Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy
Purpose: To assess the impact of intrafraction intervention on margins for prostate radiotherapy. Methods and Materials: Eleven supine prostate patients with three implanted transponders were studied. The relative transponder positions were monitored for 8 min and combined with previously measured d...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics biology, physics, 2006-06, Vol.65 (2), p.548-553 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 553 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 548 |
container_title | International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics |
container_volume | 65 |
creator | Litzenberg, Dale W. Balter, James M. Hadley, Scott W. Sandler, Howard M. Willoughby, Twyla R. Kupelian, Patrick A. Levine, Lisa |
description | Purpose: To assess the impact of intrafraction intervention on margins for prostate radiotherapy.
Methods and Materials: Eleven supine prostate patients with three implanted transponders were studied. The relative transponder positions were monitored for 8 min and combined with previously measured data on prostate position relative to skin marks. Margins were determined for situations of (
1) skin-based positioning, and (
2) pretreatment transponder positioning. Intratreatment intervention was simulated assuming conditions of (
1) continuous tracking, and (
2) a 3-mm threshold for position correction.
Results: For skin-based setup without and with inclusion of intrafraction motion, prostate treatments would have required average margins of 8.0, 7.3, and 10.0 mm and 8.2, 10.2, and 12.5 mm, about the left–right, anterior–posterior, and cranial–caudal directions, respectively. Positioning by prostate markers at the start of the treatment fraction reduced these values to 1.8, 5.8, and 7.1 mm, respectively. Interbeam adjustment further reduced margins to an average of 1.4, 2.3, and 1.8 mm. Intrabeam adjustment yielded margins of 1.3, 1.5, and 1.5 mm, respectively.
Conclusion: Significant reductions in margins might be achieved by repositioning the patient before each beam, either radiographically or electromagnetically. However, 2 of the 11 patients would have benefited from continuous target tracking and threshold-based intervention. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.033 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67964438</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0360301606000952</els_id><sourcerecordid>67964438</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-dfdf63e087f97d9b83167f9f0553efdff46b57365588fdc148a3be59e4d777673</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1LwzAUwIMobk7_A5GevLUmy1d7EWQ4HQy8KHgLafOiKVszk1bYf29mB948vQfv975-CF0TXBBMxF1buDb4elfMMeYFmReY0hM0JaWscsr5-ymaYipwThM8QRcxthhjQiQ7RxMiOOMVqaZouersZoCugczbzHV90Dbopne-y7b-NxwyHT5cFzPrQ7YLPva6hyxo43z_CUHv9pfozOpNhKtjnKG35ePr4jlfvzytFg_rvGFz0efGGiso4FLaSpqqLikRKbWYcwqpZpmouaSC87K0piGs1LQGXgEzUkoh6QzdjnPTFV8DxF5tXWxgs9Ed-CEqISvBGC0TyEawSefGAFbtgktv7BXB6uBPtWr0pw7-FJmr5C-13RznD_UWzF_TUVgC7kcA0pffDoKKjTvoMy5A0yvj3f8bfgDCkIRT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67964438</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Litzenberg, Dale W. ; Balter, James M. ; Hadley, Scott W. ; Sandler, Howard M. ; Willoughby, Twyla R. ; Kupelian, Patrick A. ; Levine, Lisa</creator><creatorcontrib>Litzenberg, Dale W. ; Balter, James M. ; Hadley, Scott W. ; Sandler, Howard M. ; Willoughby, Twyla R. ; Kupelian, Patrick A. ; Levine, Lisa</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: To assess the impact of intrafraction intervention on margins for prostate radiotherapy.
Methods and Materials: Eleven supine prostate patients with three implanted transponders were studied. The relative transponder positions were monitored for 8 min and combined with previously measured data on prostate position relative to skin marks. Margins were determined for situations of (
1) skin-based positioning, and (
2) pretreatment transponder positioning. Intratreatment intervention was simulated assuming conditions of (
1) continuous tracking, and (
2) a 3-mm threshold for position correction.
Results: For skin-based setup without and with inclusion of intrafraction motion, prostate treatments would have required average margins of 8.0, 7.3, and 10.0 mm and 8.2, 10.2, and 12.5 mm, about the left–right, anterior–posterior, and cranial–caudal directions, respectively. Positioning by prostate markers at the start of the treatment fraction reduced these values to 1.8, 5.8, and 7.1 mm, respectively. Interbeam adjustment further reduced margins to an average of 1.4, 2.3, and 1.8 mm. Intrabeam adjustment yielded margins of 1.3, 1.5, and 1.5 mm, respectively.
Conclusion: Significant reductions in margins might be achieved by repositioning the patient before each beam, either radiographically or electromagnetically. However, 2 of the 11 patients would have benefited from continuous target tracking and threshold-based intervention.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0360-3016</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-355X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.033</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16545919</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Dose Fractionation ; Electromagnetic Phenomena - instrumentation ; Electromagnetic Phenomena - methods ; Gold - administration & dosage ; Humans ; Intrafraction motion ; Male ; Margins ; Movement ; Organ motion ; Prostate - diagnostic imaging ; Prostate cancer ; Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy ; Prostheses and Implants ; Radiography ; Radiotherapy, Conformal - methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Setup correction ; Supine Position ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2006-06, Vol.65 (2), p.548-553</ispartof><rights>2006 Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-dfdf63e087f97d9b83167f9f0553efdff46b57365588fdc148a3be59e4d777673</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-dfdf63e087f97d9b83167f9f0553efdff46b57365588fdc148a3be59e4d777673</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360301606000952$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16545919$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Litzenberg, Dale W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balter, James M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hadley, Scott W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandler, Howard M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willoughby, Twyla R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kupelian, Patrick A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levine, Lisa</creatorcontrib><title>Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy</title><title>International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics</title><addtitle>Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys</addtitle><description>Purpose: To assess the impact of intrafraction intervention on margins for prostate radiotherapy.
Methods and Materials: Eleven supine prostate patients with three implanted transponders were studied. The relative transponder positions were monitored for 8 min and combined with previously measured data on prostate position relative to skin marks. Margins were determined for situations of (
1) skin-based positioning, and (
2) pretreatment transponder positioning. Intratreatment intervention was simulated assuming conditions of (
1) continuous tracking, and (
2) a 3-mm threshold for position correction.
Results: For skin-based setup without and with inclusion of intrafraction motion, prostate treatments would have required average margins of 8.0, 7.3, and 10.0 mm and 8.2, 10.2, and 12.5 mm, about the left–right, anterior–posterior, and cranial–caudal directions, respectively. Positioning by prostate markers at the start of the treatment fraction reduced these values to 1.8, 5.8, and 7.1 mm, respectively. Interbeam adjustment further reduced margins to an average of 1.4, 2.3, and 1.8 mm. Intrabeam adjustment yielded margins of 1.3, 1.5, and 1.5 mm, respectively.
Conclusion: Significant reductions in margins might be achieved by repositioning the patient before each beam, either radiographically or electromagnetically. However, 2 of the 11 patients would have benefited from continuous target tracking and threshold-based intervention.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Dose Fractionation</subject><subject>Electromagnetic Phenomena - instrumentation</subject><subject>Electromagnetic Phenomena - methods</subject><subject>Gold - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intrafraction motion</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Margins</subject><subject>Movement</subject><subject>Organ motion</subject><subject>Prostate - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Prostate cancer</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy</subject><subject>Prostheses and Implants</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Radiotherapy, Conformal - methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Setup correction</subject><subject>Supine Position</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0360-3016</issn><issn>1879-355X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1LwzAUwIMobk7_A5GevLUmy1d7EWQ4HQy8KHgLafOiKVszk1bYf29mB948vQfv975-CF0TXBBMxF1buDb4elfMMeYFmReY0hM0JaWscsr5-ymaYipwThM8QRcxthhjQiQ7RxMiOOMVqaZouersZoCugczbzHV90Dbopne-y7b-NxwyHT5cFzPrQ7YLPva6hyxo43z_CUHv9pfozOpNhKtjnKG35ePr4jlfvzytFg_rvGFz0efGGiso4FLaSpqqLikRKbWYcwqpZpmouaSC87K0piGs1LQGXgEzUkoh6QzdjnPTFV8DxF5tXWxgs9Ed-CEqISvBGC0TyEawSefGAFbtgktv7BXB6uBPtWr0pw7-FJmr5C-13RznD_UWzF_TUVgC7kcA0pffDoKKjTvoMy5A0yvj3f8bfgDCkIRT</recordid><startdate>20060601</startdate><enddate>20060601</enddate><creator>Litzenberg, Dale W.</creator><creator>Balter, James M.</creator><creator>Hadley, Scott W.</creator><creator>Sandler, Howard M.</creator><creator>Willoughby, Twyla R.</creator><creator>Kupelian, Patrick A.</creator><creator>Levine, Lisa</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060601</creationdate><title>Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy</title><author>Litzenberg, Dale W. ; Balter, James M. ; Hadley, Scott W. ; Sandler, Howard M. ; Willoughby, Twyla R. ; Kupelian, Patrick A. ; Levine, Lisa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c426t-dfdf63e087f97d9b83167f9f0553efdff46b57365588fdc148a3be59e4d777673</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Dose Fractionation</topic><topic>Electromagnetic Phenomena - instrumentation</topic><topic>Electromagnetic Phenomena - methods</topic><topic>Gold - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intrafraction motion</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Margins</topic><topic>Movement</topic><topic>Organ motion</topic><topic>Prostate - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Prostate cancer</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy</topic><topic>Prostheses and Implants</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Radiotherapy, Conformal - methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Setup correction</topic><topic>Supine Position</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Litzenberg, Dale W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balter, James M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hadley, Scott W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sandler, Howard M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willoughby, Twyla R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kupelian, Patrick A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levine, Lisa</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Litzenberg, Dale W.</au><au>Balter, James M.</au><au>Hadley, Scott W.</au><au>Sandler, Howard M.</au><au>Willoughby, Twyla R.</au><au>Kupelian, Patrick A.</au><au>Levine, Lisa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy</atitle><jtitle>International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys</addtitle><date>2006-06-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>65</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>548</spage><epage>553</epage><pages>548-553</pages><issn>0360-3016</issn><eissn>1879-355X</eissn><abstract>Purpose: To assess the impact of intrafraction intervention on margins for prostate radiotherapy.
Methods and Materials: Eleven supine prostate patients with three implanted transponders were studied. The relative transponder positions were monitored for 8 min and combined with previously measured data on prostate position relative to skin marks. Margins were determined for situations of (
1) skin-based positioning, and (
2) pretreatment transponder positioning. Intratreatment intervention was simulated assuming conditions of (
1) continuous tracking, and (
2) a 3-mm threshold for position correction.
Results: For skin-based setup without and with inclusion of intrafraction motion, prostate treatments would have required average margins of 8.0, 7.3, and 10.0 mm and 8.2, 10.2, and 12.5 mm, about the left–right, anterior–posterior, and cranial–caudal directions, respectively. Positioning by prostate markers at the start of the treatment fraction reduced these values to 1.8, 5.8, and 7.1 mm, respectively. Interbeam adjustment further reduced margins to an average of 1.4, 2.3, and 1.8 mm. Intrabeam adjustment yielded margins of 1.3, 1.5, and 1.5 mm, respectively.
Conclusion: Significant reductions in margins might be achieved by repositioning the patient before each beam, either radiographically or electromagnetically. However, 2 of the 11 patients would have benefited from continuous target tracking and threshold-based intervention.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>16545919</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.033</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0360-3016 |
ispartof | International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2006-06, Vol.65 (2), p.548-553 |
issn | 0360-3016 1879-355X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67964438 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Algorithms Dose Fractionation Electromagnetic Phenomena - instrumentation Electromagnetic Phenomena - methods Gold - administration & dosage Humans Intrafraction motion Male Margins Movement Organ motion Prostate - diagnostic imaging Prostate cancer Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis Prostatic Neoplasms - radiotherapy Prostheses and Implants Radiography Radiotherapy, Conformal - methods Retrospective Studies Setup correction Supine Position Time Factors |
title | Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T07%3A34%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Influence%20of%20intrafraction%20motion%20on%20margins%20for%20prostate%20radiotherapy&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20radiation%20oncology,%20biology,%20physics&rft.au=Litzenberg,%20Dale%20W.&rft.date=2006-06-01&rft.volume=65&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=548&rft.epage=553&rft.pages=548-553&rft.issn=0360-3016&rft.eissn=1879-355X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.12.033&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67964438%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67964438&rft_id=info:pmid/16545919&rft_els_id=S0360301606000952&rfr_iscdi=true |