Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer

Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospe...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Gong, Youling [verfasserIn] Wang, Shichao Zhou, Lin Liu, Yongmei Xu, Yong Lu, You Bai, Sen Fu, Yuchuan Xu, Qingfeng Jiang, Qingfeng

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2010

Schlagwörter:	Planning Target Volume Clinical Target Volume Gross Tumor Volume Leaf Width Conformity Index

Anmerkung:	© Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Radiation oncology - London : BioMed Central, 2006, 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:5 ; year:2010 ; number:1 ; day:15 ; month:07

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65

Katalog-ID:	SPR029582121

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR029582121
003	DE-627
005	20230519150350.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR029582121
035			\|a (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Gong, Youling \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
264		1	\|c 2010
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
520			\|a Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC.
650		4	\|a Planning Target Volume \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Clinical Target Volume \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Gross Tumor Volume \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Leaf Width \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Conformity Index \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Wang, Shichao \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Zhou, Lin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Liu, Yongmei \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Xu, Yong \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Lu, You \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Bai, Sen \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Fu, Yuchuan \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Xu, Qingfeng \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Jiang, Qingfeng \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Radiation oncology \|d London : BioMed Central, 2006 \|g 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli \|w (DE-627)508725739 \|w (DE-600)2224965-5 \|x 1748-717X \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:5 \|g year:2010 \|g number:1 \|g day:15 \|g month:07
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 \|z lizenzpflichtig \|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 5 \|j 2010 \|e 1 \|b 15 \|c 07

Indexfelder

author_variant	y g yg s w sw l z lz y l yl y x yx y l yl s b sb y f yf q x qx q j qj
matchkey_str	article:1748717X:2010----::oiercoprsnsndfeetutlaclieesnnestmdltdaiteay
hierarchy_sort_str	2010
publishDate	2010
allfields	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 doi (DE-627)SPR029582121 (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gong, Youling verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gross Tumor Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Leaf Width (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformity Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wang, Shichao aut Zhou, Lin aut Liu, Yongmei aut Xu, Yong aut Lu, You aut Bai, Sen aut Fu, Yuchuan aut Xu, Qingfeng aut Jiang, Qingfeng aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 lizenzpflichtig 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 5 2010 1 15 07
spelling	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 doi (DE-627)SPR029582121 (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gong, Youling verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gross Tumor Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Leaf Width (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformity Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wang, Shichao aut Zhou, Lin aut Liu, Yongmei aut Xu, Yong aut Lu, You aut Bai, Sen aut Fu, Yuchuan aut Xu, Qingfeng aut Jiang, Qingfeng aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 lizenzpflichtig 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 5 2010 1 15 07
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 doi (DE-627)SPR029582121 (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gong, Youling verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gross Tumor Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Leaf Width (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformity Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wang, Shichao aut Zhou, Lin aut Liu, Yongmei aut Xu, Yong aut Lu, You aut Bai, Sen aut Fu, Yuchuan aut Xu, Qingfeng aut Jiang, Qingfeng aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 lizenzpflichtig 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 5 2010 1 15 07
allfieldsGer	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 doi (DE-627)SPR029582121 (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gong, Youling verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gross Tumor Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Leaf Width (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformity Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wang, Shichao aut Zhou, Lin aut Liu, Yongmei aut Xu, Yong aut Lu, You aut Bai, Sen aut Fu, Yuchuan aut Xu, Qingfeng aut Jiang, Qingfeng aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 lizenzpflichtig 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 5 2010 1 15 07
allfieldsSound	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 doi (DE-627)SPR029582121 (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gong, Youling verfasserin aut Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gross Tumor Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Leaf Width (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformity Index (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wang, Shichao aut Zhou, Lin aut Liu, Yongmei aut Xu, Yong aut Lu, You aut Bai, Sen aut Fu, Yuchuan aut Xu, Qingfeng aut Jiang, Qingfeng aut Enthalten in Radiation oncology London : BioMed Central, 2006 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli (DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5 1748-717X nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65 lizenzpflichtig 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 5 2010 1 15 07
language	English
source	Enthalten in Radiation oncology 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07
sourceStr	Enthalten in Radiation oncology 5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli volume:5 year:2010 number:1 day:15 month:07
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Planning Target Volume Clinical Target Volume Gross Tumor Volume Leaf Width Conformity Index
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	Radiation oncology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Gong, Youling @@aut@@ Wang, Shichao @@aut@@ Zhou, Lin @@aut@@ Liu, Yongmei @@aut@@ Xu, Yong @@aut@@ Lu, You @@aut@@ Bai, Sen @@aut@@ Fu, Yuchuan @@aut@@ Xu, Qingfeng @@aut@@ Jiang, Qingfeng @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2010-07-15T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	508725739
id	SPR029582121
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">SPR029582121</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519150350.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-5-65</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029582121</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1748-717X-5-65-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">Gong, Youling</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</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">© Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC.</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">Clinical Target Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gross Tumor Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Leaf Width</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Conformity Index</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wang, Shichao</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhou, Lin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Yongmei</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xu, Yong</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lu, You</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bai, Sen</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fu, Yuchuan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xu, Qingfeng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiang, Qingfeng</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">5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli</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:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</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">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Gong, Youling
spellingShingle	Gong, Youling misc Planning Target Volume misc Clinical Target Volume misc Gross Tumor Volume misc Leaf Width misc Conformity Index Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
authorStr	Gong, Youling
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)508725739
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1748-717X
topic_title	Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer Planning Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Clinical Target Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gross Tumor Volume (dpeaa)DE-He213 Leaf Width (dpeaa)DE-He213 Conformity Index (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Planning Target Volume misc Clinical Target Volume misc Gross Tumor Volume misc Leaf Width misc Conformity Index
topic_unstemmed	misc Planning Target Volume misc Clinical Target Volume misc Gross Tumor Volume misc Leaf Width misc Conformity Index
topic_browse	misc Planning Target Volume misc Clinical Target Volume misc Gross Tumor Volume misc Leaf Width misc Conformity Index
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	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)508725739 (DE-600)2224965-5
title	Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR029582121 (SPR)1748-717X-5-65-e
title_full	Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
author_sort	Gong, Youling
journal	Radiation oncology
journalStr	Radiation oncology
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2010
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Gong, Youling Wang, Shichao Zhou, Lin Liu, Yongmei Xu, Yong Lu, You Bai, Sen Fu, Yuchuan Xu, Qingfeng Jiang, Qingfeng
container_volume	5
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Gong, Youling
doi_str_mv	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65
title_sort	dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
title_auth	Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
abstract	Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
abstractGer	Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
abstract_unstemmed	Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC. © Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
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	Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65
remote_bool	true
author2	Wang, Shichao Zhou, Lin Liu, Yongmei Xu, Yong Lu, You Bai, Sen Fu, Yuchuan Xu, Qingfeng Jiang, Qingfeng
author2Str	Wang, Shichao Zhou, Lin Liu, Yongmei Xu, Yong Lu, You Bai, Sen Fu, Yuchuan Xu, Qingfeng Jiang, Qingfeng
ppnlink	508725739
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/1748-717X-5-65
up_date	2024-07-04T01:34:12.403Z
_version_	1803610334103076864
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">SPR029582121</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519150350.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1748-717X-5-65</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029582121</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1748-717X-5-65-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">Gong, Youling</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</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">© Gong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Purpose To study the impacts of multileaf collimators (MLC) width [standard MLC width of 10 mm (sMLC) and micro-MLC width of 4 mm (mMLC)] in the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for the upper thoracic esophageal cancer (UTEC). Methods and materials 10 patients with UTEC were retrospectively planned with the sMLC and the mMLC. The monitor unites (MUs) and dose volume histogram-based parameters [conformity index (CI) and homogeneous index (HI)] were compared between the IMRT plans with sMLC and with mMLC. Results The IMRT plans with the mMLC were more efficient (average MUs: 703.1 ± 68.3) than plans with the sMLC (average MUs: 833.4 ± 73.8) (p < 0.05). Also, compared to plans with the sMLC, the plans with the mMLC showed advantages in dose coverage of the planning gross tumor volume (Pgtv) (CI 0.706 ± 0.056/HI 1.093 ± 0.021) and the planning target volume (PTV) (CI 0.707 ± 0.029/HI 1.315 ± 0.013) (p < 0.05). In addition, the significant dose sparing in the $ D_{5} $ (3260.3 ± 374.0 vs 3404.5 ± 374.4)/gEUD (1815.1 ± 281.7 vs 1849.2 ± 297.6) of the spinal cord, the $ V_{10} $ (33.2 ± 6.5 vs 34.0 ± 6.7), $ V_{20} $ (16.0 ± 4.6 vs 16.6 ± 4.7), MLD (866.2 ± 174.1 vs 887.9 ± 172.1) and gEUD (938.6 ± 175.2 vs 956.8 ± 171.0) of the lungs were observed in the plans with the mMLC, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusions Comparing to the sMLC, the mMLC not only demonstrated higher efficiencies and more optimal target coverage, but also considerably improved the dose sparing of OARs in the IMRT planning for UTEC.</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">Clinical Target Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gross Tumor Volume</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Leaf Width</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Conformity Index</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wang, Shichao</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhou, Lin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Yongmei</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xu, Yong</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lu, You</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bai, Sen</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fu, Yuchuan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xu, Qingfeng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiang, Qingfeng</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">5(2010), 1 vom: 15. Juli</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:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:07</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-5-65</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</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">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">07</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4007587

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Dosimetric comparison using different multileaf collimeters in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for upper thoracic esophageal cancer

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?