A dosimetric comparison of real-time adaptive and non-adaptive radiotherapy: A multi-institutional study encompassing robotic, gimbaled, multileaf collimator and couch tracking
Standard
A dosimetric comparison of real-time adaptive and non-adaptive radiotherapy: A multi-institutional study encompassing robotic, gimbaled, multileaf collimator and couch tracking. / Colvill, Emma; Booth, Jeremy; Nill, Simeon; Fast, Martin; Bedford, James; Oelfke, Uwe; Nakamura, Mitsuhiro; Poulsen, Per; Worm, Esben; Hansen, Rune; Ravkilde, Thomas; Scherman Rydhög, Jonas; Pommer, Tobias; Munck Af Rosenschold, Per; Lang, Stephanie; Guckenberger, Matthias; Groh, Christian; Herrmann, Christian; Verellen, Dirk; Poels, Kenneth; Wang, Lei; Hadsell, Michael; Sothmann, Thilo; Blanck, Oliver; Keall, Paul.
In: RADIOTHER ONCOL, Vol. 119, No. 1, 04.2016, p. 159-65.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - A dosimetric comparison of real-time adaptive and non-adaptive radiotherapy: A multi-institutional study encompassing robotic, gimbaled, multileaf collimator and couch tracking
AU - Colvill, Emma
AU - Booth, Jeremy
AU - Nill, Simeon
AU - Fast, Martin
AU - Bedford, James
AU - Oelfke, Uwe
AU - Nakamura, Mitsuhiro
AU - Poulsen, Per
AU - Worm, Esben
AU - Hansen, Rune
AU - Ravkilde, Thomas
AU - Scherman Rydhög, Jonas
AU - Pommer, Tobias
AU - Munck Af Rosenschold, Per
AU - Lang, Stephanie
AU - Guckenberger, Matthias
AU - Groh, Christian
AU - Herrmann, Christian
AU - Verellen, Dirk
AU - Poels, Kenneth
AU - Wang, Lei
AU - Hadsell, Michael
AU - Sothmann, Thilo
AU - Blanck, Oliver
AU - Keall, Paul
N1 - Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/4
Y1 - 2016/4
N2 - 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 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 γ-tests recorded.RESULTS: For all lung traces all measurement sets show improved dose accuracy with a mean 2%/2mm γ-fail rate of 1.6% with adaptation and 15.2% without adaptation (p<0.001). For all prostate the mean 2%/2mm γ-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%/2mm γ-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.
AB - 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 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 γ-tests recorded.RESULTS: For all lung traces all measurement sets show improved dose accuracy with a mean 2%/2mm γ-fail rate of 1.6% with adaptation and 15.2% without adaptation (p<0.001). For all prostate the mean 2%/2mm γ-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%/2mm γ-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.
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.03.006
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.03.006
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 27016171
VL - 119
SP - 159
EP - 165
JO - RADIOTHER ONCOL
JF - RADIOTHER ONCOL
SN - 0167-8140
IS - 1
ER -