{"title":"包括腹主动脉旁淋巴结区域在内的宫颈癌患者图像引导放射治疗的最佳校正策略","authors":"Kazuki Wakabayashi PhD , Makoto Hirata PhD , Hajime Monzen PhD , Takaya Inagaki MD , Tetsuo Sonomura MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The clinically accepted planning target volume margin for radiation therapy to the paraortic nodal region in cervical cancer patients is 5 mm. However, the comprehensive alignment and variability from the pelvic bone to all lumbar vertebrae are undetermined. This study aims to quantify the residual setup errors between the pelvic bone and lumbar vertebrae and determine the optimal correction strategy for patients with cervical cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><p>Fifteen patients underwent pretreatment mega-voltage computed tomography scans (375 total fractions). Residual setup errors and required margins for each lumbar vertebra were calculated based on registrations accounting for pelvic rotation and translation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The systematic residual errors (1 SD) at L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5 using pelvic bone registration were 6.5, 4.9, 3.1, 1.5, and 0.6 mm in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, 3.1, 2.3, 1.4, 0.6, and 0.3 mm in the right-left direction, and 2.7, 2.2, 1.7, 1.0, and 0.5 mm in the superior-inferior direction, respectively. The residual setup errors were the largest in the AP direction. Registration based on the pelvic bone required margins in the AP direction of 16.0, 12.1, 7.7, 3.6, and 1.3 mm for L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5, respectively, whereas registration based on L3 required margins of 8.8, 4.8, 4.4, 7.1, and 7.7 mm for L1, L2, L4, L5, and pelvic bone, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Considerable local setup variability was found in patients with cervical cancer. After reviewing the corrective strategies, we determined that L3-based registration effectively minimized the required margins.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"9 10","pages":"Article 101590"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001532/pdfft?md5=a23932bd7bb3450bafaee5bff06a827c&pid=1-s2.0-S2452109424001532-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal Correction Strategy of Image Guided Radiation Therapy Including the Paraortic Lymph Node Region in Patients With Cervical Cancers\",\"authors\":\"Kazuki Wakabayashi PhD , Makoto Hirata PhD , Hajime Monzen PhD , Takaya Inagaki MD , Tetsuo Sonomura MD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The clinically accepted planning target volume margin for radiation therapy to the paraortic nodal region in cervical cancer patients is 5 mm. However, the comprehensive alignment and variability from the pelvic bone to all lumbar vertebrae are undetermined. This study aims to quantify the residual setup errors between the pelvic bone and lumbar vertebrae and determine the optimal correction strategy for patients with cervical cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><p>Fifteen patients underwent pretreatment mega-voltage computed tomography scans (375 total fractions). Residual setup errors and required margins for each lumbar vertebra were calculated based on registrations accounting for pelvic rotation and translation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The systematic residual errors (1 SD) at L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5 using pelvic bone registration were 6.5, 4.9, 3.1, 1.5, and 0.6 mm in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, 3.1, 2.3, 1.4, 0.6, and 0.3 mm in the right-left direction, and 2.7, 2.2, 1.7, 1.0, and 0.5 mm in the superior-inferior direction, respectively. The residual setup errors were the largest in the AP direction. Registration based on the pelvic bone required margins in the AP direction of 16.0, 12.1, 7.7, 3.6, and 1.3 mm for L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5, respectively, whereas registration based on L3 required margins of 8.8, 4.8, 4.4, 7.1, and 7.7 mm for L1, L2, L4, L5, and pelvic bone, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Considerable local setup variability was found in patients with cervical cancer. After reviewing the corrective strategies, we determined that L3-based registration effectively minimized the required margins.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\"9 10\",\"pages\":\"Article 101590\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001532/pdfft?md5=a23932bd7bb3450bafaee5bff06a827c&pid=1-s2.0-S2452109424001532-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001532\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424001532","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Optimal Correction Strategy of Image Guided Radiation Therapy Including the Paraortic Lymph Node Region in Patients With Cervical Cancers
Purpose
The clinically accepted planning target volume margin for radiation therapy to the paraortic nodal region in cervical cancer patients is 5 mm. However, the comprehensive alignment and variability from the pelvic bone to all lumbar vertebrae are undetermined. This study aims to quantify the residual setup errors between the pelvic bone and lumbar vertebrae and determine the optimal correction strategy for patients with cervical cancer.
Materials and Methods
Fifteen patients underwent pretreatment mega-voltage computed tomography scans (375 total fractions). Residual setup errors and required margins for each lumbar vertebra were calculated based on registrations accounting for pelvic rotation and translation.
Results
The systematic residual errors (1 SD) at L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5 using pelvic bone registration were 6.5, 4.9, 3.1, 1.5, and 0.6 mm in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, 3.1, 2.3, 1.4, 0.6, and 0.3 mm in the right-left direction, and 2.7, 2.2, 1.7, 1.0, and 0.5 mm in the superior-inferior direction, respectively. The residual setup errors were the largest in the AP direction. Registration based on the pelvic bone required margins in the AP direction of 16.0, 12.1, 7.7, 3.6, and 1.3 mm for L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5, respectively, whereas registration based on L3 required margins of 8.8, 4.8, 4.4, 7.1, and 7.7 mm for L1, L2, L4, L5, and pelvic bone, respectively.
Conclusions
Considerable local setup variability was found in patients with cervical cancer. After reviewing the corrective strategies, we determined that L3-based registration effectively minimized the required margins.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.