Cargando…

Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor

PURPOSE: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) in the liver, RTOG‐1112 guides the treatment modalities including the dose constraints for this technique but not the plan parameters. This study is not only analyzing the plan quality by utilizing the plan parameters and indexes but also compa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Watcharawipha, Anirut, Chakrabandhu, Somvilai, Kongsa, Anupong, Tippanya, Damrongsak, Chitapanarux, Imjai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36857202
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13948
_version_ 1785071713263812608
author Watcharawipha, Anirut
Chakrabandhu, Somvilai
Kongsa, Anupong
Tippanya, Damrongsak
Chitapanarux, Imjai
author_facet Watcharawipha, Anirut
Chakrabandhu, Somvilai
Kongsa, Anupong
Tippanya, Damrongsak
Chitapanarux, Imjai
author_sort Watcharawipha, Anirut
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) in the liver, RTOG‐1112 guides the treatment modalities including the dose constraints for this technique but not the plan parameters. This study is not only analyzing the plan quality by utilizing the plan parameters and indexes but also compares treatment modalities from the protocol implementation. METHOD AND MATERIAL: Twenty‐five patients treated in the period from February 2020 to September 2022 were recruited in this analysis. Two planners randomly selected the patients and modalities. The modalities employed were Volumetric‐Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Helical Tomotherapy (HT). Various parameters and indexes were used to access not only the plan quality but also to compare each modality. The parameters and indexes studied were the homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), gradient distance (GD), and the dose received by the organs at risk. RESULT: The data reveals that the mean volume of PTV is 60.8 ± 53.9 cc where these targets exhibit no significant difference between each modality. The HI shows a consistent value for both modalities. Between each modality, the CI value shows less deviation, but the HT shows slightly higher performance than VMAT. The value of GD is 1.5 ± 0.3 cm where the HT provides a shorter distance compared to VMAT as well. CONCLUSION: The parameters and indexes should be utilized for the plan evaluation although in the guidelines this was not required. Various modalities were employed for treatment. Both can achieve the treatment criteria with slightly low performance of VMAT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10338832
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103388322023-07-14 Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor Watcharawipha, Anirut Chakrabandhu, Somvilai Kongsa, Anupong Tippanya, Damrongsak Chitapanarux, Imjai J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) in the liver, RTOG‐1112 guides the treatment modalities including the dose constraints for this technique but not the plan parameters. This study is not only analyzing the plan quality by utilizing the plan parameters and indexes but also compares treatment modalities from the protocol implementation. METHOD AND MATERIAL: Twenty‐five patients treated in the period from February 2020 to September 2022 were recruited in this analysis. Two planners randomly selected the patients and modalities. The modalities employed were Volumetric‐Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Helical Tomotherapy (HT). Various parameters and indexes were used to access not only the plan quality but also to compare each modality. The parameters and indexes studied were the homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), gradient distance (GD), and the dose received by the organs at risk. RESULT: The data reveals that the mean volume of PTV is 60.8 ± 53.9 cc where these targets exhibit no significant difference between each modality. The HI shows a consistent value for both modalities. Between each modality, the CI value shows less deviation, but the HT shows slightly higher performance than VMAT. The value of GD is 1.5 ± 0.3 cm where the HT provides a shorter distance compared to VMAT as well. CONCLUSION: The parameters and indexes should be utilized for the plan evaluation although in the guidelines this was not required. Various modalities were employed for treatment. Both can achieve the treatment criteria with slightly low performance of VMAT. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10338832/ /pubmed/36857202 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13948 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Watcharawipha, Anirut
Chakrabandhu, Somvilai
Kongsa, Anupong
Tippanya, Damrongsak
Chitapanarux, Imjai
Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
title Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
title_full Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
title_fullStr Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
title_full_unstemmed Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
title_short Plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
title_sort plan quality analysis of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy treatment planning in liver tumor
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10338832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36857202
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13948
work_keys_str_mv AT watcharawiphaanirut planqualityanalysisofstereotacticablativebodyradiotherapytreatmentplanninginlivertumor
AT chakrabandhusomvilai planqualityanalysisofstereotacticablativebodyradiotherapytreatmentplanninginlivertumor
AT kongsaanupong planqualityanalysisofstereotacticablativebodyradiotherapytreatmentplanninginlivertumor
AT tippanyadamrongsak planqualityanalysisofstereotacticablativebodyradiotherapytreatmentplanninginlivertumor
AT chitapanaruximjai planqualityanalysisofstereotacticablativebodyradiotherapytreatmentplanninginlivertumor