View in EDS

Impact of postimplant edema on V(100) and D(90) in prostate brachytherapy: can implant quality be predicted on day 0?

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Impact of postimplant edema on V(100) and D(90) in prostate brachytherapy: can implant quality be predicted on day 0?
Authors: Waterman, Frank M1 (AUTHOR), Dicker, Adam P (AUTHOR)
Source: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. Jul2002, Vol. 53 Issue 3, p610-621. 12p.
Subjects: Research, Multivariate analysis, Time, Research methodology, Regression analysis, Evaluation research, Medical cooperation, Comparative studies, Radiation doses, Research funding, Radioisotope brachytherapy, Computed tomography, Prostate tumors, Prostate diseases, Edema, Algorithms, Disease complications
Abstract: Purpose: To determine the effect of edema on the dosimetric parameters V(100) (percentage of prostate volume that received a dose equal to or greater than the prescribed dose) and D(90) (minimal dose delivered to 90% of prostate volume) in 125I prostate brachytherapy and to determine whether the edema can be used to predict implant quality on the day of the implant (Day 0).Methods and Materials: Fifty consecutive patients treated with (125)I implants who had two postimplant CT scans were selected for this study. The mean interval between the studies was 46 +/- 23 days. The implants were preplanned to deliver 150 Gy to the prostate plus a 3-5-mm symmetric dose margin using peripherally loaded 0.4-0.6-mCi (NIST-99) (125)I seeds. A dose-volume histogram was compiled for each postimplant CT scan. The V(100) and D(90) from the first and second CT scans were compared to determine the effect of edema on these parameters. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to define the linear relationships for predicting the V(100) or D(90) at 30-60 days after implant from the magnitude of the edema and the values of V(100) and D(90) on Day 0.Results: V(100) and D(90) increased by 5% +/- 6% and 15% +/- 17%, respectively, during the interval between the first and second postimplant CT scans. The mean edema was 1.53 +/- 0.20. The increases in V(100) and D(90) were found to be proportional to the edema and the values of V(100) and D(90) on Day 0. The increase in V(100) was also found to depend on the width of the preplan dose margin. Linear relationships were derived that predict the V(100) and D(90) at 30-60 days after implant with a standard error of +/-4% and +/-24 Gy, respectively.Conclusion: V(100) and D(90) increased by 5% +/- 6% and 15% +/- 17%, respectively, during the first 30-60 days after implant. The results of a multivariate linear regression analysis showed that the increases in V(100) and D(90) were proportional to both the magnitude of the edema and the values of these parameters on Day 0. The relationships derived by linear regression analysis predict V(100) and D(90) at 30-60 days after implant to within +/-4% and +/-24 Gy, respectively. However, predicting the 30-60-day V(100) and D(90) on Day 0 is a poor substitute for obtaining a 30-60-day CT scan, because the uncertainty in the predicted values is greater by a factor of > or =2. Nevertheless, on average, the predicted values should provide a more reliable estimate of the actual V(100) and D(90) than the Day 0 values that ignore the effect of edema altogether. The increase in V(100) was also found to depend on the width of the preplan dose margin; therefore, our results for V(100) are only valid for implants planned with a 3-5-mm margin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: egs
DbLabel: Engineering Source
An: 137995681
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Impact of postimplant edema on V(100) and D(90) in prostate brachytherapy: can implant quality be predicted on day 0?
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Waterman%2C+Frank+M%22">Waterman, Frank M</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dicker%2C+Adam+P%22">Dicker, Adam P</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22International+Journal+of+Radiation+Oncology%2C+Biology%2C+Physics%22">International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics</searchLink>. Jul2002, Vol. 53 Issue 3, p610-621. 12p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research%22">Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multivariate+analysis%22">Multivariate analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Time%22">Time</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+methodology%22">Research methodology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Regression+analysis%22">Regression analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+research%22">Evaluation research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+cooperation%22">Medical cooperation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+studies%22">Comparative studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Radiation+doses%22">Radiation doses</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+funding%22">Research funding</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Radioisotope+brachytherapy%22">Radioisotope brachytherapy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computed+tomography%22">Computed tomography</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prostate+tumors%22">Prostate tumors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prostate+diseases%22">Prostate diseases</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Edema%22">Edema</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Algorithms%22">Algorithms</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disease+complications%22">Disease complications</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: <bold>Purpose: </bold>To determine the effect of edema on the dosimetric parameters V(100) (percentage of prostate volume that received a dose equal to or greater than the prescribed dose) and D(90) (minimal dose delivered to 90% of prostate volume) in 125I prostate brachytherapy and to determine whether the edema can be used to predict implant quality on the day of the implant (Day 0).<bold>Methods and Materials: </bold>Fifty consecutive patients treated with (125)I implants who had two postimplant CT scans were selected for this study. The mean interval between the studies was 46 +/- 23 days. The implants were preplanned to deliver 150 Gy to the prostate plus a 3-5-mm symmetric dose margin using peripherally loaded 0.4-0.6-mCi (NIST-99) (125)I seeds. A dose-volume histogram was compiled for each postimplant CT scan. The V(100) and D(90) from the first and second CT scans were compared to determine the effect of edema on these parameters. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to define the linear relationships for predicting the V(100) or D(90) at 30-60 days after implant from the magnitude of the edema and the values of V(100) and D(90) on Day 0.<bold>Results: </bold>V(100) and D(90) increased by 5% +/- 6% and 15% +/- 17%, respectively, during the interval between the first and second postimplant CT scans. The mean edema was 1.53 +/- 0.20. The increases in V(100) and D(90) were found to be proportional to the edema and the values of V(100) and D(90) on Day 0. The increase in V(100) was also found to depend on the width of the preplan dose margin. Linear relationships were derived that predict the V(100) and D(90) at 30-60 days after implant with a standard error of +/-4% and +/-24 Gy, respectively.<bold>Conclusion: </bold>V(100) and D(90) increased by 5% +/- 6% and 15% +/- 17%, respectively, during the first 30-60 days after implant. The results of a multivariate linear regression analysis showed that the increases in V(100) and D(90) were proportional to both the magnitude of the edema and the values of these parameters on Day 0. The relationships derived by linear regression analysis predict V(100) and D(90) at 30-60 days after implant to within +/-4% and +/-24 Gy, respectively. However, predicting the 30-60-day V(100) and D(90) on Day 0 is a poor substitute for obtaining a 30-60-day CT scan, because the uncertainty in the predicted values is greater by a factor of > or =2. Nevertheless, on average, the predicted values should provide a more reliable estimate of the actual V(100) and D(90) than the Day 0 values that ignore the effect of edema altogether. The increase in V(100) was also found to depend on the width of the preplan dose margin; therefore, our results for V(100) are only valid for implants planned with a 3-5-mm margin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics is the property of Pergamon Press - An Imprint of Elsevier Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=137995681
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1016/s0360-3016(02)02751-7
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 610
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multivariate analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Time
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Regression analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Medical cooperation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative studies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Radiation doses
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research funding
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Radioisotope brachytherapy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computed tomography
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prostate tumors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prostate diseases
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Edema
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Algorithms
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disease complications
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Impact of postimplant edema on V(100) and D(90) in prostate brachytherapy: can implant quality be predicted on day 0?
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Waterman, Frank M
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dicker, Adam P
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 07
              Text: Jul2002
              Type: published
              Y: 2002
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 03603016
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 53
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
              Type: main
ResultId 1