Impact of dosimetric differences between CT and MRI derived target volumes for external beam cervical cancer radiotherapy.
Journal
The British journal of radiology
ISSN: 1748-880X
Titre abrégé: Br J Radiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0373125
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Oct 2020
01 Oct 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
10
6
2020
medline:
7
10
2020
entrez:
10
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The use of MRI is becoming more prevalent in cervical cancer external beam radiotherapy (RT). The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of dosimetric differences between CT and MRI-derived target volumes for cervical cancer external beam RT. An automated planning technique for volumetric modulated arc therapy was developed. Two automated planning plans were generated for 18 cervical cancer patients where planning target volumes (PTVs) were generated based on CT or MRI data alone. Dose metrics for planning target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) were compared to analyse any differences based on imaging modality. All treatment plans were clinically acceptable. Bladder doses (V40) were lower in MRI-based plans ( The dosimetric differences of CT- and MRI-based contouring variability for this study was small. CT remains the standard imaging modality for volume delineation for these patients. This is the first study to evaluate the dosimetric implications of imaging modality on target and OAR doses in cervical cancer external beam RT.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32516544
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20190564
pmc: PMC7548354
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
20190564Références
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2013 Oct;12(5):429-46
pubmed: 23617289
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2019 Apr;63(2):236-243
pubmed: 30506944
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Mar 1;73(3):944-51
pubmed: 19215827
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016 Nov - Dec;6(6):442-449
pubmed: 27374191
Acta Oncol. 2017 Nov;56(11):1495-1500
pubmed: 28840767
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Sep;120(3):493-499
pubmed: 27162158
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2004 Jul;23(7):903-21
pubmed: 15250643
J Med Radiat Sci. 2018 Dec;65(4):300-310
pubmed: 30076690
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2013 Jul-Sep;3(3):e99-e106
pubmed: 24674377
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Oct 1;54(2):457-61
pubmed: 12243822
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2016 Sep 19;1:2-8
pubmed: 29657987
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Nov;121(2):169-179
pubmed: 27729166
Radiother Oncol. 2012 Aug;104(2):192-8
pubmed: 22857857
Radiother Oncol. 2013 Apr;107(1):13-9
pubmed: 23462706
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2012 Oct-Dec;2(4):296-305
pubmed: 24674168
Radiother Oncol. 2014 Sep;112(3):332-6
pubmed: 24853367
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 May 08;17(3):331-346
pubmed: 27167292
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 Jan 08;17(1):272-282
pubmed: 26894364
Radiat Oncol. 2015 Nov 10;10:226
pubmed: 26555303
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Mar 1;76(3 Suppl):S116-22
pubmed: 20171505
Med Dosim. 2017 Autumn;42(3):203-209
pubmed: 28549556
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Jul 15;77(4):1166-70
pubmed: 19836158
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018 May - Jun;8(3):e87-e97
pubmed: 28993138
Radiother Oncol. 2015 Dec;117(3):542-7
pubmed: 26475252
Radiother Oncol. 2010 May;95(2):142-8
pubmed: 20188427