000157092 001__ 157092
000157092 005__ 20240229123128.0
000157092 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.3389/fonc.2020.00568
000157092 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:32457829
000157092 0247_ $$2pmc$$apmc:PMC7225280
000157092 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:85839875
000157092 037__ $$aDKFZ-2020-01383
000157092 041__ $$aeng
000157092 082__ $$a610
000157092 1001_ $$aEl Shafie, Rami A$$b0
000157092 245__ $$aSingle-Isocenter Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy vs. CyberKnife M6 for the Stereotactic Radiosurgery of Multiple Brain Metastases.
000157092 260__ $$aLausanne$$bFrontiers Media$$c2020
000157092 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000157092 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000157092 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1594725828_26624
000157092 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000157092 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000157092 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000157092 520__ $$aIntroduction: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is becoming more frequently used for patients with multiple brain metastases (BMs). Single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (SI-VMAT) is an emerging alternative to dedicated systems such as CyberKnife (CK). We present a dosimetric comparison between CyberKnife M6 and SI-VMAT, planned at RayStation V8B, for the simultaneous SRS of five or more BM. Patients and Methods: Twenty treatment plans of CK-based single-session SRS to ≥5 brain metastases were replanned using SI-VMAT for delivery at an Elekta VersaHD linear accelerator. Prescription dose was 20 or 18 Gy, conformally enclosing at least 98% of the total planning target volume (PTV), with PTV margin-width adapted to the respective SRS technique. Comparatively analyzed quality metrics included dose distribution to the healthy brain (HB), including different isodose volumes, conformity, and gradient indices. Estimated treatment time was also compared. Results: Median HB isodose volumes for 3, 5, 8, 10, and 12 Gy were consistently smaller for CK-SRS compared to SI-VMAT (p < 0.001). Dose falloff outside the target volume, as expressed by the gradient indices GI_high and GI_low, was consistently steeper for CK-SRS compared to SI-VMAT (p < 0.001). CK-SRS achieved a median GI_high of 3.1 [interquartile range (IQR), 2.9-1.3] vs. 5.0 (IQR 4.3-5.5) for SI-VMAT (p < 0.001). For GI_low, the results were 3.0 (IQR, 2.9-3.1) for CK-SRS vs. 5.6 (IQR, 4.3-5.5) for SI-VMAT (p < 0.001). The median conformity index (CI) was 1.2 (IQR, 1.1-1.2) for CK-SRS vs. 1.5 (IQR, 1.4-1.7) for SI-VMAT (p < 0.001). Estimated treatment time was shorter for SI-VMAT, yielding a median of 13.7 min (IQR, 13.5-14.0) compared to 130 min (IQR, 114.5-154.5) for CK-SRS (p < 0.001). Conclusion: SI-VMAT offers enhanced treatment efficiency in cases with multiple BM, as compared to CyberKnife, but requires compromise regarding conformity and integral dose to the healthy brain. Additionally, delivery at a conventional linear accelerator (linac) may require a larger PTV margin to account for delivery and setup errors. Further evaluations are warranted to determine whether the detected dosimetric differences are clinically relevant. SI-VMAT could be a reasonable alternative to a dedicated radiosurgery system for selected patients with multiple BM.
000157092 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315$$a315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)$$cPOF3-315$$fPOF III$$x0
000157092 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
000157092 7001_ $$aTonndorf-Martini, Eric$$b1
000157092 7001_ $$aSchmitt, Daniela$$b2
000157092 7001_ $$aCelik, Aylin$$b3
000157092 7001_ $$aWeber, Dorothea$$b4
000157092 7001_ $$aLang, Kristin$$b5
000157092 7001_ $$aKönig, Laila$$b6
000157092 7001_ $$aHöne, Simon$$b7
000157092 7001_ $$aForster, Tobias$$b8
000157092 7001_ $$avon Nettelbladt, Bastian$$b9
000157092 7001_ $$aAdeberg, Sebastian$$b10
000157092 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)8714da4e45acfa36ce87c291443a9218$$aDebus, Jürgen$$b11$$udkfz
000157092 7001_ $$aRieken, Stefan$$b12
000157092 7001_ $$aBernhardt, Denise$$b13
000157092 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2649216-7$$a10.3389/fonc.2020.00568$$gVol. 10, p. 568$$p568$$tFrontiers in oncology$$v10$$x2234-943X$$y2020
000157092 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:157092$$pVDB
000157092 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)8714da4e45acfa36ce87c291443a9218$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b11$$kDKFZ
000157092 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vImaging and radiooncology$$x0
000157092 9141_ $$y2020
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bFRONT ONCOL : 2018$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0310$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bNCBI Molecular Biology Database$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0320$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bPubMed Central$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Blind peer review$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNV$$2V:(DE-HGF)$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY (No Version)$$bDOAJ$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1110$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Clinical Medicine$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5$$d2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0561$$2StatID$$aArticle Processing Charges$$f2020-01-05
000157092 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0700$$2StatID$$aFees$$d2020-01-05
000157092 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E050-20160331$$kE050$$lE050 KKE Strahlentherapie$$x0
000157092 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331$$kHD01$$lDKTK HD zentral$$x1
000157092 980__ $$ajournal
000157092 980__ $$aVDB
000157092 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E050-20160331
000157092 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331
000157092 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED