Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Respiratory motion-management in stereotactic body radiation therapy for lung cancer - A dosimetric comparison in an anthropomorphic lung phantom (LuCa)


Ehrbar, Stefanie; Perrin, Rosalind; Peroni, Marta; Bernatowicz, Kinga; Parkel, Thomas; Pytko, Izabela; Klöck, Stephan; Guckenberger, Matthias; Tanadini-Lang, Stephanie; Weber, Damien Charles; Lomax, Antony (2016). Respiratory motion-management in stereotactic body radiation therapy for lung cancer - A dosimetric comparison in an anthropomorphic lung phantom (LuCa). Radiotherapy and Oncology, 121(2):328-334.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The objective of this study was to compare the latest respiratory motion-management strategies, namely the internal-target-volume (ITV) concept, the mid-ventilation (MidV) principle, respiratory gating and dynamic couch tracking. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anthropomorphic, deformable and dynamic lung phantom was used for the dosimetric validation of these techniques. Stereotactic treatments were adapted to match the techniques and five distinct respiration patterns, and delivered to the phantom while radiographic film measurements were taken inside the tumor. To report on tumor coverage, these dose distributions were used to calculate mean doses (Dmean), changes in homogeneity indices (ΔH2-98), gamma agreement, and areas covered by the planned minimum dose (A>Dmin). RESULTS All techniques achieved good tumor coverage (A>Dmin>99.0%) and minor changes in Dmean (±3.2%). Gating and tracking strategies showed superior results in gamma agreement and ΔH2-98 compared to ITV and MidV concepts, which seem to be more influenced by the interplay and the gradient effect. For lung, heart and spinal cord, significant dose differences between the four techniques were found (p<0.05), with lowest doses for gating and tracking strategies. CONCLUSION Active motion-management techniques, such as gating or tracking, showed superior tumor dose coverage and better organ dose sparing than the passive techniques based on tumor margins.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The objective of this study was to compare the latest respiratory motion-management strategies, namely the internal-target-volume (ITV) concept, the mid-ventilation (MidV) principle, respiratory gating and dynamic couch tracking. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anthropomorphic, deformable and dynamic lung phantom was used for the dosimetric validation of these techniques. Stereotactic treatments were adapted to match the techniques and five distinct respiration patterns, and delivered to the phantom while radiographic film measurements were taken inside the tumor. To report on tumor coverage, these dose distributions were used to calculate mean doses (Dmean), changes in homogeneity indices (ΔH2-98), gamma agreement, and areas covered by the planned minimum dose (A>Dmin). RESULTS All techniques achieved good tumor coverage (A>Dmin>99.0%) and minor changes in Dmean (±3.2%). Gating and tracking strategies showed superior results in gamma agreement and ΔH2-98 compared to ITV and MidV concepts, which seem to be more influenced by the interplay and the gradient effect. For lung, heart and spinal cord, significant dose differences between the four techniques were found (p<0.05), with lowest doses for gating and tracking strategies. CONCLUSION Active motion-management techniques, such as gating or tracking, showed superior tumor dose coverage and better organ dose sparing than the passive techniques based on tumor margins.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
42 citations in Web of Science®
45 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

217 downloads since deposited on 12 Jan 2017
35 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Radiation Oncology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Health Sciences > Hematology
Health Sciences > Oncology
Health Sciences > Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
Language:English
Date:November 2016
Deposited On:12 Jan 2017 11:38
Last Modified:26 Jan 2022 11:18
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0167-8140
OA Status:Green
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.10.011
PubMed ID:27817945
  • Content: Accepted Version