Cargando…

Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?

BACKGROUND: To evaluate and compare the biological impact on different proposed margin recipes for the same geometric uncertainties for intra-hepatic tumors with different tumor cell types or clinical stages. METHOD: Three different margin recipes based on tumor motion were applied to sixteen IMRT p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kuo, Hsiang-Chi, Liu, Wen-Shan, Wu, Andrew, Mah, Dennis, Chuang, Keh-Shih, Hong, Linda, Yaparpalvi, Ravi, Guha, Chandan, Kalnicki, Shalom
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2893459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20525298
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-48
_version_ 1782183044438818816
author Kuo, Hsiang-Chi
Liu, Wen-Shan
Wu, Andrew
Mah, Dennis
Chuang, Keh-Shih
Hong, Linda
Yaparpalvi, Ravi
Guha, Chandan
Kalnicki, Shalom
author_facet Kuo, Hsiang-Chi
Liu, Wen-Shan
Wu, Andrew
Mah, Dennis
Chuang, Keh-Shih
Hong, Linda
Yaparpalvi, Ravi
Guha, Chandan
Kalnicki, Shalom
author_sort Kuo, Hsiang-Chi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate and compare the biological impact on different proposed margin recipes for the same geometric uncertainties for intra-hepatic tumors with different tumor cell types or clinical stages. METHOD: Three different margin recipes based on tumor motion were applied to sixteen IMRT plans with a total of twenty two intra-hepatic tumors. One recipe used the full amplitude of motion measured from patients to generate margins. A second used 70% of the full amplitude of motion, while the third had no margin for motion. The biological effects of geometric uncertainty in these three situations were evaluated with Equivalent Uniform Doses (EUD) for various survival fractions at 2 Gy (SF(2)). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the biological impact between the full motion margin and the 70% motion margin. Also, there was no significant difference between different tumor cell types. When the margin for motion was eliminated, the difference of the biological impact was significant among different cell types due to geometric uncertainties. Elimination of the motion margin requires dose escalation to compensate for the biological dose reduction due to the geometric misses during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Both patient-based margins of full motion and of 70% motion are sufficient to prevent serious dosimetric error. Clinical implementation of margin reduction should consider the tumor sensitivity to radiation.
format Text
id pubmed-2893459
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28934592010-06-30 Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors? Kuo, Hsiang-Chi Liu, Wen-Shan Wu, Andrew Mah, Dennis Chuang, Keh-Shih Hong, Linda Yaparpalvi, Ravi Guha, Chandan Kalnicki, Shalom Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To evaluate and compare the biological impact on different proposed margin recipes for the same geometric uncertainties for intra-hepatic tumors with different tumor cell types or clinical stages. METHOD: Three different margin recipes based on tumor motion were applied to sixteen IMRT plans with a total of twenty two intra-hepatic tumors. One recipe used the full amplitude of motion measured from patients to generate margins. A second used 70% of the full amplitude of motion, while the third had no margin for motion. The biological effects of geometric uncertainty in these three situations were evaluated with Equivalent Uniform Doses (EUD) for various survival fractions at 2 Gy (SF(2)). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the biological impact between the full motion margin and the 70% motion margin. Also, there was no significant difference between different tumor cell types. When the margin for motion was eliminated, the difference of the biological impact was significant among different cell types due to geometric uncertainties. Elimination of the motion margin requires dose escalation to compensate for the biological dose reduction due to the geometric misses during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Both patient-based margins of full motion and of 70% motion are sufficient to prevent serious dosimetric error. Clinical implementation of margin reduction should consider the tumor sensitivity to radiation. BioMed Central 2010-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC2893459/ /pubmed/20525298 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-48 Text en Copyright ©2010 Kuo et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Kuo, Hsiang-Chi
Liu, Wen-Shan
Wu, Andrew
Mah, Dennis
Chuang, Keh-Shih
Hong, Linda
Yaparpalvi, Ravi
Guha, Chandan
Kalnicki, Shalom
Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
title Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
title_full Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
title_fullStr Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
title_full_unstemmed Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
title_short Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
title_sort biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2893459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20525298
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-48
work_keys_str_mv AT kuohsiangchi biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT liuwenshan biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT wuandrew biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT mahdennis biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT chuangkehshih biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT honglinda biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT yaparpalviravi biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT guhachandan biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors
AT kalnickishalom biologicalimpactofgeometricuncertaintieswhatmarginisneededforintrahepatictumors