Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://mnclhd.intersearch.com.au/mnclhdjspui/handle/123456789/339Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Rankine, A. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Turnbull, K. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Greenham, S. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Shakespeare, T. P. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Westhuyzen, J. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Kovendy, A. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Chua, B. | - |
| dc.contributor.author | McKay, M. J. | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-12-17T23:25:42Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-12-17T23:25:42Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2015-09 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Radiotherapy. 2015(1). doi:10.1155/2015/682463 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://mnclhd.intersearch.com.au/mnclhdjspui/handle/123456789/339 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | Step-and-shoot (S&S) intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using the XiO treatment planning system (TPS) has been routinely used for patients receiving postprostatectomy radiotherapy (PPRT). After installing the Monaco, a pilot study was undertaken with five patients to compare XiO with Monaco (V2.03) TPS for PPRT with respect to plan quality for S&S as well as volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Monaco S&S showed higher mean clinical target volume (CTV) coverage (99.85%) than both XiO S&S (97.98%, P = 0.04) and Monaco VMAT (99.44, P = 0.02). Rectal V60Gy volumes were lower for Monaco S&S compared to XiO (46.36% versus 58.06%, P = 0.001) and Monaco VMAT (46.36% versus 54.66%, P = 0.02). Rectal V60Gy volume was lowest for Monaco S&S and superior to XiO (mean 19.89% versus 31.25%, P = 0.02). Rectal V60Gy volumes were lower for Monaco VMAT compared to XiO (21.09% versus 31.25%, P = 0.02). Other organ-at-risk (OAR) parameters were comparable between TPSs. Compared to XiO S&S, Monaco S&S plans had fewer segments (78.6 versus 116.8 segments, P = 0.02), lower total monitor units (MU) (677.6 MU versus 770.7 MU, P = 0.01), and shorter beam-on times (5.7 min versus 7.6 min, P = 0.03). This pilot study suggests that Monaco S&S improves CTV coverage, OAR doses, and planning and treatment times for PPRT. | en |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.subject | Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated | en |
| dc.subject | Prostatectomy | en |
| dc.subject | Monaco | en |
| dc.subject | Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted | en |
| dc.title | Monte Carlo-based dose calculation in postprostatectomy image-guided intensity modulated radiotherapy: A pilot study | en |
| dc.type | Article | en |
| dc.contributor.mnclhdauthor | Turnbull, Kirsty | - |
| dc.contributor.mnclhdauthor | Shakespeare, Thomas P. | - |
| dc.contributor.mnclhdauthor | Westhuyzen, Justin | - |
| dc.contributor.mnclhdauthor | Kovendy, Andrew | - |
| dc.contributor.mnclhdauthor | McKay, Michael J. | - |
| Appears in Collections: | Oncology / Cancer | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Journal of Radiotherapy - 2015 - Rankine - Monte Carlo‐Based Dose Calculation in Postprostatectomy Image‐Guided Intensity.pdf | 485.45 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
