CBCT-based deformable dose accumulation of external beam radiotherapy in cervical cancer

References

• Colombo N, Carinelli S, Colombo A, et al. Cervical cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23 (Suppl 7):vii27–32. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mds268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pötter R, Tanderup K, Kirisits C, et al. The EMBRACE II study: the outcome and prospect of two decades of evolution within the GEC-ESTRO GYN working group and the EMBRACE studies. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2018;9:48–60. doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2018.01.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger T, Assenholt M, Seppenwoolde Y, et al. Importance of technique, dose prescription, and contouring in cervix external beam radiation therapy: current and future practice in a large multicenter study (EMBRACE). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(2):E292. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.06.1359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klopp AH, Yeung AR, Deshmukh S, et al. A phase III randomized trial comparing Patient-Reported toxicity and quality of life (QOL) during pelvic intensity modulated radiation therapy as compared to conventional radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96(2):S3. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.06.024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chopra S, Engineer R, Mahantshetty UM, et al. Phase III RCT of postoperative adjuvant conventional radiation (3DCRT) versus IGIMRT for reducing late bowel toxicity in cervical cancer (PARCER) (NCT01279135/CTRI2012/120349): results of interim analyses. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;93(3):S4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.07.016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gandhi AK, Sharma DN, Rath GK, et al. Early clinical outcomes and toxicity of intensity modulated versus conventional pelvic radiation therapy for locally advanced cervix carcinoma: a prospective randomized study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(3):542–548. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.06.2059.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naik A, Gurjar OP, Gupta KL, et al. Comparison of dosimetric parameters and acute toxicity of intensity-modulated and three-dimensional radiotherapy in patients with cervix carcinoma: a randomized prospective study. Cancer Radiother. 2016;20(5):370–376. doi: 10.1016/j.canrad.2016.05.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mundt AJ, Mell LK, Roeske JC. Preliminary analysis of chronic gastrointestinal toxicity in gynecology patients treated with intensity-modulated whole pelvic radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 56(5):1354–1360. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(03)00325-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimopoulos JCA, Petrow P, Tanderup K, et al. Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC-ESTRO working group (IV): basic principles and parameters for MR imaging within the frame of image based adaptive cervix cancer brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2012;103(1):113–122. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2011.12.024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelley CE, Barraclough LH, Nelder CL, et al. Adaptive radiotherapy in the management of cervical cancer: review of strategies and clinical implementation. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2021;33(9):579–590. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.06.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijkoop ST, Langerak TR, Quint S, et al. Clinical implementation of an online adaptive plan-of-the-day protocol for nonrigid motion management in locally advanced cervical cancer IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90(3):673–679. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.06.046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buschmann M, Majercakova K, Sturdza A, et al. Image guided adaptive external beam radiation therapy for cervix cancer: Evaluation of a clinically implemented plan-of-the-day technique. Z Med Phys. 2018;28(3):184–195. doi: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2017.09.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart J, Lim K, Kelly V, et al. Automated weekly replanning for intensity-modulated radiotherapy of cervix cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78(2):350–358. Octdoi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.1699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim K, Stewart J, Kelly V, et al. Dosimetrically triggered adaptive intensity modulated radiation therapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90(1):147–154. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.05.039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li X, Wang L, Cui Z, et al. Online MR evaluation of inter- and intra-fraction uterus motions and bladder volume changes during cervical cancer external beam radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol. 2021;16(1):179. doi: 10.1186/s13014-021-01907-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulani J, Jain J, Gupta A, et al. Dose accumulation for multicourse gynecological reirradiation: a methodological narrative and clinical examples. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2022;113(5):1085–1090. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.04.046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swamidas J, Kirisits C, De Brabandere M, et al. Image registration, contour propagation and dose accumulation of external beam and brachytherapy in gynecological radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2020;143:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.08.023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim H, Lee YC, Benedict SH, et al. Dose summation strategies for external beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy in gynecologic malignancy: a review from the NRG oncology and NCTN medical physics subcommittees. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2021;111(4):999–1010. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.06.019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brock KK, Mutic S, McNutt TR, et al. Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: report of the AAPM radiation therapy committee task group no. 132. Med Phys. 2017;44(7):e43–76–e76. doi: 10.1002/mp.12256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saenz DL, Kim H, Chen J, et al. The level of detail required in a deformable phantom to accurately perform quality assurance of deformable image registration. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(17):6269–6280. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/61/17/6269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loi G, Fusella M, Lanzi E, et al. Performance of commercially available deformable image registration platforms for contour propagation using patient-based computational phantoms: a multi-institutional study. Med Phys. 2018;45(2):748–757. doi: 10.1002/mp.12737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nie K, Chuang C, Kirby N, et al. Site-specific deformable imaging registration algorithm selection using patient-based simulated deformations: site-specific DIR selection using patient-based simulated deformations. Med Phys. 2013;40(4):041911. doi: 10.1118/1.4793723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubli A, Pukala J, Shah AP, et al. Variability in commercially available deformable image registration: a multi‐institution analysis using virtual head and neck phantoms. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021;22(5):89–96. doi: 10.1002/acm2.13242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teo BK, Bonner Millar LP, Ding X, et al. Assessment of cumulative external beam and intracavitary brachytherapy organ doses in gynecologic cancers using deformable dose summation. Radiother Oncol. 2015;115(2):195–202. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.04.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Heerden LE, Houweling AC, Koedooder K, et al. Structure-based deformable image registration: added value for dose accumulation of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy in cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2017;123(2):319–324. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.03.015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim H, Huq MS, Houser C, et al. Mapping of dose distribution from IMRT onto MRI-guided high dose rate brachytherapy using deformable image registration for cervical cancer treatments: preliminary study with commercially available software. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2014;6(2):178–184. doi: 10.5114/jcb.2014.43240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi K, Isohashi F, Akino Y, et al. Estimation of the total rectal dose of radical external beam and intracavitary radiotherapy for uterine cervical cancer using the deformable image registration method. J Radiat Res. 2015;56(3):546–552. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rru127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kadoya N, Miyasaka Y, Yamamoto T, et al. Evaluation of rectum and bladder dose accumulation from external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for cervical cancer using two different deformable image registration techniques. J Radiat Res. 2017;58(5):720–728. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rrx028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pötter R, Haie-Meder C, Limbergen EV, et al. Recommendations from gynaecological (GYN) GEC ESTRO working group (II): concepts and terms in 3D image-based treatment planning in cervix cancer brachytherapy—3D dose volume parameters and aspects of 3D image-based anatomy, radiation physics, radiobiology. Radiother Oncol. 2006;78(1):67–77. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2005.11.014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Heerden LE, Visser J, Koedooder K, et al. Role of deformable image registration for delivered dose accumulation of adaptive external beam radiation therapy and brachytherapy in cervical cancer. J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2018;10(6):542–550. doi: 10.5114/jcb.2018.79840.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson JD, Schreibmann E, Jani AB, et al. Quantitative evaluation of a cone-beam computed tomography-planning computed tomography deformable image registration method for adaptive radiation therapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007;8(4):96–113. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v8i4.2432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zambrano V, Furtado H, Fabri D, et al. Performance validation of deformable image registration in the pelvic region. J Radiat Res. 2013;54 Suppl 1(suppl 1):i120–8. doi: 10.1093/jrr/rrt045.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shi L, Chen Q, Barley S, et al. Benchmarking of deformable image registration for multiple anatomic sites using digital data sets with ground-truth deformation vector fields. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2021;11(5):404–414. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.02.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar