TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessment and clinical validation of margins for adaptive simultaneous integrated boost in neo-adjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer
AU - Raso, Roberta
AU - Scalco, Elisa
AU - Fiorino, Claudio
AU - Broggi, Sara
AU - Cattaneo, Giovanni Mauro
AU - Garelli, Stefania
AU - Pagliazzi, Marco
AU - Slim, Najla
AU - di Muzio, Nadia
AU - Rizzo, Giovanna
AU - Calandrino, Riccardo
AU - Passoni, Paolo
PY - 2015/3/1
Y1 - 2015/3/1
N2 - Purpose: An adaptive concomitant boost (ACB) for the neo-adjuvant treatment of rectal cancer was clinically implemented. In this study population margins M(90,90) considering rectal deformation were derived for 10 consecutive patients treated at 18×2.3. Gy with Helical Tomotherapy (HT) and prospectively validated on 20 additional patients treated with HT, delivering ACB in the last 6 fractions. Methods: Sectorial margins M(90,90) of the whole and second treatment parts were assessed for 90% population through a method combining the 90% coverage probability maps of rectal positions (CPC90%) with 3D local distance measurements between the CPC90% and a reference rectal contour. M(90,90) were compared with the margins M(90,90)95%/99%, ensuring CPC90% coverage with 95%/99% confidence level. M(90,90) of the treatment second part were chosen as ACB margins which were clinically validated for each patient by means of %volume missing of CPC5/6 excluded by the ACB margins. Results: The whole treatment M(90,90) ranged between 1.9mm and 9mm in the lower-posterior and upper-anterior sectors, respectively. Regarding ACB, M(90,90) were 7mm in the anterior direction and 95%/99% did not significantly differ from M(90,90). The %volume excluded by the ACB margin was
AB - Purpose: An adaptive concomitant boost (ACB) for the neo-adjuvant treatment of rectal cancer was clinically implemented. In this study population margins M(90,90) considering rectal deformation were derived for 10 consecutive patients treated at 18×2.3. Gy with Helical Tomotherapy (HT) and prospectively validated on 20 additional patients treated with HT, delivering ACB in the last 6 fractions. Methods: Sectorial margins M(90,90) of the whole and second treatment parts were assessed for 90% population through a method combining the 90% coverage probability maps of rectal positions (CPC90%) with 3D local distance measurements between the CPC90% and a reference rectal contour. M(90,90) were compared with the margins M(90,90)95%/99%, ensuring CPC90% coverage with 95%/99% confidence level. M(90,90) of the treatment second part were chosen as ACB margins which were clinically validated for each patient by means of %volume missing of CPC5/6 excluded by the ACB margins. Results: The whole treatment M(90,90) ranged between 1.9mm and 9mm in the lower-posterior and upper-anterior sectors, respectively. Regarding ACB, M(90,90) were 7mm in the anterior direction and 95%/99% did not significantly differ from M(90,90). The %volume excluded by the ACB margin was
KW - Adaptive radiotherapy
KW - Margins
KW - Rectal cancer
KW - Tomotherapy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921881050&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921881050&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.12.002
DO - 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.12.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 25586933
AN - SCOPUS:84921881050
SN - 1120-1797
VL - 31
SP - 167
EP - 172
JO - Physica Medica
JF - Physica Medica
IS - 2
ER -