Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 19, Number 3, 2014

Comparative analysis of image guidance in two institutions for prostate cancer patients

Tomasz Piotrowski, Slav Yartsev, George Rodrigues, Tomasz Bajon

Summary:

Aim/Background

The analysis of systematic and random errors obtained from the pooled data on inter-fraction prostate motion during radiation therapy in two institutions.

Materials and methods

Data of 6085 observations for 216 prostate cancer patients treated on tomotherapy units in two institutions of position correction shifts obtained by co-registration of planning and daily CT studies were investigated. Three independent variables: patient position (supine or prone), target (prostate or prostate bed), and imaging mode (normal or coarse) were analyzed. Systematic and random errors were evaluated and used to calculate the margins for different options of referencing based on the position corrections observed with one, three, or five imaging sessions.

Results

Statistical analysis showed that only the difference between normal and coarse modes of imaging was significant, which allowed to merge the supine and prone position sub-groups as well as the prostate and prostate bed patients. In the normal and coarse imaging groups, the margins calculated using systematic and random errors in the medio-lateral and cranio-caudal directions (5.5 mm and 4.5 mm, respectively) were similar, but significantly different (5.3 mm for the normal mode and 7.1 mm for the coarse mode) in the anterio-posterior direction. The reference scheme based on the first three fractions (R3) was found to be the optimal one.

Conclusions

The R3 reference scheme effectively reduced systematic and random errors. Larger margins in the anterio-posterior direction should be used during prostate treatment on the tomotherapy unit, as coarse imaging mode is chosen in order to reduce imaging time and dose.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2014; 19(3) : 206-213


« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2