Analytical approach to estimate normal tissue complication probability using best fit of normal tissue tolerance doses into the NTCP equation of the linear quadratic model.

Kehwar, Than S.

doi:10.4103/0973-1482.19597

Cited by 86 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The EUD-based calculations were performed by using a freely available MatLab program (The MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA), Eudmodel.m [21]. The cumulative DVHs of 120 plans exported from Eclipse along with various radiobiological factors ( Table 2) for different sites were given as input to the above program [23][24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Plan Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of treatment plans: a retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation

Puzhakkal

Kochunny²,

Padannayil

et al. 2016

Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are many situations in radiotherapy where multiple treatment plans need to be compared for selection of an optimal plan. In this study we performed the radiobiological method of plan evaluation to verify the treatment plan comparison procedure of our clinical practice. We estimated and correlated various radiobiological dose indices with physical dose metrics for a total of 30 patients representing typical cases of head and neck, prostate and brain tumors. Three sets of plans along with a clinically approved plan (final plan) treated by either Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) or Rapid Arc (RA) techniques were considered. The study yielded improved target coverage for final plans, however, no appreciable differences in doses and the complication probabilities of organs at risk were noticed. Even though all four plans showed adequate dose distributions, from dosimetric point of view, the final plan had more acceptable dose distribution. The estimated biological outcome and dose volume histogram data showed least differences between plans for IMRT when compared to RA. Our retrospective study based on 120 plans, validated the radiobiological method of plan evaluation. The tumor cure or normal tissue complication probabilities were found to be correlated with the corresponding physical dose indices.

show abstract

Section: Plan Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of treatment plans: a retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation

Puzhakkal

Kochunny²,

Padannayil

et al. 2016

Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the esophageal cancer, the EUD was calculated using alpha-beta ratio of 10 [22] . The alpha-beta ratio for lung, liver, heart, and spinal cord were 3, 1.5, 2, and 2, respectively [22,23] . For complete list of EUD parameters, please refer to Table 1.…”

Section: Equivalent Uniform Dosementioning

confidence: 99%

“…(The parameters are obtained from published papers of Oinam et al [22] , Kehwar [23] , and Okunieff et al [25] )…”

Section: Tumor Control Probabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiobiological evaluation of dose calculation algorithms in RapidArc planning of esophageal cancer treatment plans

Rana

Rogers²

2013

JST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of current study is to investigate the impact of tissue heterogeneity corrections in Acuros XB algorithm (AXB) and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) on RapidArc esophageal cancer treatment plans using equivalent uniform dose (EUD) calculations and tumor control probability (TCP). Methods:Ten esophageal cancer cases were selected for the current study. All cases were planned using RapidArc technique in Eclipse treatment planning system (10.0.28). The treatment plans were inversely optimized using progressive resolution optimizer and each optimized plan was calculated using AAA with tissue heterogeneity correction. The AAA plans were then normalized such that prescription dose covered 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). The AXB plans were generated by recalculating the normalized AAA plans using AXB with tissue heterogeneity correction for identical monitor units and beam parameters as in the corresponding AAA plans. The EUD and TCP calculations were then performed on the AAA and AXB plans.Results: For PTV, the EUD values in AXB plans were always lower than in AAA plans with an average difference of 1.3%. Similarly, AXB calculations produced smaller magnitude of EUD for the organs at risk (OARs) compared to AAA calculations. On average, in AXB plans, the lung EUD was lower by 3.5%, the liver EUD was lower by 2.3%, the heart EUD was lower by 2.8%, and the spinal cord EUD was lower by 1.8%. The TCP of AXB plans was lower by average difference of 7.1% compared to that of AAA plans. Conclusion:In comparison to AAA calculations, the preliminary results presented in the current study showed that AXB calculations produced lower EUD and TCP for the PTV as well as lower EUD for OARs in the esophageal cancer treatment plans created by RapidArc planning technique.

show abstract

“…Dose prescriptions in both linac and HT, IMRT plans were selected so that the planned target volume received 54 Gy ( PTV54 ) and 60 Gy ( PTV60=SIB) in 28 fractions. Dose constraints for OAR's were made according to normal tissue complication probability analyses (Kehwar, 2005;Emami et al,1991).…”

Section: Dose Prescriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Linear Accelerator and Helical Tomotherapy Plans for Glioblastoma Multiforme Patients

Koca

Basaran²,

Sezen³

et al. 2014

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Despite advances in radiotherapy, overall survival of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients is still poor. Moreover dosimetrical analyses with these newer treatment methods are insufficient. The current study is aimed to compare intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) linear accelerator (linac) and helical tomotherapy (HT) treatment plans for patients with prognostic aggressive brain tumors. Material and Methods: A total of 20 GBM patient plans were prospectively evaluated in both linac and HT planning systems. Plans are compared with respect to homogenity index, conformity index and organs at risk (OAR) sparing effects of the treatments. Results: Both treatment plans provided good results that can be applied to GBM patients but it was concluded that if the critical organs with relatively lower dose constraints are closer to the target region, HT for radiotherapeutical application could be preferred. Conclusion: Tomotherapy plans were superior to linear accelerator plans from the aspect of OAR sparing with slightly broader low dose ranges over the healthy tissues. In case a clinic has both of these IMRT systems, employment of HT is recommended based on the observed results and future re-irradiation strategies must be considered.

show abstract

Analytical approach to estimate normal tissue complication probability using best fit of normal tissue tolerance doses into the NTCP equation of the linear quadratic model.

Abstract: A fairly good correspondence is found between the curves of 2 sets of data for brain, heart and rectum. Hence the model may, therefore, be used to interpolate clinical data to provide an estimate of NTCP for these organs for any altered fractionated treatment schedule.

Cited by 86 publications

References 45 publications

Comparison of treatment plans: a retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation

Comparison of treatment plans: a retrospective study by the method of radiobiological evaluation

Radiobiological evaluation of dose calculation algorithms in RapidArc planning of esophageal cancer treatment plans

Comparison of Linear Accelerator and Helical Tomotherapy Plans for Glioblastoma Multiforme Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About