Knopf, Antje

Profilbild
E-Mail-Adresse
Geburtsdatum
Projekt
Organisationseinheiten
Berufsbeschreibung
Nachname
Knopf
Vorname
Antje
Name
Knopf, Antje

Filter

20221
Filter zurücksetzen

Einstellungen

Autor:in: Both, Stefan × Autor:in: Langendijk, Johannes A. × Thema: Oesophageal cancer ×

Suchergebnisse

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
  • Vorschaubild
    Publikation
    Robustness assessment of clinical adaptive proton and photon radiotherapy for oesophageal cancer in the model-based approach
    (Elsevier, 12/2022) Visser, Sabine; O. Ribeiro, Cássia; Dieters, Margriet; Mul, Veronique E.; Niezink, Anne G.H.; van der Schaaf, Arjen; Langendijk, Johannes A.; Korevaar, Erik W.; Both, Stefan; Muijs, Christina T.; Knopf, Antje [in: Radiotherapy and Oncology]
    Purpose In the Netherlands, oesophageal cancer (EC) patients are selected for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using the expected normal tissue complication probability reduction (ΔNTCP) when treating with IMPT compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). In this study, we evaluate the robustness of the first EC patients treated with IMPT in our clinic in terms of target and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose with corresponding NTCP, as compared to VMAT. Materials and Methods For 20 consecutive EC patients, clinical IMPT and VMAT plans were created on the average planning 4DCT. Both plans were robustly evaluated on weekly repeated 4DCTs and if target coverage degraded, replanning was performed. Target coverage was evaluated for complete treatment trajectories with and without replanning. The planned and accumulated mean lung dose (MLD) and mean heart dose (MHD) were additionally evaluated and translated into NTCP. Results Replanning in the clinic was performed more often for IMPT (15x) than would have been needed for VMAT (8x) (p = 0.11). Both adaptive treatments would have resulted in adequate accumulated target dose coverage. Replanning in the first week of treatment had most clinical impact, as anatomical changes resulting in insufficient accumulated target coverage were already observed at this stage. No differences were found in MLD between the planned dose and the accumulated dose. Accumulated MHD differed from the planned dose (p < 0.001), but since these differences were similar for VMAT and IMPT (1.0 and 1.5 Gy, respectively), the ΔNTCP remained unchanged. Conclusion Following an adaptive clinical workflow, adequate target dose coverage and stable OAR doses with corresponding NTCPs was assured for both IMPT and VMAT.
    01A - Beitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschrift