000170488 001__ 170488
000170488 005__ 20240229133715.0
000170488 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1007/s00066-021-01834-w
000170488 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:34468783
000170488 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0179-7158
000170488 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1439-099X
000170488 0247_ $$2altmetric$$aaltmetric:112738189
000170488 037__ $$aDKFZ-2021-01969
000170488 041__ $$aEnglish
000170488 082__ $$a610
000170488 1001_ $$aWeykamp, Fabian$$b0
000170488 245__ $$aStereotactic body radiotherapy of lymph node metastases under MR-guidance: First clinical results and patient-reported outcomes.
000170488 260__ $$aHeidelberg$$bSpringer Medizin$$c2022
000170488 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000170488 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000170488 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1642424121_11680
000170488 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000170488 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000170488 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000170488 500__ $$a#LA:E050# / 2022 Jan;198(1):56-65
000170488 520__ $$aStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a noninvasive treatment option for lymph node metastases (LNM). Magnetic resonance (MR)-guidance offers superior tissue contrast and enables treatment of targets in close vicinity to radiosensitive organs at risk (OAR). However, literature on MR-guided SBRT of LNM is scarce with no report on outcome parameters.We report a subgroup analysis of a prospective observational study comprising patients with LNM. Patients received MR-guided SBRT at our MRIdian Linac (ViewRay Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) between January 2019 and February 2020. Local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) analysis were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method with log rank test to test for significance (p < 0.05). Our patient-reported outcome questionnaire was utilized to evaluate patients' perspective. The CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) v. 5.0 was used to describe toxicity.Twenty-nine patients (72.4% with prostate cancer; 51.7% with no distant metastases) received MR-guided SBRT for in total 39 LNM. Median dose was 27 Gy in three fractions, prescribed to the 80% isodose. At 1‑year, estimated LC, PFS and OS were 92.6, 67.4 and 100.0%. Compared to baseline, six patients (20.7%) developed new grade I toxicities (mainly fatigue). One grade II toxicity occurred (fatigue), with no adverse event grade ≥III. Overall treatment experience was rated particularly positive, while the technically required low room temperature still represents the greatest obstacle in the pursuit of the ideal patient acceptance.MR-guided SBRT of LNM was demonstrated to be a well-accepted treatment modality with excellent preliminary results. Future studies should evaluate the clinical superiority to conventional SBRT.
000170488 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$a315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)$$cPOF4-315$$fPOF IV$$x0
000170488 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo01.inet.dkfz-heidelberg.de
000170488 650_7 $$2Other$$aAbdomen
000170488 650_7 $$2Other$$aOrgans at risk
000170488 650_7 $$2Other$$aPatient acceptance
000170488 650_7 $$2Other$$aPelvis
000170488 650_7 $$2Other$$aVisability
000170488 7001_ $$aHerder-Wagner, Charlotte$$b1
000170488 7001_ $$aRegnery, Sebastian$$b2
000170488 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)a8a8a2fe0df558db50514c1b568ca8ff$$aHoegen, Philipp$$b3$$udkfz
000170488 7001_ $$aRenkamp, C Katharina$$b4
000170488 7001_ $$aLiermann, Jakob$$b5
000170488 7001_ $$aRippke, Carolin$$b6
000170488 7001_ $$aKoerber, Stefan A$$b7
000170488 7001_ $$aKönig, Laila$$b8
000170488 7001_ $$aBuchele, Carolin$$b9
000170488 7001_ $$aKlüter, Sebastian$$b10
000170488 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)8714da4e45acfa36ce87c291443a9218$$aDebus, Jürgen$$b11$$udkfz
000170488 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)c59ff25b48c192ed3fd4ad3a4bc9b9c0$$aHörner-Rieber, Juliane$$b12$$eLast author$$udkfz
000170488 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2003907-4$$a10.1007/s00066-021-01834-w$$n1$$p56-65$$tStrahlentherapie und Onkologie$$v198$$x1439-099X$$y2022
000170488 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:170488$$pVDB
000170488 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)a8a8a2fe0df558db50514c1b568ca8ff$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b3$$kDKFZ
000170488 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)8714da4e45acfa36ce87c291443a9218$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b11$$kDKFZ
000170488 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)c59ff25b48c192ed3fd4ad3a4bc9b9c0$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b12$$kDKFZ
000170488 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vBildgebung und Radioonkologie$$x0
000170488 9141_ $$y2021
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)3002$$2StatID$$aDEAL Springer$$d2021-01-26$$wger
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2021-01-26
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1190$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBiological Abstracts$$d2021-01-26
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0113$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2021-01-26
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bSTRAHLENTHER ONKOL : 2021$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1110$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Clinical Medicine$$d2022-11-11
000170488 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5$$d2022-11-11
000170488 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E050-20160331$$kE050$$lE050 KKE Strahlentherapie$$x0
000170488 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331$$kHD01$$lDKTK HD zentral$$x1
000170488 980__ $$ajournal
000170488 980__ $$aVDB
000170488 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E050-20160331
000170488 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331
000170488 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED