AUTOMATED WEEKLY REPLANNING FOR INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY OF CERVIX CANCER

被引:61
|
作者
Stewart, James [1 ]
Lim, Karen [1 ,2 ]
Kelly, Valerie [1 ,2 ]
Xie, Jason [1 ]
Brock, Kristy K. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Moseley, Joanne [1 ]
Cho, Young-Bin [1 ,2 ]
Fyles, Anthony [1 ,2 ]
Lundin, Anna [4 ]
Rehbinder, Henrik [4 ]
Lof, Johan [4 ]
Jaffray, David [1 ,3 ]
Milosevic, Michael [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hlth Network, Radiat Med Program, Ontario Canc Inst, Princess Margaret Hosp, Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Dept Radiat Oncol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Med Biophys, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] RaySearch Labs AB, Stockholm, Sweden
关键词
Cervix cancer; IMRT; Organ motion; Adaptive replanning; Dosimetry; PELVIC RADIATION-THERAPY; GASTROINTESTINAL TOXICITY; WOMEN; TUMOR;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.1699
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: The adoption of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to treat cervical malignancies has been limited in part by complex organ and tumor motion during treatment. This study explores the limits of a highly adaptive, small-margin treatment scenario to accommodate this motion. In addition, the dosimetric consequences of organ and tumor motion are modeled using a combination of deformable registration and fractional dose accumulation techniques. Methods and Materials: Thirty-three cervix cancer patients had target volumes and organs-at-risk contoured on fused, pretreatment magnetic resonance computed tomography images and weekly magnetic resonance scans taken during treatment. The dosimetric impact of interfraction organ and target motion was compared for two hypothetical treatment scenarios: a 3-mm margin plan with no replanning, and a 3-mm margin plan with an automated replan performed on the updated weekly patient geometry. Results: Of the 33 patients, 24 (73%) met clinically acceptable target coverage (98% of the clinical target volume receiving at least 95% of the prescription dose) using the 3-mm margin plan without replanning. The range in dose to 98% of the clinical target volume across all patients was 7.9% of the prescription dose if no replanning was performed. After weekly replanning, this range was tightened to 2.6% of the prescription dose and all patients met clinically acceptable target coverage while maintaining organ-at-risk dose sparing. Conclusions: The dosimetric impact of anatomical motion underscores the challenges of applying IMRT to treat cervix cancer. An appropriate adaptive strategy can ensure target coverage for small-margin IMRT treatments and maintain favorable organ-at-risk dose sparing. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:350 / 358
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Outcomes of intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus conventional radiotherapy for hypopharyngeal cancer
    Mok, Gary
    Gauthier, Isabelle
    Jiang, Haiyan
    Huang, Shao Hui
    Chan, Kelvin
    Witterick, Ian J.
    O'Sullivan, Brian
    Waldron, John N.
    Bayley, Andrew J.
    Cho, B. C. John
    Cummings, Bernard J.
    Dawson, Laura A.
    Hope, Andrew J.
    Kim, John J.
    Ringash, Jolie
    [J]. HEAD AND NECK-JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES AND SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, 2015, 37 (05): : 655 - 661
  • [32] Organ-sparing Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy for Anal Cancer using the ACTII Schedule: A Comparison of Conventional and Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Plans
    Brooks, C. J.
    Lee, Y. K.
    Aitken, K.
    Hansen, V. N.
    Tait, D. M.
    Hawkins, M. A.
    [J]. CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 25 (03) : 155 - 161
  • [33] A Comparative Study of Replanning at the Midcourse and the Latter Course during Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
    Yang, H.
    Wang, W.
    Yu, C.
    Shan, G.
    Hu, W.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06)
  • [34] Weekly robustness evaluation of intensity-modulated proton therapy for oesophageal cancer
    Anakotta, R. Melissa
    van der Laan, Hans P.
    Visser, Sabine
    Ribeiro, Cassia O.
    Dieters, Margriet
    Langendijk, Johannes A.
    Both, Stefan
    Korevaar, Erik W.
    Sijtsema, Nanna M.
    Knopf, Antje
    Muijs, Christina T.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2020, 151 : 66 - 72
  • [35] Adaptive whole pelvis intensity modulated radiotherapy for cervix cancer
    Lim, K.
    Fyles, A.
    Lundin, A.
    Cho, Y.
    Kelly, V.
    Moseley, J.
    Brock, K.
    Stewart, J.
    Rehbinder, H.
    Milosevic, M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2007, 69 (03): : S385 - S386
  • [36] Dosimetric Study of Conventional Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Knowledge-Based Radiation Therapy for Postoperation of Cervix Cancer
    Ma, C.
    Yin, Y.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3240 - 3240
  • [37] CONSENSUS GUIDELINES FOR DELINEATION OF CLINICAL TARGET VOLUME FOR INTENSITY-MODULATED PELVIC RADIOTHERAPY FOR THE DEFINITIVE TREATMENT OF CERVIX CANCER
    Lim, Karen
    Small, William, Jr.
    Portelance, Lorraine
    Creutzberg, Carien
    Jurgenliemk-Schulz, Ina M.
    Mundt, Arno
    Mell, Loren K.
    Mayr, Nina
    Viswanathan, Akila
    Jhingran, Anuja
    Erickson, Beth
    De Los Santos, Jennifer
    Gaffney, David
    Yashar, Catheryn
    Beriwal, Sushil
    Wolfson, Aaron
    Taylor, Alexandra
    Bosch, Walter
    El Naqa, Issam
    Fyles, Anthony
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2011, 79 (02): : 348 - 355
  • [38] Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for early-stage glottic cancer
    Berwouts, Dieter
    Swimberghe, Martijn
    Duprez, Frederic
    Boterberg, Tom
    Bonte, Katrien
    Deron, Philippe
    De Gersem, Werner
    De Neve, Wilfried
    Madani, Indira
    [J]. HEAD AND NECK-JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES AND SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, 2016, 38 : E179 - E184
  • [39] Impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy on node irradiation for breast cancer
    Fenoglietto, P.
    Bourgier, C.
    Riou, O.
    Lemanski, C.
    Azria, D.
    [J]. CANCER RADIOTHERAPIE, 2015, 19 (04): : 265 - 270
  • [40] MANAGED CARE AND THE DIFFUSION OF INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER
    Jacobs, Bruce L.
    Zhang, Yun
    Hollenbeck, Brent K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2012, 187 (04): : E735 - E735