Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy
<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare cover...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Korevaar Erik W [verfasserIn] Maduro John H [verfasserIn] Dolsma Wil V [verfasserIn] van der Laan Hans [verfasserIn] Langendijk Johannes A [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2008 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Radiation Oncology - BMC, 2006, 3(2008), 1, p 6 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:3 ; year:2008 ; number:1, p 6 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ041998243 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ041998243 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230308054158.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230227s2008 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ041998243 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
050 | 0 | |a R895-920 | |
050 | 0 | |a RC254-282 | |
100 | 0 | |a Korevaar Erik W |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
264 | 1 | |c 2008 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< | ||
653 | 0 | |a Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine | |
653 | 0 | |a Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens | |
700 | 0 | |a Maduro John H |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Dolsma Wil V |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a van der Laan Hans |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 0 | |a Langendijk Johannes A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Radiation Oncology |d BMC, 2006 |g 3(2008), 1, p 6 |w (DE-627)508725739 |w (DE-600)2224965-5 |x 1748717X |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:3 |g year:2008 |g number:1, p 6 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2119 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 3 |j 2008 |e 1, p 6 |
author_variant |
k e w kew m j h mjh d w v dwv v d l h vdlh l j a lja |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:1748717X:2008----::oiercosqecsfhsitoadcmuetmgahgietredfntoadlnig |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2008 |
callnumber-subject-code |
R |
publishDate |
2008 |
allfields |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 doi (DE-627)DOAJ041998243 (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R895-920 RC254-282 Korevaar Erik W verfasserin aut Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy 2008 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Maduro John H verfasserin aut Dolsma Wil V verfasserin aut van der Laan Hans verfasserin aut Langendijk Johannes A verfasserin aut In Radiation Oncology BMC, 2006 3(2008), 1, p 6 (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748717X nnns volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a kostenfrei http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 3 2008 1, p 6 |
spelling |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 doi (DE-627)DOAJ041998243 (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R895-920 RC254-282 Korevaar Erik W verfasserin aut Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy 2008 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Maduro John H verfasserin aut Dolsma Wil V verfasserin aut van der Laan Hans verfasserin aut Langendijk Johannes A verfasserin aut In Radiation Oncology BMC, 2006 3(2008), 1, p 6 (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748717X nnns volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a kostenfrei http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 3 2008 1, p 6 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 doi (DE-627)DOAJ041998243 (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R895-920 RC254-282 Korevaar Erik W verfasserin aut Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy 2008 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Maduro John H verfasserin aut Dolsma Wil V verfasserin aut van der Laan Hans verfasserin aut Langendijk Johannes A verfasserin aut In Radiation Oncology BMC, 2006 3(2008), 1, p 6 (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748717X nnns volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a kostenfrei http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 3 2008 1, p 6 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 doi (DE-627)DOAJ041998243 (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R895-920 RC254-282 Korevaar Erik W verfasserin aut Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy 2008 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Maduro John H verfasserin aut Dolsma Wil V verfasserin aut van der Laan Hans verfasserin aut Langendijk Johannes A verfasserin aut In Radiation Oncology BMC, 2006 3(2008), 1, p 6 (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748717X nnns volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a kostenfrei http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 3 2008 1, p 6 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 doi (DE-627)DOAJ041998243 (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng R895-920 RC254-282 Korevaar Erik W verfasserin aut Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy 2008 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Maduro John H verfasserin aut Dolsma Wil V verfasserin aut van der Laan Hans verfasserin aut Langendijk Johannes A verfasserin aut In Radiation Oncology BMC, 2006 3(2008), 1, p 6 (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748717X nnns volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a kostenfrei http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 3 2008 1, p 6 |
language |
English |
source |
In Radiation Oncology 3(2008), 1, p 6 volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 |
sourceStr |
In Radiation Oncology 3(2008), 1, p 6 volume:3 year:2008 number:1, p 6 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Radiation Oncology |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Korevaar Erik W @@aut@@ Maduro John H @@aut@@ Dolsma Wil V @@aut@@ van der Laan Hans @@aut@@ Langendijk Johannes A @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2008-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
508725739 |
id |
DOAJ041998243 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ041998243</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308054158.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2008 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-3-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ041998243</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R895-920</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC254-282</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Korevaar Erik W</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a"><p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p<</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maduro John H</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dolsma Wil V</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">van der Laan Hans</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langendijk Johannes A</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Radiation Oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">3(2008), 1, p 6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)508725739</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2224965-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1748717X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:3</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2008</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1, p 6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">3</subfield><subfield code="j">2008</subfield><subfield code="e">1, p 6</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
callnumber-first |
R - Medicine |
author |
Korevaar Erik W |
spellingShingle |
Korevaar Erik W misc R895-920 misc RC254-282 misc Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
authorStr |
Korevaar Erik W |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)508725739 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
DOAJ |
remote_str |
true |
callnumber-label |
R895-920 |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1748717X |
topic_title |
R895-920 RC254-282 Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
topic |
misc R895-920 misc RC254-282 misc Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
topic_unstemmed |
misc R895-920 misc RC254-282 misc Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
topic_browse |
misc R895-920 misc RC254-282 misc Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine misc Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Radiation Oncology |
hierarchy_parent_id |
508725739 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Radiation Oncology |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 |
title |
Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ041998243 (DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a |
title_full |
Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
author_sort |
Korevaar Erik W |
journal |
Radiation Oncology |
journalStr |
Radiation Oncology |
callnumber-first-code |
R |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2008 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Korevaar Erik W Maduro John H Dolsma Wil V van der Laan Hans Langendijk Johannes A |
container_volume |
3 |
class |
R895-920 RC254-282 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Korevaar Erik W |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
callnumber |
R895-920 |
title_auth |
Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
abstract |
<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< |
abstractGer |
<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< |
abstract_unstemmed |
<p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p< |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2119 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1, p 6 |
title_short |
Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6 https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Maduro John H Dolsma Wil V van der Laan Hans Langendijk Johannes A |
author2Str |
Maduro John H Dolsma Wil V van der Laan Hans Langendijk Johannes A |
ppnlink |
508725739 |
callnumber-subject |
R - General Medicine |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/1748-717X-3-6 |
callnumber-a |
R895-920 |
up_date |
2024-07-03T23:10:23.725Z |
_version_ |
1803601286241714176 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ041998243</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308054158.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2008 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-3-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ041998243</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R895-920</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC254-282</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Korevaar Erik W</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dosimetric consequences of the shift towards computed tomography guided target definition and planning for breast conserving radiotherapy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a"><p<Abstract</p< <p<Background</p< <p<The shift from conventional two-dimensional (2D) to three-dimensional (3D)-conformal target definition and dose-planning seems to have introduced volumetric as well as geometric changes. The purpose of this study was to compare coverage of computed tomography (CT)-based breast and boost planning target volumes (PTV), absolute volumes irradiated, and dose delivered to the organs at risk with conventional 2D and 3D-conformal breast conserving radiotherapy.</p< <p<Methods</p< <p<Twenty-five patients with left-sided breast cancer were subject of CT-guided target definition and 3D-conformal dose-planning, and conventionally defined target volumes and treatment plans were reconstructed on the planning CT. Accumulated dose-distributions were calculated for the conventional and 3D-conformal dose-plans, taking into account a prescribed dose of 50 Gy for the breast plans and 16 Gy for the boost plans.</p< <p<Results</p< <p<With conventional treatment plans, CT-based breast and boost PTVs received the intended dose in 78% and 32% of the patients, respectively, and smaller volumes received the prescribed breast and boost doses compared with 3D-conformal dose-planning. The mean lung dose, the volume of the lungs receiving < 20 Gy, the mean heart dose, and volume of the heart receiving < 30 Gy were significantly less with conventional treatment plans. Specific areas within the breast and boost PTVs systematically received a lower than intended dose with conventional treatment plans.</p< <p<Conclusion</p< <p<The shift towards CT-guided target definition and planning as the golden standard for breast conserving radiotherapy has resulted in improved target coverage at the cost of larger irradiated volumes and an increased dose delivered to organs at risk. Tissue is now included into the breast and boost target volumes that was never explicitly defined or included with conventional treatment. Therefore, a coherent definition of the breast and boost target volumes is needed, based on clinical data confirming tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability with the use of 3D-conformal radiotherapy.</p<</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maduro John H</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dolsma Wil V</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">van der Laan Hans</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Langendijk Johannes A</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Radiation Oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">3(2008), 1, p 6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)508725739</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2224965-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1748717X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:3</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2008</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1, p 6</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-3-6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/222ad6946472465aadf1c138c048069a</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.ro-journal.com/content/3/1/6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1748-717X</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2119</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">3</subfield><subfield code="j">2008</subfield><subfield code="e">1, p 6</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.400687 |