The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 25 of 370
Back to Result List

A dosimetric comparison of real-time adaptive and non-adaptive radiotherapy: a multi-institutional study encompassing robotic, gimbaled, multileaf collimator and couch tracking

Please always quote using this URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-189605
  • Purpose: A study of real-time adaptive radiotherapy systems was performed to test the hypothesis that, across delivery systems and institutions, the dosimetric accuracy is improved with adaptive treatments over non-adaptive radiotherapy in the presence of patient-measured tumor motion. Methods and materials: Ten institutions with robotic(2), gimbaled(2), MLC(4) or couch tracking(2) used common materials including CT and structure sets, motion traces and planning protocols to create a lung and a prostate plan. For each motion trace, the plan wasPurpose: A study of real-time adaptive radiotherapy systems was performed to test the hypothesis that, across delivery systems and institutions, the dosimetric accuracy is improved with adaptive treatments over non-adaptive radiotherapy in the presence of patient-measured tumor motion. Methods and materials: Ten institutions with robotic(2), gimbaled(2), MLC(4) or couch tracking(2) used common materials including CT and structure sets, motion traces and planning protocols to create a lung and a prostate plan. For each motion trace, the plan was delivered twice to a moving dosimeter; with and without real-time adaptation. Each measurement was compared to a static measurement and the percentage of failed points for gamma-tests recorded. Results: For all lung traces all measurement sets show improved dose accuracy with a mean 2%/2 mm gamma-fail rate of 1.6% with adaptation and 15.2% without adaptation (p < 0.001). For all prostate the mean 2%/2 mm gamma-fail rate was 1.4% with adaptation and 17.3% without adaptation (p < 0.001). The difference between the four systems was small with an average 2%/2 mm gamma-fail rate of <3% for all systems with adaptation for lung and prostate. Conclusions: The investigated systems all accounted for realistic tumor motion accurately and performed to a similar high standard, with real-time adaptation significantly outperforming non-adaptive delivery methods.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author: Emma Colvill, Jeremy Booth, Simeon Nill, Martin Fast, James Bedford, Uwe Oelfke, Mitsuhiro Nakamura, Per Poulsen, Esben Worm, Rune Hansen, Thomas Ravkilde, Jonas Scherman Rydhög, Tobias Pommer, Per Munck af Rosenschold, Stephanie Lang, Matthias Guckenberger, Christian Groh, Christian Herrmann, Dirk Verellen, Kenneth Poels, Lei Wang, Michael Hadsell, Thilo Sothmann, Oliver Blanck, Paul Keall
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-189605
Document Type:Journal article
Faculties:Fakultät für Mathematik und Informatik / Institut für Informatik
Medizinische Fakultät / Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie
Language:English
Parent Title (English):Radiotherapy and Oncology
Year of Completion:2016
Volume:119
Issue:1
Pagenumber:159-165
Source:Radiotherapy and Oncology (2016) 119:1, S. 159-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.03.006
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.03.006
Dewey Decimal Classification:0 Informatik, Informationswissenschaft, allgemeine Werke / 00 Informatik, Wissen, Systeme / 000 Informatik, Informationswissenschaft, allgemeine Werke
6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Tag:Couch tracking; Gimbaled tracking; MLC tracking; Organ motion; Robotic tracking
Release Date:2020/12/17
Licence (German):License LogoCC BY-NC-ND: Creative-Commons-Lizenz: Namensnennung, Nicht kommerziell, Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International