Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The aim of this study was to investigate the dosimetric accuracy of imaged-guided radiation therapy for prostate patients using the in-room computed tomography (CT) target localization technique. A Siemens CT-on-rails system was used for patient setup and target localization for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of prostate cancer. Fifteen previously treated prostate patients were included in this retrospective study. CT-on-Rails scans were performed before and after the IMRT treatment under local IRB approval. A total of 15 original simulation CT scans and 98 post-treatment CT scans were contoured by the same oncologist to delineate the prostate target, bladder, and rectum. IMRT plans were generated on the original simulation CTs and the same MUs and leaf sequences were used to compute the dose distributions using post-treatment CTs. Varian Velocity deformable registration was used for the summation of the fractional doses and the cumulative doses were compared with the planned doses. For the 15 patients investigated, the mean isocenter shift was up to 4.0 mm in the left-right direction, 5.9 mm in the anterior-posterior direction and 5.6 mm in the superior-inferior direction due to interfractional organ motion. The mean rectal volume varied from 0.6 to 1.73 times and the mean bladder volume varied from 0.59 to 3.65 times between simulation and the end of treatment. The prescription dose to 95% of the PTV, D, was set to 76 Gy for all treatment plans. The dose to 95% of the clinical treatment volume (CTV), D, was 74.0 to 77.6 Gy and the minimum CTV dose, D, was 61.0 to 71.6 Gy, respectively, in the cumulative dose distributions. Detailed analyses showed that 7.1% of the treatment fractions had cold spots (< 85% of D) in the peripheral CTV, leading to D < 64 Gy in the cumulative dose distributions for 4 patients. The rectal dose-volume constraints were violated in 35.7% of the treatment fractions while the bladder dose was much improved in 82.7% of the treatment fractions. The current IGRT procedure for patient setup and target localization using rigid-body registration based on contour/anatomy matching is effective for population-based PTV margins. For a small group of patients, specific PTV margins and/or real-time target monitoring/tracking will be necessary due to significant prostate deformation/rotation caused by inter- and intrafractional bladder and rectal volume variation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2020.09.007 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!