Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis

Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Onal, Cem [verfasserIn] Topkan, Erkan Efe, Esma Yavuz, Melek Sonmez, Serhat Yavuz, Aydin

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2009

Schlagwörter:	Planning Target Volume Rectal Bleeding Anal Verge Rectal Volume Rectal Toxicity

Anmerkung:	© Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Radiation oncology - London : BioMed Central, 2006, 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:4 ; year:2009 ; number:1 ; day:11 ; month:05

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14

Katalog-ID:	SPR029568773

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR029568773
003	DE-627
005	20230519144244.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2009 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR029568773
035			\|a (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Onal, Cem \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
264		1	\|c 2009
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
520			\|a Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3.
650		4	\|a Planning Target Volume \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Rectal Bleeding \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Anal Verge \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Rectal Volume \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Rectal Toxicity \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Topkan, Erkan \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Efe, Esma \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Yavuz, Melek \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Sonmez, Serhat \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Yavuz, Aydin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Radiation oncology \|d London : BioMed Central, 2006 \|g 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai \|w (DE-627)508725739 \|w (DE-600)2224965-5 \|x 1748-717X \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:4 \|g year:2009 \|g number:1 \|g day:11 \|g month:05
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 \|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_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 4 \|j 2009 \|e 1 \|b 11 \|c 05

Indexfelder

author_variant	c o co e t et e e ee m y my s s ss a y ay
matchkey_str	article:1748717X:2009----::oprsnfetloueeiiinehiusnternlecorcatxctiptetwtpottcnetetdih
hierarchy_sort_str	2009
publishDate	2009
allfields	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 doi (DE-627)SPR029568773 (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Onal, Cem verfasserin aut Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009 Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Bleeding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Anal Verge (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Toxicity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Topkan, Erkan aut Efe, Esma aut Yavuz, Melek aut Sonmez, Serhat aut Yavuz, Aydin aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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 4 2009 1 11 05
spelling	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 doi (DE-627)SPR029568773 (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Onal, Cem verfasserin aut Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009 Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Bleeding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Anal Verge (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Toxicity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Topkan, Erkan aut Efe, Esma aut Yavuz, Melek aut Sonmez, Serhat aut Yavuz, Aydin aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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 4 2009 1 11 05
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 doi (DE-627)SPR029568773 (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Onal, Cem verfasserin aut Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009 Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Bleeding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Anal Verge (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Toxicity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Topkan, Erkan aut Efe, Esma aut Yavuz, Melek aut Sonmez, Serhat aut Yavuz, Aydin aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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 4 2009 1 11 05
allfieldsGer	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 doi (DE-627)SPR029568773 (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Onal, Cem verfasserin aut Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009 Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Bleeding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Anal Verge (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Toxicity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Topkan, Erkan aut Efe, Esma aut Yavuz, Melek aut Sonmez, Serhat aut Yavuz, Aydin aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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 4 2009 1 11 05
allfieldsSound	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 doi (DE-627)SPR029568773 (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Onal, Cem verfasserin aut Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis 2009 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009 Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Bleeding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Anal Verge (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Toxicity (dpeaa)DE-He213 Topkan, Erkan aut Efe, Esma aut Yavuz, Melek aut Sonmez, Serhat aut Yavuz, Aydin aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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 4 2009 1 11 05
language	English
source	Enthalten in Radiation oncology 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05
sourceStr	Enthalten in Radiation oncology 4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai volume:4 year:2009 number:1 day:11 month:05
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Planning Target Volume Rectal Bleeding Anal Verge Rectal Volume Rectal Toxicity
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Radiation oncology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Onal, Cem @@aut@@ Topkan, Erkan @@aut@@ Efe, Esma @@aut@@ Yavuz, Melek @@aut@@ Sonmez, Serhat @@aut@@ Yavuz, Aydin @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2009-05-11T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	508725739
id	SPR029568773
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">SPR029568773</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519144244.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2009 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-4-14</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029568773</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1748-717X-4-14-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">Onal, Cem</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2009</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">© Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Planning Target Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rectal Bleeding</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Anal Verge</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rectal Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rectal Toxicity</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Topkan, Erkan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Efe, Esma</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yavuz, Melek</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sonmez, Serhat</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yavuz, Aydin</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">4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai</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:4</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2009</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:11</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14</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_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">4</subfield><subfield code="j">2009</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">11</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Onal, Cem
spellingShingle	Onal, Cem misc Planning Target Volume misc Rectal Bleeding misc Anal Verge misc Rectal Volume misc Rectal Toxicity Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
authorStr	Onal, Cem
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)508725739
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1748-717X
topic_title	Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Bleeding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Anal Verge (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rectal Toxicity (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Planning Target Volume misc Rectal Bleeding misc Anal Verge misc Rectal Volume misc Rectal Toxicity
topic_unstemmed	misc Planning Target Volume misc Rectal Bleeding misc Anal Verge misc Rectal Volume misc Rectal Toxicity
topic_browse	misc Planning Target Volume misc Rectal Bleeding misc Anal Verge misc Rectal Volume misc Rectal Toxicity
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	Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR029568773 (SPR)1748-717X-4-14-e
title_full	Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
author_sort	Onal, Cem
journal	Radiation oncology
journalStr	Radiation oncology
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2009
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Onal, Cem Topkan, Erkan Efe, Esma Yavuz, Melek Sonmez, Serhat Yavuz, Aydin
container_volume	4
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Onal, Cem
doi_str_mv	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14
title_sort	comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3d conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
title_auth	Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
abstract	Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
abstractGer	Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
abstract_unstemmed	Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3. © Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA 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
title_short	Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14
remote_bool	true
author2	Topkan, Erkan Efe, Esma Yavuz, Melek Sonmez, Serhat Yavuz, Aydin
author2Str	Topkan, Erkan Efe, Esma Yavuz, Melek Sonmez, Serhat Yavuz, Aydin
ppnlink	508725739
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/1748-717X-4-14
up_date	2024-07-04T01:31:00.162Z
_version_	1803610132487077888
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">SPR029568773</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519144244.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2009 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-4-14</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029568773</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1748-717X-4-14-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">Onal, Cem</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2009</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">© Onal et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background To evaluate the impact of four different rectum contouring techniques and rectal toxicities in patients with treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT). Methods Clinical and dosimetric data were evaluated for 94 patients who received a total dose 3DCRT of 70 Gy, and rectal doses were compared in four different rectal contouring techniques: the prostate-containing CT sections (method 1); 1 cm above and below the planning target volume (PTV) (method 2); 110 mm starting from the anal verge (method 3); and from the anal verge to the sigmoid flexure (method 4). The percentage of rectal volume receiving RT doses (30–70 Gy) and minimum, mean rectal doses were assessed. Results Median age was 69 years. Percentage of rectal volume receiving high doses (≥ 70 Gy) were higher with the techniques that contoured smaller rectal volumes. In methods 2 and 3, the percentage of rectal volume receiving ≥ 70 Gy was significantly higher in patients with than without rectal bleeding (method 2: 30.8% vs. 22.5%, respectively (p = 0.03); method 3: 26.9% vs. 18.1%, respectively (p = 0.006)). Mean rectal dose was significant predictor of rectal bleeding only in method 3 (48.8 Gy in patients with bleeding vs. 44.4 Gy in patients without bleeding; p = 0.02). Conclusion Different techniques of rectal contouring significantly influence the calculation of radiation doses to the rectum and the prediction of rectal toxicity. Rectal volume receiving higher doses (≥ 70 Gy) and mean rectal doses may significantly predict rectal bleeding for techniques contouring larger rectal volumes, as was in method 3.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Planning Target Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rectal Bleeding</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Anal Verge</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rectal Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rectal Toxicity</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Topkan, Erkan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Efe, Esma</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yavuz, Melek</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sonmez, Serhat</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yavuz, Aydin</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">4(2009), 1 vom: 11. Mai</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:4</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2009</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:11</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-4-14</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_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">4</subfield><subfield code="j">2009</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">11</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.40018

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Comparison of rectal volume definition techniques and their influence on rectal toxicity in patients with prostate cancer treated with 3D conformal radiotherapy: a dose-volume analysis

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?