Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis
Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of pati...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Peñagarícano, José A [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2006 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Radiation oncology - London : BioMed Central, 2006, 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:1 ; year:2006 ; number:1 ; day:03 ; month:08 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR029553865 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR029553865 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230519230427.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 201007s2006 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR029553865 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Peñagarícano, José A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
264 | 1 | |c 2006 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 | ||
520 | |a Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Dose Volume |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Gamma Knife |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Helical Tomotherapy |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Conformality Index |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Single Brain Metastasis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Yan, Yulong |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Shi, Chengyu |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Linskey, Mark E |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Radiation oncology |d London : BioMed Central, 2006 |g 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. |w (DE-627)508725739 |w (DE-600)2224965-5 |x 1748-717X |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:1 |g year:2006 |g number:1 |g day:03 |g month:08 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
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_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 1 |j 2006 |e 1 |b 03 |c 08 |
author_variant |
j a p ja jap y y yy c s cs m e l me mel v r vr |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:1748717X:2006----::oiercoprsnfeiatmteayngmanfseetcirdoug |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2006 |
publishDate |
2006 |
allfields |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 doi (DE-627)SPR029553865 (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Peñagarícano, José A verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. Dose Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gamma Knife (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helical Tomotherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformality Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single Brain Metastasis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Yan, Yulong aut Shi, Chengyu aut Linskey, Mark E aut Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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_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 1 2006 1 03 08 |
spelling |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 doi (DE-627)SPR029553865 (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Peñagarícano, José A verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. Dose Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gamma Knife (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helical Tomotherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformality Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single Brain Metastasis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Yan, Yulong aut Shi, Chengyu aut Linskey, Mark E aut Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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_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 1 2006 1 03 08 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 doi (DE-627)SPR029553865 (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Peñagarícano, José A verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. Dose Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gamma Knife (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helical Tomotherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformality Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single Brain Metastasis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Yan, Yulong aut Shi, Chengyu aut Linskey, Mark E aut Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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_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 1 2006 1 03 08 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 doi (DE-627)SPR029553865 (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Peñagarícano, José A verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. Dose Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gamma Knife (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helical Tomotherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformality Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single Brain Metastasis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Yan, Yulong aut Shi, Chengyu aut Linskey, Mark E aut Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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_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 1 2006 1 03 08 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 doi (DE-627)SPR029553865 (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Peñagarícano, José A verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. Dose Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gamma Knife (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helical Tomotherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformality Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single Brain Metastasis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Yan, Yulong aut Shi, Chengyu aut Linskey, Mark E aut Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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_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 1 2006 1 03 08 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Radiation oncology 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Radiation oncology 1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug. volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:03 month:08 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Dose Volume Gamma Knife Helical Tomotherapy Conformality Index Single Brain Metastasis |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Radiation oncology |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Peñagarícano, José A @@aut@@ Yan, Yulong @@aut@@ Shi, Chengyu @@aut@@ Linskey, Mark E @@aut@@ Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2006-08-03T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
508725739 |
id |
SPR029553865 |
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">SPR029553865</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519230427.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2006 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-1-26</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029553865</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e</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="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Peñagarícano, José A</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2006</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="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dose Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gamma Knife</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Helical Tomotherapy</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Conformality Index</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Single Brain Metastasis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan, Yulong</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shi, Chengyu</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Linskey, Mark E</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Radiation oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)508725739</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2224965-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1748-717X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2006</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:03</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</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_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</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_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">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2006</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">03</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Peñagarícano, José A |
spellingShingle |
Peñagarícano, José A misc Dose Volume misc Gamma Knife misc Helical Tomotherapy misc Conformality Index misc Single Brain Metastasis Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
authorStr |
Peñagarícano, José A |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)508725739 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1748-717X |
topic_title |
Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis Dose Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gamma Knife (dpeaa)DE-He213 Helical Tomotherapy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformality Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single Brain Metastasis (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
misc Dose Volume misc Gamma Knife misc Helical Tomotherapy misc Conformality Index misc Single Brain Metastasis |
topic_unstemmed |
misc Dose Volume misc Gamma Knife misc Helical Tomotherapy misc Conformality Index misc Single Brain Metastasis |
topic_browse |
misc Dose Volume misc Gamma Knife misc Helical Tomotherapy misc Conformality Index misc Single Brain Metastasis |
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 comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR029553865 (SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e |
title_full |
Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
author_sort |
Peñagarícano, José A |
journal |
Radiation oncology |
journalStr |
Radiation oncology |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2006 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Peñagarícano, José A Yan, Yulong Shi, Chengyu Linskey, Mark E Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat |
container_volume |
1 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Peñagarícano, José A |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 |
title_sort |
dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy and gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
title_auth |
Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
abstract |
Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
abstractGer |
Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS. © Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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_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 |
title_short |
Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Yan, Yulong Shi, Chengyu Linskey, Mark E Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat |
author2Str |
Yan, Yulong Shi, Chengyu Linskey, Mark E Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat |
ppnlink |
508725739 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/1748-717X-1-26 |
up_date |
2024-07-04T01:27:21.603Z |
_version_ |
1803609903314501632 |
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">SPR029553865</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519230427.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2006 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-1-26</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029553865</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1748-717X-1-26-e</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="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Peñagarícano, José A</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dosimetric comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery for single brain metastasis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2006</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="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Peñagarícano et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Helical Tomotherapy (HT) integrates linear accelerator and computerized tomography (CT) technology to deliver IMRT. Targets are localized (i.e. outlined as gross tumor volume [GTV] and planning target volume [PTV]) on the planning kVCT study while daily MVCT is used for correction of patient's set-up and assessment of inter-fraction anatomy changes. Based on dosimetric comparisons, this study aims to find dosimetric equivalency between single fraction HT and Gamma $ Knife^{®} $ stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) for the treatment of single brain metastasis. Methods The targeting MRI data set from the GKSRS were used for tomotherapy planning. Five patients with single brain metastasis treated with GKSRS were re-planned in the HT planning station using the same prescribed doses. There was no expansion of the GTV to create the PTV. Sub-volumes were created within the PTV and prescribed to the maximum dose seen in the GKSRS plans to imitate the hot spot normally seen in GKSRS. The PTV objective was set as a region at risk in HT planning using the same prescribed dose to the PTV periphery as seen in the corresponding GKSRS plan. The tumor volumes ranged from 437–1840 $ mm^{3} $. Results Conformality indices are inconsistent between HT and GKSRS. HT generally shows larger lower isodose line volumes, has longer treatment time than GKSRS and can treat a much larger lesion than GKSRS. Both HT and GKSRS single fraction dose-volume toxicity may be prohibitive in treating single or multiple lesions depending on the number and the sizes of the lesions. Conclusion Based on the trend for larger lower dose volumes and more constricted higher dose volumes in HT as compared to GKSRS, dosimetric equivalency was not reached between HT and GKSRS.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dose Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gamma Knife</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Helical Tomotherapy</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Conformality Index</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Single Brain Metastasis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan, Yulong</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shi, Chengyu</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Linskey, Mark E</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ratanatharathorn, Vaneerat</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Radiation oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2006), 1 vom: 03. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)508725739</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2224965-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1748-717X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2006</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:03</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-1-26</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</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_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</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_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">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2006</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">03</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.4004374 |