SU‐E‐T‐378: Limits and Possibilities of a Simplistic Approach to Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Planning
Purpose: Challenges for radiation therapy in developing countries include unreliable infrastructure and high patient load. We propose a system to treat whole breast in the prone position without computed tomography and/or planning software. Methods: Six parameters are measured using calipers and lev...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Medical physics (Lancaster) 2014-06, Vol.41 (6Part17), p.312-312 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 312 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6Part17 |
| container_start_page | 312 |
| container_title | Medical physics (Lancaster) |
| container_volume | 41 |
| creator | Hipp, E Osa, E No, H Rosman, M Formenti, S Jozsef, G |
| description | Purpose:
Challenges for radiation therapy in developing countries include unreliable infrastructure and high patient load. We propose a system to treat whole breast in the prone position without computed tomography and/or planning software.
Methods:
Six parameters are measured using calipers and levels with the patient prone in the treatment position. (1) The largest separation; (2) the angle that separation makes with the horizontal; (3) the separation 2 cm posterior to the nipple; (4) the vertical distance between these two separations; (5) the sup/inf length and (6) angle of the desired posterior field edge. The data in (5) (6) and (2) provide field length, collimator and gantry angles. Isocenter is set to the midpoint of (1), anterior jaw setting is 20cm (half‐beam setup), and the dose is prescribed to a point 1.5 cm anterior to isocenter. MUs and wedge angles are calculated using an MU calculator and by requiring 100% dose at that point and 100‐105% at the midpoint of (3). Measurements on 30 CT scans were taken to obtain the data 1‐6. To test the resulting MU/wedge combinations, they were entered into Eclipse (Varian) and dose distributions were calculated. The MU/wedge combinations were recorded and tabulated.
Results:
Performing a dose volume histogram analysis, the contoured breast V95 was 90.5%, and the average V90 was 94.1%. The maximum dose never exceeded 114.5%, (average 108%). The lung V20 was |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1118/1.4888711 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>wiley_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_22355922</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>MP8711</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1001-3feb108c64332f7900abb576535e55d00d66d219df37db7094502b35adce8ecf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1KAzEUhYMoWKsL3yDgysXUm2QyP-6q1B-oWGyLy5BJMk5kmgyTgHTnI_iMPomj7dbFuWfzcTnnIHROYEIIKa7IJC2KIifkAI1omrMkpVAeohFAmSY0BX6MTkJ4B4CMcRght1x_f37NBq0Gsby4xnO7sTFg6TRe-BBsZVsbrQnY11jipd10rQ3RKjztut5L1eDo8WvjW4NveiNDxC9SWxmtd3jVmF52W7xopXPWvZ2io1q2wZztfYzWd7PV7UMyf75_vJ3OE0UASMJqUxEoVJYyRuu8BJBVxfOMM2441wA6yzQlpa5Zrqt86MaBVoxLrUxhVM3G6GL31w9JRVA2GtUo75xRUVDKOC-HO0aXO0r1Q9He1KLr7Ub2W0FA_M4piNjPObDJjv2wrdn-D4qnxR__A1lBdls</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>SU‐E‐T‐378: Limits and Possibilities of a Simplistic Approach to Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Planning</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Hipp, E ; Osa, E ; No, H ; Rosman, M ; Formenti, S ; Jozsef, G</creator><creatorcontrib>Hipp, E ; Osa, E ; No, H ; Rosman, M ; Formenti, S ; Jozsef, G</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose:
Challenges for radiation therapy in developing countries include unreliable infrastructure and high patient load. We propose a system to treat whole breast in the prone position without computed tomography and/or planning software.
Methods:
Six parameters are measured using calipers and levels with the patient prone in the treatment position. (1) The largest separation; (2) the angle that separation makes with the horizontal; (3) the separation 2 cm posterior to the nipple; (4) the vertical distance between these two separations; (5) the sup/inf length and (6) angle of the desired posterior field edge. The data in (5) (6) and (2) provide field length, collimator and gantry angles. Isocenter is set to the midpoint of (1), anterior jaw setting is 20cm (half‐beam setup), and the dose is prescribed to a point 1.5 cm anterior to isocenter. MUs and wedge angles are calculated using an MU calculator and by requiring 100% dose at that point and 100‐105% at the midpoint of (3). Measurements on 30 CT scans were taken to obtain the data 1‐6. To test the resulting MU/wedge combinations, they were entered into Eclipse (Varian) and dose distributions were calculated. The MU/wedge combinations were recorded and tabulated.
Results:
Performing a dose volume histogram analysis, the contoured breast V95 was 90.5%, and the average V90 was 94.1%. The maximum dose never exceeded 114.5%, (average 108%). The lung V20 was <5% for 96.7%, and the heart V5 was <10% for 93.3% of our sample.
Conclusion:
A method to provide prone whole breast treatment without CT‐planning was developed. The method provides reasonable coverage and normal tissue sparing. This approach is not recommended if imaging and planning capabilities are available; it was designed to specifically avoid the need for CT planning and should be reserved to clinics that need to avoid that step.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-2405</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2473-4209</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1118/1.4888711</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Association of Physicists in Medicine</publisher><subject>60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES ; CAT SCANNING ; Collimators ; Computed tomography ; COMPUTER CODES ; Computer software ; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ; Dosimetry ; Heart ; Lungs ; MAMMARY GLANDS ; Medical imaging ; PATIENTS ; PLANNING ; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS ; RADIATION DOSES ; RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY ; Radiation treatment ; RADIOTHERAPY ; Tissues</subject><ispartof>Medical physics (Lancaster), 2014-06, Vol.41 (6Part17), p.312-312</ispartof><rights>2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1118%2F1.4888711$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1417,27924,27925,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/22355922$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hipp, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osa, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>No, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosman, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Formenti, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jozsef, G</creatorcontrib><title>SU‐E‐T‐378: Limits and Possibilities of a Simplistic Approach to Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Planning</title><title>Medical physics (Lancaster)</title><description>Purpose:
Challenges for radiation therapy in developing countries include unreliable infrastructure and high patient load. We propose a system to treat whole breast in the prone position without computed tomography and/or planning software.
Methods:
Six parameters are measured using calipers and levels with the patient prone in the treatment position. (1) The largest separation; (2) the angle that separation makes with the horizontal; (3) the separation 2 cm posterior to the nipple; (4) the vertical distance between these two separations; (5) the sup/inf length and (6) angle of the desired posterior field edge. The data in (5) (6) and (2) provide field length, collimator and gantry angles. Isocenter is set to the midpoint of (1), anterior jaw setting is 20cm (half‐beam setup), and the dose is prescribed to a point 1.5 cm anterior to isocenter. MUs and wedge angles are calculated using an MU calculator and by requiring 100% dose at that point and 100‐105% at the midpoint of (3). Measurements on 30 CT scans were taken to obtain the data 1‐6. To test the resulting MU/wedge combinations, they were entered into Eclipse (Varian) and dose distributions were calculated. The MU/wedge combinations were recorded and tabulated.
Results:
Performing a dose volume histogram analysis, the contoured breast V95 was 90.5%, and the average V90 was 94.1%. The maximum dose never exceeded 114.5%, (average 108%). The lung V20 was <5% for 96.7%, and the heart V5 was <10% for 93.3% of our sample.
Conclusion:
A method to provide prone whole breast treatment without CT‐planning was developed. The method provides reasonable coverage and normal tissue sparing. This approach is not recommended if imaging and planning capabilities are available; it was designed to specifically avoid the need for CT planning and should be reserved to clinics that need to avoid that step.</description><subject>60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES</subject><subject>CAT SCANNING</subject><subject>Collimators</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>COMPUTER CODES</subject><subject>Computer software</subject><subject>DEVELOPING COUNTRIES</subject><subject>Dosimetry</subject><subject>Heart</subject><subject>Lungs</subject><subject>MAMMARY GLANDS</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>PATIENTS</subject><subject>PLANNING</subject><subject>RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS</subject><subject>RADIATION DOSES</subject><subject>RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY</subject><subject>Radiation treatment</subject><subject>RADIOTHERAPY</subject><subject>Tissues</subject><issn>0094-2405</issn><issn>2473-4209</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kM1KAzEUhYMoWKsL3yDgysXUm2QyP-6q1B-oWGyLy5BJMk5kmgyTgHTnI_iMPomj7dbFuWfzcTnnIHROYEIIKa7IJC2KIifkAI1omrMkpVAeohFAmSY0BX6MTkJ4B4CMcRght1x_f37NBq0Gsby4xnO7sTFg6TRe-BBsZVsbrQnY11jipd10rQ3RKjztut5L1eDo8WvjW4NveiNDxC9SWxmtd3jVmF52W7xopXPWvZ2io1q2wZztfYzWd7PV7UMyf75_vJ3OE0UASMJqUxEoVJYyRuu8BJBVxfOMM2441wA6yzQlpa5Zrqt86MaBVoxLrUxhVM3G6GL31w9JRVA2GtUo75xRUVDKOC-HO0aXO0r1Q9He1KLr7Ub2W0FA_M4piNjPObDJjv2wrdn-D4qnxR__A1lBdls</recordid><startdate>201406</startdate><enddate>201406</enddate><creator>Hipp, E</creator><creator>Osa, E</creator><creator>No, H</creator><creator>Rosman, M</creator><creator>Formenti, S</creator><creator>Jozsef, G</creator><general>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201406</creationdate><title>SU‐E‐T‐378: Limits and Possibilities of a Simplistic Approach to Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Planning</title><author>Hipp, E ; Osa, E ; No, H ; Rosman, M ; Formenti, S ; Jozsef, G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1001-3feb108c64332f7900abb576535e55d00d66d219df37db7094502b35adce8ecf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES</topic><topic>CAT SCANNING</topic><topic>Collimators</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>COMPUTER CODES</topic><topic>Computer software</topic><topic>DEVELOPING COUNTRIES</topic><topic>Dosimetry</topic><topic>Heart</topic><topic>Lungs</topic><topic>MAMMARY GLANDS</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>PATIENTS</topic><topic>PLANNING</topic><topic>RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS</topic><topic>RADIATION DOSES</topic><topic>RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY</topic><topic>Radiation treatment</topic><topic>RADIOTHERAPY</topic><topic>Tissues</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hipp, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Osa, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>No, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosman, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Formenti, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jozsef, G</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hipp, E</au><au>Osa, E</au><au>No, H</au><au>Rosman, M</au><au>Formenti, S</au><au>Jozsef, G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SU‐E‐T‐378: Limits and Possibilities of a Simplistic Approach to Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Planning</atitle><jtitle>Medical physics (Lancaster)</jtitle><date>2014-06</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>6Part17</issue><spage>312</spage><epage>312</epage><pages>312-312</pages><issn>0094-2405</issn><eissn>2473-4209</eissn><abstract>Purpose:
Challenges for radiation therapy in developing countries include unreliable infrastructure and high patient load. We propose a system to treat whole breast in the prone position without computed tomography and/or planning software.
Methods:
Six parameters are measured using calipers and levels with the patient prone in the treatment position. (1) The largest separation; (2) the angle that separation makes with the horizontal; (3) the separation 2 cm posterior to the nipple; (4) the vertical distance between these two separations; (5) the sup/inf length and (6) angle of the desired posterior field edge. The data in (5) (6) and (2) provide field length, collimator and gantry angles. Isocenter is set to the midpoint of (1), anterior jaw setting is 20cm (half‐beam setup), and the dose is prescribed to a point 1.5 cm anterior to isocenter. MUs and wedge angles are calculated using an MU calculator and by requiring 100% dose at that point and 100‐105% at the midpoint of (3). Measurements on 30 CT scans were taken to obtain the data 1‐6. To test the resulting MU/wedge combinations, they were entered into Eclipse (Varian) and dose distributions were calculated. The MU/wedge combinations were recorded and tabulated.
Results:
Performing a dose volume histogram analysis, the contoured breast V95 was 90.5%, and the average V90 was 94.1%. The maximum dose never exceeded 114.5%, (average 108%). The lung V20 was <5% for 96.7%, and the heart V5 was <10% for 93.3% of our sample.
Conclusion:
A method to provide prone whole breast treatment without CT‐planning was developed. The method provides reasonable coverage and normal tissue sparing. This approach is not recommended if imaging and planning capabilities are available; it was designed to specifically avoid the need for CT planning and should be reserved to clinics that need to avoid that step.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Association of Physicists in Medicine</pub><doi>10.1118/1.4888711</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0094-2405 |
| ispartof | Medical physics (Lancaster), 2014-06, Vol.41 (6Part17), p.312-312 |
| issn | 0094-2405 2473-4209 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_osti_scitechconnect_22355922 |
| source | Access via Wiley Online Library; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | 60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES CAT SCANNING Collimators Computed tomography COMPUTER CODES Computer software DEVELOPING COUNTRIES Dosimetry Heart Lungs MAMMARY GLANDS Medical imaging PATIENTS PLANNING RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS RADIATION DOSES RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY Radiation treatment RADIOTHERAPY Tissues |
| title | SU‐E‐T‐378: Limits and Possibilities of a Simplistic Approach to Whole Breast Radiation Therapy Planning |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T02%3A12%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SU%E2%80%90E%E2%80%90T%E2%80%90378:%20Limits%20and%20Possibilities%20of%20a%20Simplistic%20Approach%20to%20Whole%20Breast%20Radiation%20Therapy%20Planning&rft.jtitle=Medical%20physics%20(Lancaster)&rft.au=Hipp,%20E&rft.date=2014-06&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=6Part17&rft.spage=312&rft.epage=312&rft.pages=312-312&rft.issn=0094-2405&rft.eissn=2473-4209&rft_id=info:doi/10.1118/1.4888711&rft_dat=%3Cwiley_osti_%3EMP8711%3C/wiley_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |