Planning 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography (4DCT) Cannot Adequately Represent Daily Intrafractional Motion of Abdominal Tumors

Ge, Jiajia; Santanam, Lakshmi; Noël, C.; Parikh, Parag J.

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.09.014

Cited by 118 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The patients reported by Ge et al (26) were not treated with any voice coaching or respiratory gating. To improve the reproducibility of the respiratory motion, patients followed voice coaching both during the 4D-CT at simulation and during daily treatments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous investigators have already demonstrated that matching bony anatomy is not appropriate, given the day-to-day variations in tumor position caused by nonrespiratory motion (25). Ge et al (26) have shown that the baseline 4D-CT simulation did not agree with daily intrafractional motion for 92% of the treatment fractions in a RPM Z real-time position management; SI Z superior-inferior. * Testing whether or not the fixed slope is significantly different from zero (thus indicating whether the predictor is significantly associated with GTV).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling Pancreatic Tumor Motion Using 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and Surrogate Markers

Huguet

Yorke

Davidson

et al. 2015

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Pancreatic Tumor Motion Using 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and Surrogate Markers

Huguet

Yorke

Davidson

et al. 2015

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Ge et al (10) have reported the observation of intrafraction motion variation of the abdominal tumor in a CT simulation and during the course of radiation treatment. They suggested that it is important to monitor the intrafraction motion during treatment delivery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a combined respiratory‐gating system comprising the TrueBeam linear accelerator and a new real‐time tumor‐tracking radiotherapy system: a preliminary study

Shiinoki

Kawamura

Uehara

et al. 2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A combined system comprising the TrueBeam linear accelerator and a new real‐time, tumor‐tracking radiotherapy system, SyncTraX, was installed in our institution. The goals of this study were to assess the capability of SyncTraX in measuring the position of a fiducial marker using color fluoroscopic images, and to evaluate the dosimetric and geometric accuracy of respiratory‐gated radiotherapy using this combined system for the simple geometry. For the fundamental evaluation of respiratory‐gated radiotherapy using SyncTraX, the following were performed: 1) determination of dosimetric and positional characteristics of sinusoidal patterns using a motor‐driven base for several gating windows; 2) measurement of time delay using an oscilloscope; 3) positional verification of sinusoidal patterns and the pattern in the case of a lung cancer patient; 4) measurement of the half‐value layer (HVL in mm AL), effective kVp, and air kerma, using a solid‐state detector for each fluoroscopic condition, to determine the patient dose. The dose profile in a moving phantom with gated radiotherapy having a gating window ≤4 mm was in good agreement with that under static conditions for each photon beam. The total time delay between TrueBeam and SyncTraX was <227 ms for each photon beam. The mean of the positional tracking error was <0.4 mm for sinusoidal patterns and for the pattern in the case of a lung cancer patient. The air‐kerma rates from one fluoroscopy direction were 1.93±0.01, 2.86±0.01, 3.92±0.04, 5.28±0.03, and 6.60±0.05 mGy/min for 70, 80, 90, 100, and 110 kV X‐ray beams at 80 mA, respectively. The combined system comprising TrueBeam and SyncTraX could track the motion of the fiducial marker and control radiation delivery with reasonable accuracy; therefore, this system provides significant dosimetric improvement. However, patient exposure dose from fluoroscopy was not clinically negligible.PACS number(s): 87.53.Bn, 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr

show abstract

“…Previous studies have compared fiducial marker motion using 4DCT versus fluoroscopy or respiratory tracking (5,6), liver tumor motion using cine-MRI with or without abdominal compression (7), and liver tumor motion using cine-MRI versus diaphragm motion with fluoroscopy (8). Although 4DCT has been compared with cine-MRI in patients with lung tumors where fiducial markers are not necessary (9), to our knowledge no studies exist that compare 4DCT with cine-MRI in the evaluation of hepatic tumor motion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Assessment of Liver Tumor Motion Using Cine–Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography

Fernandes

Apisarnthanarax

Yin

et al. 2015

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planning 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography (4DCT) Cannot Adequately Represent Daily Intrafractional Motion of Abdominal Tumors

Cited by 118 publications

References 16 publications

Modeling Pancreatic Tumor Motion Using 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and Surrogate Markers

Modeling Pancreatic Tumor Motion Using 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and Surrogate Markers

Evaluation of a combined respiratory‐gating system comprising the TrueBeam linear accelerator and a new real‐time tumor‐tracking radiotherapy system: a preliminary study

Comparative Assessment of Liver Tumor Motion Using Cine–Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About