Cargando…

Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning

BACKGROUND: Online adaptive radiotherapy is intended to prevent plan degradation caused by inter-fractional tumor volume and shape changes, but time limitations make online re-planning challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of online-adapted plans to their respective reference...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Timmeren, Janita E., Chamberlain, Madalyne, Krayenbuehl, Jérôme, Wilke, Lotte, Ehrbar, Stefanie, Bogowicz, Marta, Hartley, Callum, Zamburlini, Mariangela, Andratschke, Nicolaus, Garcia Schüler, Helena, Pavic, Matea, Balermpas, Panagiotis, Ryu, Chaehee, Guckenberger, Matthias, Tanadini-Lang, Stephanie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7441614/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32825848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01641-0
_version_ 1783573326098071552
author van Timmeren, Janita E.
Chamberlain, Madalyne
Krayenbuehl, Jérôme
Wilke, Lotte
Ehrbar, Stefanie
Bogowicz, Marta
Hartley, Callum
Zamburlini, Mariangela
Andratschke, Nicolaus
Garcia Schüler, Helena
Pavic, Matea
Balermpas, Panagiotis
Ryu, Chaehee
Guckenberger, Matthias
Tanadini-Lang, Stephanie
author_facet van Timmeren, Janita E.
Chamberlain, Madalyne
Krayenbuehl, Jérôme
Wilke, Lotte
Ehrbar, Stefanie
Bogowicz, Marta
Hartley, Callum
Zamburlini, Mariangela
Andratschke, Nicolaus
Garcia Schüler, Helena
Pavic, Matea
Balermpas, Panagiotis
Ryu, Chaehee
Guckenberger, Matthias
Tanadini-Lang, Stephanie
author_sort van Timmeren, Janita E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Online adaptive radiotherapy is intended to prevent plan degradation caused by inter-fractional tumor volume and shape changes, but time limitations make online re-planning challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of online-adapted plans to their respective reference treatment plans. METHODS: Fifty-two patients treated on a ViewRay MRIdian Linac were included in this retrospective study. In total 238 online-adapted plans were analyzed, which were optimized with either changing of the segment weights (n = 85) or full re-optimization (n = 153). Five different treatment sites were evaluated: prostate, abdomen, liver, lung and pelvis. Dosimetric parameters of gross tumor volume (GTV), planning target volume (PTV), 2 cm ring around the PTV and organs at risk (OARs) were considered. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences between online-adapted and reference treatment plans, p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The average duration of the online adaptation, consisting of contour editing, plan optimization and quality assurance (QA), was 24 ± 6 min. The GTV was slightly larger (average ± SD: 1.9% ± 9.0%) in the adapted plans than in the reference plans (p < 0.001). GTV-D(95%) exhibited no significant changes when considering all plans, but GTV-D(2%) increased by 0.40% ± 1.5% on average (p < 0.001). There was a very small yet significant decrease in GTV-coverage for the abdomen plans. The ring D(mean) increased on average by 1.0% ± 3.6% considering all plans (p < 0.001). There was a significant reduction of the dose to the rectum of 4.7% ± 16% on average (p < 0.001) for prostate plans. CONCLUSIONS: Dosimetric quality of online-adapted plans was comparable to reference treatment plans and OAR dose was either comparable or decreased, depending on treatment site. However, dose spillage was slightly increased.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7441614
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74416142020-08-24 Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning van Timmeren, Janita E. Chamberlain, Madalyne Krayenbuehl, Jérôme Wilke, Lotte Ehrbar, Stefanie Bogowicz, Marta Hartley, Callum Zamburlini, Mariangela Andratschke, Nicolaus Garcia Schüler, Helena Pavic, Matea Balermpas, Panagiotis Ryu, Chaehee Guckenberger, Matthias Tanadini-Lang, Stephanie Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Online adaptive radiotherapy is intended to prevent plan degradation caused by inter-fractional tumor volume and shape changes, but time limitations make online re-planning challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of online-adapted plans to their respective reference treatment plans. METHODS: Fifty-two patients treated on a ViewRay MRIdian Linac were included in this retrospective study. In total 238 online-adapted plans were analyzed, which were optimized with either changing of the segment weights (n = 85) or full re-optimization (n = 153). Five different treatment sites were evaluated: prostate, abdomen, liver, lung and pelvis. Dosimetric parameters of gross tumor volume (GTV), planning target volume (PTV), 2 cm ring around the PTV and organs at risk (OARs) were considered. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences between online-adapted and reference treatment plans, p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The average duration of the online adaptation, consisting of contour editing, plan optimization and quality assurance (QA), was 24 ± 6 min. The GTV was slightly larger (average ± SD: 1.9% ± 9.0%) in the adapted plans than in the reference plans (p < 0.001). GTV-D(95%) exhibited no significant changes when considering all plans, but GTV-D(2%) increased by 0.40% ± 1.5% on average (p < 0.001). There was a very small yet significant decrease in GTV-coverage for the abdomen plans. The ring D(mean) increased on average by 1.0% ± 3.6% considering all plans (p < 0.001). There was a significant reduction of the dose to the rectum of 4.7% ± 16% on average (p < 0.001) for prostate plans. CONCLUSIONS: Dosimetric quality of online-adapted plans was comparable to reference treatment plans and OAR dose was either comparable or decreased, depending on treatment site. However, dose spillage was slightly increased. BioMed Central 2020-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7441614/ /pubmed/32825848 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01641-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
van Timmeren, Janita E.
Chamberlain, Madalyne
Krayenbuehl, Jérôme
Wilke, Lotte
Ehrbar, Stefanie
Bogowicz, Marta
Hartley, Callum
Zamburlini, Mariangela
Andratschke, Nicolaus
Garcia Schüler, Helena
Pavic, Matea
Balermpas, Panagiotis
Ryu, Chaehee
Guckenberger, Matthias
Tanadini-Lang, Stephanie
Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
title Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
title_full Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
title_fullStr Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
title_full_unstemmed Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
title_short Treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
title_sort treatment plan quality during online adaptive re-planning
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7441614/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32825848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01641-0
work_keys_str_mv AT vantimmerenjanitae treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT chamberlainmadalyne treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT krayenbuehljerome treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT wilkelotte treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT ehrbarstefanie treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT bogowiczmarta treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT hartleycallum treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT zamburlinimariangela treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT andratschkenicolaus treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT garciaschulerhelena treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT pavicmatea treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT balermpaspanagiotis treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT ryuchaehee treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT guckenbergermatthias treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning
AT tanadinilangstephanie treatmentplanqualityduringonlineadaptivereplanning