I MRT I MRT-
- THE STATE OF THE
I MRT- - THE STATE OF THE THE STATE OF THE I MRT EVI DENCE EVI - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
I MRT- - THE STATE OF THE THE STATE OF THE I MRT EVI DENCE EVI DENCE Bhadrasain Vikram, MD Bhadrasain Vikram, MD COMPARI NG TREATMENTS COMPARI NG TREATMENTS I f I receive I MRT: I f I receive I MRT: Will I live longer? Will I
They decreased dose heterogeneity within the breast by techniques that did within the breast by techniques that did not rise to the level of I MRT, and had not rise to the level of I MRT, and had been available and already in use in been available and already in use in many radiotherapy centers for decades. many radiotherapy centers for decades.
Das I . JNCI , 100:300 Das I . JNCI , 100:300-
7, 2008
Das I . JNCI , 100:300 Das I . JNCI , 100:300-
7, 2008 RESULTS: RESULTS:
I n 46% of patients the plan delivered to the CTV a maximum dose more than 10% the CTV a maximum dose more than 10% ‘ ‘hotter hotter’ ’ than prescribed by the MD (worst than prescribed by the MD (worst case: 40% higher). case: 40% higher).
I n 63% of patients the plan delivered to the CTV a minimum dose more than 10% the CTV a minimum dose more than 10% ‘ ‘colder colder’ ’ than prescribed (worst case: than prescribed (worst case: 100% lower = zero). 100% lower = zero).
I bbott GS. Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment, 5:481 I bbott GS. Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment, 5:481-
7, 2006.
128 RTOG member institutions imaged a phantom, developed a treatment plan, phantom, developed a treatment plan, then treated the phantom. then treated the phantom.
Goal: Deliver to the CTV a dose within 7% Deliver to the CTV a dose within 7%
Results: One One-
third of the institutions failed the test the test (the dose delivered differed from (the dose delivered differed from the planned dose by up to 22% ; the high the planned dose by up to 22% ; the high dose region was off by up to 15 mm). dose region was off by up to 15 mm).
I naccurate modeling by the TPS algorithm
I naccurate handling by the TPS of inhomogeneity inhomogeneity corrections. corrections.
Variable handling of cost-
function
controlled by the user. controlled by the user.
I ncorrect data input into the TPS.
I ndexing errors in the table movement system. system.
I ncorrect monitor unit settings.
I naccurate positioning of the phantom (or patient). patient).