@article{ToussaintRichterManteletal.2016,
  author    = {Toussaint, Andr{\´e} and Richter, Anne and Mantel, Frederick and Flickinger, John C. and Grills, Inga Siiner and Tyagi, Neelam and Sahgal, Arjun and Letourneau, Daniel and Sheehan, Jason P. and Schlesinger, David J. and Gerszten, Peter Carlos and Guckenberger, Matthias},
  title     = {Variability in spine radiosurgery treatment planning - results of an international multi-institutional study},
  series = {Radiation Oncology},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Radiation Oncology},
  number    = {57},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13014-016-0631-9},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-146687},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background The aim of this study was to quantify the variability in spinal radiosurgery (SRS) planning practices between five international institutions, all member of the Elekta Spine Radiosurgery Research Consortium. Methods Four institutions provided one representative patient case each consisting of the medical history, CT and MR imaging. A step-wise planning approach was used where, after each planning step a consensus was generated that formed the basis for the next planning step. This allowed independent analysis of all planning steps of CT-MR image registration, GTV definition, CTV definition, PTV definition and SRS treatment planning. In addition, each institution generated one additional SRS plan for each case based on intra-institutional image registration and contouring, independent of consensus results. Results Averaged over the four cases, image registration variability ranged between translational 1.1 mm and 2.4 mm and rotational 1.1° and 2.0° in all three directions. GTV delineation variability was 1.5 mm in axial and 1.6 mm in longitudinal direction averaged for the four cases. CTV delineation variability was 0.8 mm in axial and 1.2 mm in longitudinal direction. CTV-to-PTV margins ranged between 0 mm and 2 mm according to institutional protocol. Delineation variability was 1 mm in axial directions for the spinal cord. Average PTV coverage for a single fraction18 Gy prescription was 87 ± 5 \%; Dmin to the PTV was 7.5 ± 1.8 Gy averaged over all cases and institutions. Average Dmax to the PRV_SC (spinal cord + 1 mm) was 10.5 ± 1.6 Gy and the average Paddick conformity index was 0.69 ± 0.06. Conclusions Results of this study reflect the variability in current practice of spine radiosurgery in large and highly experienced academic centers. Despite close methodical agreement in the daily workflow, clinically significant variability in all steps of the treatment planning process was demonstrated. This may translate into differences in patient clinical outcome and highlights the need for consensus and established delineation and planning criteria.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GuckenbergerMantelGersztenetal.2014,
  author    = {Guckenberger, Matthias and Mantel, Frederick and Gerszten, Peter C. and Flickinger, John C. and Sahgal, Arjun and L{\´e}tourneau, Daniel and Grills, Inga S. and Jawad, Maha and Fahim, Daniel K. and Shin, John H. and Winey, Brian and Sheehan, Jason and Kersh, Ron},
  title     = {Safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy as primary treatment for vertebral metastases: a multi-institutional analysis},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13014-014-0226-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-110638},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Purpose To evaluate patient selection criteria, methodology, safety and clinical outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for treatment of vertebral metastases. Materials and methods Eight centers from the United States (n = 5), Canada (n = 2) and Germany (n = 1) participated in the retrospective study and analyzed 301 patients with 387 vertebral metastases. No patient had been exposed to prior radiation at the treatment site. All patients were treated with linac-based SBRT using cone-beam CT image-guidance and online correction of set-up errors in six degrees of freedom. Results 387 spinal metastases were treated and the median follow-up was 11.8 months. The median number of consecutive vertebrae treated in a single volume was one (range, 1-6), and the median total dose was 24 Gy (range 8-60 Gy) in 3 fractions (range 1-20). The median EQD210 was 38 Gy (range 12-81 Gy). Median overall survival (OS) was 19.5 months and local tumor control (LC) at two years was 83.9\%. On multivariate analysis for OS, male sex (p < 0.001; HR = 0.44), performance status <90 (p < 0.001; HR = 0.46), presence of visceral metastases (p = 0.007; HR = 0.50), uncontrolled systemic disease (p = 0.007; HR = 0.45), >1 vertebra treated with SBRT (p = 0.04; HR = 0.62) were correlated with worse outcomes. For LC, an interval between primary diagnosis of cancer and SBRT of ≤30 months (p = 0.01; HR = 0.27) and histology of primary disease (NSCLC, renal cell cancer, melanoma, other) (p = 0.01; HR = 0.21) were correlated with worse LC. Vertebral compression fractures progressed and developed de novo in 4.1\% and 3.6\%, respectively. Other adverse events were rare and no radiation induced myelopathy reported. Conclusions This multi-institutional cohort study reports high rates of efficacy with spine SBRT. At this time the optimal fractionation within high dose practice is unknown.},
  language  = {en}
}