Daily prostate targeting using implanted radiopaque markers

Litzenberg, Dale W.; Dawson, Laura A.; Sandler, Howard M.; Sanda, Martin G.; McShan, Daniel L.; Haken, Randall K. Ten; Lam, Kwok L.; Brock, Kristy K.; Balter, James M.

doi:10.1016/s0360-3016(01)02654-2

Cited by 178 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a case for guidelines to be developed regarding best position of markers. The absence of marker migration during treatment agrees with that in previous studies (12,11,22,19,20).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…There was no indication of either prostate swelling (increased separation of markers) or shrinking (decreased separation of markers) which might have been caused by prostate swelling or constriction due to radiotherapy or continual hormone therapy respectively. Where the position of the markers within the prostate has been stated in other studies it is either in both lobes and apex, when there were 3 markers used (27,19), or at the base and the apex (40,41,20,22). Only one study was specific in stating that the markers should be at some distance from the rectal wall and urethra (11) which is in accordance of our experience.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Other authors have shown that the use of gold markers is clinically feasible (18,11,19), that there is no significant marker migration within the prostate (20,21,22) and that there is independent prostate movement (23,24)relative to bony anatomy. The consequence of using bony anatomy for prostate position verification instead of gold markers using an off-line protocol has also been shown [29,24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Comparison of the Use of Bony Anatomy and Internal Markers for Offline Verification and an Evaluation of the Potential Benefit of Online and Offline Verification Protocols for Prostate Radiotherapy

McNair

Hansen

Parker

et al. 2008

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is a case for guidelines to be developed regarding best position of markers. The absence of marker migration during treatment agrees with that in previous studies (12,11,22,19,20).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of the Use of Bony Anatomy and Internal Markers for Offline Verification and an Evaluation of the Potential Benefit of Online and Offline Verification Protocols for Prostate Radiotherapy

McNair

Hansen

Parker

et al. 2008

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[9] Poggi et al [10] studied 9 patients with 5 fiducial markers each and reported an average migration of 1.2±0.2 mm for markers, just as Aubin et al [11] who revealed similar findings on 7 patients with 3 markers each. Litzenberg et al [12] studied 10 patients with 3 markers through their radiation PSA: prostate-specific antigen treatment and reported marker migration ranging from 0.7 to 1.7 mm. Kupelian et al [7] obtained similar results in 56 patients with 3 markers each.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] It is not clear whether clinically significant fiducial marker migration happens immediately after insertion because of prostatic swelling or bleeding. To allow for an initial migration or settling of the fiducial markers, computed tomography (CT) for radiotherapy planning is generally performed several days after marker insertion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computed tomography based evaluation of prostatic fiducial marker migration between the periods of insertion and simulation

Arpaci

Uğurluer

Ispir

et al. 2017

Turkish Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether significant fiducial marker migration occurs between the periods of prostatic marker insertion and computed tomography (CT) performed for radiotherapy planning and if a waiting period is necessary. Material and methods:Thirty-nine patients with prostate adenocarcinoma underwent fiducial marker insertion before radiotherapy between June 2013 and December 2015. Three markers were inserted by one radiologist under the guidance of transrectal ultrasonography. All patients underwent CT three hours after insertion to confirm the number and position of fiducial markers. Radiotherapy planning CT was performed on an average of 11 days (range 7-20) after insertion. CT images were imported into treatment planning system to analyze the position of fiducial markers. Point-based marker match algorithm was used to find the distance of marker migration. The mean and maximum distances between each fiducial markers were calculated. Results:The mean distance of migration was 1.029±0.42 mm (range 0.23-1.93 mm) and the maximum distance was 1.361±0.59 mm (range 0.25-2.74 mm). The distance of marker migration was not statistically significant for the groups organized according to the timing of marker insertion, prostate volume, patient age, prostate specific antigen level and Gleason score. Conclusion:According to our results significant fiducial marker migration did not occur during the interval between insertion and treatment planning CT. It should be taken into consideration that performing simulation on the same day as marker insertion might prevent increased cost and delayed radiation therapy by saving the patients from extra visits to the clinic.

show abstract

Modern Approaches to Radiation Therapy

Tsien

Lawrence

2007

The Cancer Handbook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in technology have led to dramatic improvements in radiation treatment planning, and delivery. These technical advances have allowed us to deliver higher radiation doses to the tumour while limiting dose to the normal surrounding tissues. Parallel advances in imaging and molecular biology have improved our ability precisely to define target volumes at risk, enhance radiation sensitivity, as well as to evaluate response to therapy. In this chapter, we will focus on the clinical improvements that have been achieved from both technological advances in radiotherapy (RT) planning and treatment delivery in combination with radiation response modifiers such as altered fractionation, chemotherapy, and molecularly targeted therapy.

show abstract

Daily prostate targeting using implanted radiopaque markers

Cited by 178 publications

References 29 publications

A Comparison of the Use of Bony Anatomy and Internal Markers for Offline Verification and an Evaluation of the Potential Benefit of Online and Offline Verification Protocols for Prostate Radiotherapy

A Comparison of the Use of Bony Anatomy and Internal Markers for Offline Verification and an Evaluation of the Potential Benefit of Online and Offline Verification Protocols for Prostate Radiotherapy

Computed tomography based evaluation of prostatic fiducial marker migration between the periods of insertion and simulation

Modern Approaches to Radiation Therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About