FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2138443811> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2138443811 endingPage "1033" @default.
• W2138443811 startingPage "1026" @default.
• W2138443811 abstract "Purpose To evaluate online/offline image-guided/adaptive treatment techniques for prostate cancer radiation therapy with daily cone-beam CT (CBCT) imaging. Methods and Materials Three treatment techniques were evaluated retrospectively using daily pre- and posttreatment CBCT images on 22 prostate cancer patients. Prostate, seminal vesicles (SV), rectal wall, and bladder were delineated on all CBCT images. For each patient, a pretreatment intensity modulated radiation therapy plan with clinical target volume (CTV) = prostate + SV and planning target volume (PTV) = CTV + 3 mm was created. The 3 treatment techniques were as follows: (1) Daily Correction: The pretreatment intensity modulated radiation therapy plan was delivered after online CBCT imaging, and position correction; (2) Online Planning: Daily online inverse plans with 3-mm CTV-to-PTV margin were created using online CBCT images, and delivered; and (3) Hybrid Adaption: Daily Correction plus an offline adaptive inverse planning performed after the first week of treatment. The adaptive plan was delivered for all remaining 15 fractions. Treatment dose for each technique was constructed using the daily posttreatment CBCT images via deformable image registration. Evaluation was performed using treatment dose distribution in target and critical organs. Results Treatment equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for the CTV was within [85.6%, 100.8%] of the pretreatment planned target EUD for Daily Correction; [98.7%, 103.0%] for Online Planning; and [99.2%, 103.4%] for Hybrid Adaptation. Eighteen percent of the 22 patients in Daily Correction had a target dose deficiency >5%. For rectal wall, the mean ± SD of the normalized EUD was 102.6% ± 2.7% for Daily Correction, 99.9% ± 2.5% for Online Planning, and 100.6% ± 2.1% for Hybrid Adaptation. The mean ± SD of the normalized bladder EUD was 108.7% ± 8.2% for Daily Correction, 92.7% ± 8.6% for Online Planning, and 89.4% ± 10.8% for Hybrid Adaptation. Conclusions Both Online Planning and Hybrid Adaptation can achieve comparable target coverage and normal tissue sparing and are superior to the Daily Correction technique. The Daily Correction technique using a 3-mm target margin in the pretreatment plan is not appropriate to compensate for residual variations in CBCT image-guided prostate cancer radiation therapy. To evaluate online/offline image-guided/adaptive treatment techniques for prostate cancer radiation therapy with daily cone-beam CT (CBCT) imaging. Three treatment techniques were evaluated retrospectively using daily pre- and posttreatment CBCT images on 22 prostate cancer patients. Prostate, seminal vesicles (SV), rectal wall, and bladder were delineated on all CBCT images. For each patient, a pretreatment intensity modulated radiation therapy plan with clinical target volume (CTV) = prostate + SV and planning target volume (PTV) = CTV + 3 mm was created. The 3 treatment techniques were as follows: (1) Daily Correction: The pretreatment intensity modulated radiation therapy plan was delivered after online CBCT imaging, and position correction; (2) Online Planning: Daily online inverse plans with 3-mm CTV-to-PTV margin were created using online CBCT images, and delivered; and (3) Hybrid Adaption: Daily Correction plus an offline adaptive inverse planning performed after the first week of treatment. The adaptive plan was delivered for all remaining 15 fractions. Treatment dose for each technique was constructed using the daily posttreatment CBCT images via deformable image registration. Evaluation was performed using treatment dose distribution in target and critical organs. Treatment equivalent uniform dose (EUD) for the CTV was within [85.6%, 100.8%] of the pretreatment planned target EUD for Daily Correction; [98.7%, 103.0%] for Online Planning; and [99.2%, 103.4%] for Hybrid Adaptation. Eighteen percent of the 22 patients in Daily Correction had a target dose deficiency >5%. For rectal wall, the mean ± SD of the normalized EUD was 102.6% ± 2.7% for Daily Correction, 99.9% ± 2.5% for Online Planning, and 100.6% ± 2.1% for Hybrid Adaptation. The mean ± SD of the normalized bladder EUD was 108.7% ± 8.2% for Daily Correction, 92.7% ± 8.6% for Online Planning, and 89.4% ± 10.8% for Hybrid Adaptation. Both Online Planning and Hybrid Adaptation can achieve comparable target coverage and normal tissue sparing and are superior to the Daily Correction technique. The Daily Correction technique using a 3-mm target margin in the pretreatment plan is not appropriate to compensate for residual variations in CBCT image-guided prostate cancer radiation therapy." @default.
• W2138443811 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2138443811 creator A5021332443 @default.
• W2138443811 creator A5031178158 @default.
• W2138443811 creator A5072574772 @default.
• W2138443811 creator A5075699837 @default.
• W2138443811 date "2015-04-01" @default.
• W2138443811 modified "2023-10-13" @default.
• W2138443811 title "Evaluation of Online/Offline Image Guidance/Adaptation Approaches for Prostate Cancer Radiation Therapy" @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1730719179 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1967172105 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1968698198 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1975949663 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1977594058 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1977933620 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1979387793 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1983239558 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1983942212 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1988023890 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W1988165595 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2010594057 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2026683913 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2033456044 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2042239233 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2047311432 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2050755691 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2050792510 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2057900848 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2058670100 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2059576070 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2060871295 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2067061572 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2099501023 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2101609298 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2112729499 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2158980875 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2166010438 @default.
• W2138443811 cites W2170080153 @default.
• W2138443811 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.12.043" @default.
• W2138443811 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25832693" @default.
• W2138443811 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2138443811 type Work @default.
• W2138443811 sameAs 2138443811 @default.
• W2138443811 citedByCount "34" @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112016 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112017 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112018 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112019 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112020 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112021 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112022 @default.
• W2138443811 countsByYear W21384438112023 @default.
• W2138443811 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2138443811 hasAuthorship W2138443811A5021332443 @default.
• W2138443811 hasAuthorship W2138443811A5031178158 @default.
• W2138443811 hasAuthorship W2138443811A5072574772 @default.
• W2138443811 hasAuthorship W2138443811A5075699837 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C201645570 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C2776235491 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C2779813781 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C2780192828 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C544519230 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConcept C9267231 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C121608353 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C126322002 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C126838900 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C19527891 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C201645570 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C2776235491 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C2779813781 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C2780192828 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C2989005 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C509974204 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C544519230 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C71924100 @default.
• W2138443811 hasConceptScore W2138443811C9267231 @default.
• W2138443811 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2138443811 hasLocation W21384438111 @default.
• W2138443811 hasLocation W21384438112 @default.
• W2138443811 hasOpenAccess W2138443811 @default.
• W2138443811 hasPrimaryLocation W21384438111 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W1980524935 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W2075763133 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W2088520467 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W2117223058 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W2148739118 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W2376423713 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W2416398819 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W4296345545 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W84412365 @default.
• W2138443811 hasRelatedWork W1583600832 @default.

• next