Mixed-beam approach for high-risk prostate cancer: Carbon-ion boost followed by photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Dosimetric and geometric evaluations (AIRC IG-14300)
Physica Medica, ISSN: 1120-1797, Vol: 76, Page: 327-336
2020
- 3Citations
- 17Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes3
- Captures17
- Readers17
- 17
Article Description
The aim was to evaluate dosimetric uncertainties of a mixed beam approach for patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). The treatment consists of a carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) boost followed by whole-pelvis intensity-modulated RT (IMRT). Patients were treated with a CIRT boost of 16.6 Gy/4 fractions followed by whole-pelvis IMRT of 50 Gy/25 fractions, with consequent long term androgen deprivation therapy. Deformable computed tomography image registration (DIR) was performed and corresponding doses were used for plan sum. A comparative IMRT photon plan was obtained as whole-pelvis IMRT of 50 Gy/25 fractions followed by a boost of 28 Gy/14 fractions. DIR performances were evaluated through structure-related and image characteristics parameters. Until now, five patients out of ten total enrolled ended the treatment. Dosimetric parameters were lower in CIRT + IMRT than IMRT-only plans for all organs at risk (OARs) except femoral heads. Regarding DIR evaluation, femoral heads were the less deformed OAR. Penile bulb, bladder and anal canal showed intermediate deformation. Rectum was the most deformed. DIR algorithms were patient (P)-dependent, as performances were the highest for P3 and P4, intermediate for P2 and P5, and the lowest for P1. CIRT allows better OARs sparing while increasing the efficacy due to the higher radio-biological effect of carbon ions. However, a mixed beam approach could introduce DIR problems in multi-centric treatments with different operative protocols. The development of this prospective trial will lead to more mature data concerning the clinical impact of implementing DIR procedures in dose accumulation applications for high-risk PCa treatments.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1120179720301721; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.07.012; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85088992022&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32750548; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1120179720301721; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.07.012
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know