alexa A dosimetric comparison of stereotactic body radiation therapy techniques for lung cancer: robotic versus conventional linac-based systems.

Author(s): Ding C, Chang CH, Haslam J, Timmerman R, Solberg T

Abstract Share this page

Abstract The aim of this study is to compare the dosimetric characteristics of robotic and conventional linac-based SBRT techniques for lung cancer, and to provide planning guidance for each modality. Eight patients who received linac-based SBRT were retrospectively included in this study. A dose of 60 Gy given in three fractions was prescribed to each target. The Synchrony Respiratory Tracking System and a 4D dose calculation methodology were used for CyberKnife and linac-based SBRT, respectively, to minimize respiratory impact on dose calculation. Identical image and contour sets were used for both modalities. While both modalities can provide satisfactory target dose coverage, the dose to GTV was more heterogeneous for CyberKnife than for linac planning/delivery in all cases. The dose to 1000 cc lung was well below institutional constraints for both modalities. In the high dose region, the lung dose depended on tumor size, and was similar between both modalities. In the low dose region, however, the quality of CyberKnife plans was dependent on tumor location. With anteriorly-located tumors, the CyberKnife may deliver less dose to normal lung than linac techniques. Conversely, for posteriorly-located tumors, CyberKnife delivery may result in higher doses to normal lung. In all cases studied, more monitor units were required for CyberKnife delivery for given prescription. Both conventional linacs and CyberKnife provide acceptable target dose coverage while sparing normal tissues. The results of this study provide a general guideline for patient and treatment modality selection based on dosimetric, tumor and normal tissue sparing considerations.
This article was published in J Appl Clin Med Phys and referenced in

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Recommended Journals

Relevant Topics

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri, Food, Aqua and Veterinary Science Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Clinical and Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Earth & Environmental Sciences

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science and Health care Journals

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics and Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Informatics Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Material Sciences Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Mathematics and Physics Journals

Jim Willison

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

John Behannon

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords