Potential dosimetric benefits of four-dimensional radiation treatment planning.

Purpose: To determine the extent of dosimetric differences between conventional three-dimensional (3D) dose calculations and four-dimensional (4D) dose calculations based on deformation of organ models. Methods and Materials: Four-dimensional dose calculations were retrospectively performed on compu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics Vol. 73; no. 5; pp. 1560 - 1566
Autores principales: Starkschall G, Britton K, McAleer MF, Jeter MD, Kaus MR, Bzdusek K, Mohan R, Cox JD, Starkschall, George, Britton, Keith, McAleer, Mary F, Jeter, Melenda D, Kaus, Michael R, Bzdusek, Karl, Mohan, Radhe, Cox, James D
Formato: research Journal Article
Publicado: Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science Apr2009
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=105485176&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 105485176
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        03603016
        1ZQ
      jtl: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
      issn: 03603016
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2009
      vid: 73
      iid: 5
      pid: 2410
      pub: Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science
    artinfo:
      ui:
        105485176
        NLM19231098
        2010231653
        10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.12.024
        NLM19231098
        105485176
      ppf: 1560
      ppct: 6
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Potential dosimetric benefits of four-dimensional radiation treatment planning.
      aug:
        au:
          Starkschall G
          Britton K
          McAleer MF
          Jeter MD
          Kaus MR
          Bzdusek K
          Mohan R
          Cox JD
          Starkschall, George
          Britton, Keith
          McAleer, Mary F
          Jeter, Melenda D
          Kaus, Michael R
          Bzdusek, Karl
          Mohan, Radhe
          Cox, James D
        affil: Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
      sug:
        subj:
          Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung Radiotherapy
          Lung Neoplasms Radiotherapy
          Radiation Dosage
          Radiotherapy, Computer-Assisted Methods
          Algorithms
          Body Weights and Measures
          Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung Pathology
          Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung Radiography
          Diagnostic Imaging Methods
          Heart Radiography
          Lung Neoplasms Pathology
          Lung Neoplasms Radiography
          Movement
          Respiration
          Retrospective Design
          Spinal Cord Radiography
          Tomography, X-Ray Computed Methods
          Human
      ab: Purpose: To determine the extent of dosimetric differences between conventional three-dimensional (3D) dose calculations and four-dimensional (4D) dose calculations based on deformation of organ models. Methods and Materials: Four-dimensional dose calculations were retrospectively performed on computed tomography data sets for 15 patients with Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, using a model-based deformable registration algorithm on a research version of a commercial radiation treatment planning system. Target volume coverage and doses to critical structures calculated using the 4D methodology were compared with those calculated using conventional 3D methodology. Results: For 11 of 15 patients, clinical target volume coverage was comparable in the 3D and 4D calculations, whereas for 7 of 15 patients, planning target volume coverage was comparable. For the other patients, the 4D calculation indicated a difference in target volume dose sufficiently great to warrant replanning. No correlations could be established between differences in 3D and 4D calculations and gross tumor volume size or extent of motion. Negligible differences were observed between 3D and 4D dose-volume relationships for normal anatomic structures. Conclusions: Use of 4D dose calculations, when possible, helps ensure that target volumes will not be underirradiated when respiratory motion may affect the dose distribution.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N