Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 113(1): 214-227, 2022 05 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35074434

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate whether liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning can be harmonized across different treatment planning systems, delivery techniques, and institutions by using a specific prescription method and to minimize the knowledge gap concerning intersystem and interuser differences. We provide best practice guidelines for all used techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multiparametric specification of target dose (gross target volume [GTV]D50%, GTVD0.1cc, GTVV90%, planning target volume [PTV]V70%) with a prescription dose of GTVD50% = 3 × 20 Gy and organ-at-risk (OAR) limits were distributed with computed tomography and structure sets from 3 patients with liver metastases. Thirty-five institutions provided 132 treatment plans using different irradiation techniques. These plans were first analyzed for target and OAR doses. Four different renormalization methods were performed (PTVDmin, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, PTVDmax). The resulting 660 treatments plans were evaluated regarding target doses to study the effect of dose renormalization to different prescription methods. A relative scoring system was used for comparisons. RESULTS: GTVD50% prescription can be performed in all systems. Treatment plan harmonization was overall successful, with standard deviations for Dmax, PTVD98%, GTVD98%, and PTVDmean of 1.6, 3.3, 1.9, and 1.5 Gy, respectively. Primary analysis showed 55 major deviations from clinical goals in 132 plans, whereas in only <20% of deviations GTV/PTV dose was traded for meeting OAR limits. GTVD50% prescription produced the smallest deviation from target planning objectives and between techniques, followed by the PTVDmax, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, and PTVDmin prescription. Deviations were significant for all combinations but for the PTVDmax prescription compared with GTVD50% and PTVD98%. Based on the various dose prescription methods, all systems significantly differed from each other, whereas GTVD50% and PTVD98% prescription showed the least difference between the systems. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the feasibility of harmonizing liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans across different treatment planning systems and delivery techniques when a sufficient set of clinical goals is given.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Hepáticas , Radiocirurgia , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada , Benchmarking , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Hepáticas/radioterapia , Radiocirurgia/métodos , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos
3.
Strahlenther Onkol ; 193(10): 780-790, 2017 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28567503

RESUMO

PURPOSE: The aim was to evaluate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning variability for early stage nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with respect to the published guidelines of the Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Planning computed tomography (CT) scan and the structure sets (planning target volume, PTV; organs at risk, OARs) of 3 patients with early stage NSCLC were sent to 22 radiotherapy departments with SBRT experience: each department was asked to prepare a treatment plan according to the DEGRO guidelines. The prescription dose was 3 fractions of 15 Gy to the 65% isodose. RESULTS: In all, 87 plans were generated: 36 used intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT), 21 used three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), 6 used static field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SF-IMRT), 9 used helical radiotherapy and 15 used robotic radiosurgery. PTV dose coverage and simultaneously kept OARs doses were within the clinical limits published in the DEGRO guidelines. However, mean PTV dose (mean 58.0 Gy, range 52.8-66.4 Gy) and dose conformity indices (mean 0.75, range 0.60-1.00) varied between institutions and techniques (p ≤ 0.02). OARs doses varied substantially between institutions, but appeared to be technique independent (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION: All studied treatment techniques are well suited for SBRT of early stage NSCLC according to the DEGRO guidelines. Homogenization of SBRT practice in Germany is possible through the guidelines; however, detailed treatment plan characteristics varied between techniques and institutions and further homogenization is warranted in future studies and recommendations. Optimized treatment planning should always follow the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/radioterapia , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/radioterapia , Radiocirurgia/estatística & dados numéricos , Radiocirurgia/normas , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/estatística & dados numéricos , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/normas , Benchmarking , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/epidemiologia , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas/patologia , Alemanha/epidemiologia , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/normas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologia , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Prevalência , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA