on all systems for every patient. Results were analysed in terms of dose distributions and dose volume histograms. Results: For all patients, IMRT plans lead to acceptable treatments in terms of conformal avoidance since most of the dose objectives for Organs At Risk (OARs) were met, and the Conformity Index (averaged over all TPS and patients) ranged from 1.14 to 1.58 on primary target volumes and from 1.07 to 1.37 on boost volumes. The healthy tissue involvement was measured in terms of several parameters, and the average mean dose ranged from 4.6 to 13.7 Gy. A global scoring method was developed to evaluate plans according to their degree of success in meeting dose objectives (lower scores are better than higher ones). For OARs the range of scores was between 0.75 +/- 0.15 (Eclipse) to 0.92 +/- 0.18 (Pinnacle(3) with physical optimisation). For target volumes, the score ranged from 0.05 +/- 0.05 (Pinnacle(3) with physical optimisation) to 0.16 +/- 0.07 (Corvus). Conclusion: A set of complex paediatric cases presented a variety of individual treatment planning challenges. Despite the large spread of results, inverse planning systems offer promising results for IMRT delivery, hence widening the treatment strategies for this very sensitive class of patients.
引用
收藏
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] On the performances of different IMRT treatment planning systems for selected paediatric cases
    Antonella Fogliata
    Giorgia Nicolini
    Markus Alber
    Mats Åsell
    Alessandro Clivio
    Barbara Dobler
    Malin Larsson
    Frank Lohr
    Friedlieb Lorenz
    Jan Muzik
    Martin Polednik
    Eugenio Vanetti
    Dirk Wolff
    Rolf Wyttenbach
    Luca Cozzi
    [J]. Radiation Oncology, 2
  • [2] Comparison of different IMRT treatment planning systems on pediatric cases
    Cozzi, A. Fogliata
    Asell, M.
    Clivio, A.
    Dobler, B.
    Larsson, M.
    Lohr, F.
    Lorenz, F.
    Muzik, J.
    Nicolini, G.
    Polednik, M.
    Vanetti, V.
    Wolff, D.
    Wyttenbach, R.
    Cozzi, L.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2006, 81 : S408 - S408
  • [3] A comparison of three commercial IMRT treatment planning systems for selected pediatric cases
    Eldesoky, Ismail
    Attalla, Ehab M.
    Elshemey, Wael M.
    Zaghloul, Mohamed S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 13 (02): : 124 - 135
  • [4] COMPARING IMRT TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEMS
    Ceberg, C.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2010, 96 : S33 - S33
  • [5] Different method of IMRT planning for breast treatment
    Khalifeh, A.
    Abdulhay, I.
    Elasmar, H.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2006, 33 (06) : 2087 - 2087
  • [6] Automation of the Treatment Planning Process for IMRT Prostate Cases
    Kapoor, P.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (06) : E708 - E709
  • [7] Assessment of the Performances of Four Commercial Treatment Planning Systems for Simultaneous Integrated Boost IMRT of Prostate Cancer
    Attalla, Ehab M.
    Mokhtar, Maha H.
    Ahmed, Mahmoud M.
    Mosallam, Abdelrahman S.
    Abdalgeleel, Shaimaa A.
    [J]. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics, 2023, 20 (01) : 11 - 18
  • [8] On the performances of Intensity Modulated Protons, RapidArc and Helical Tomotherapy for selected paediatric cases
    Fogliata, Antonella
    Yartsev, Slav
    Nicolini, Giorgia
    Clivio, Alessandro
    Vanetti, Eugenio
    Wyttenbach, Rolf
    Bauman, Glenn
    Cozzi, Luca
    [J]. RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2009, 4
  • [9] On the performances of Intensity Modulated Protons, RapidArc and Helical Tomotherapy for selected paediatric cases
    Antonella Fogliata
    Slav Yartsev
    Giorgia Nicolini
    Alessandro Clivio
    Eugenio Vanetti
    Rolf Wyttenbach
    Glenn Bauman
    Luca Cozzi
    [J]. Radiation Oncology, 4
  • [10] Comparison of two commercial treatment planning systems for IMRT
    Petrie, M
    Robar, JL
    Clark, BG
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2003, 30 (07) : 1944 - 1944