PMID- 17056194
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20070111
LR  - 20161124
IS  - 0360-3016 (Print)
IS  - 0360-3016 (Linking)
VI  - 66
IP  - 5
DP  - 2006 Dec 1
TI  - Ultrasound-based image guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer: comparison of 
      cross-modality and intramodality methods for daily localization during external 
      beam radiotherapy.
PG  - 1562-7
AB  - PURPOSE: To compare two different ultrasound-based verification systems for 
      prostate alignment during daily external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for 
      localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Prostate displacements were 
      measured prospectively in 40 patients undergoing daily EBRT. Comparison was made 
      between a system based on the cross-modality verification method (CMVM), which 
      uses two different imaging modalities to assess organ motion, and a system based 
      on the intramodality verification method (IMVM), which uses only one imaging 
      modality for such assessment. A total of 217 CMVM and 217 IMVM displacements were 
      collected within a minute of each other. In 10 patients, IMVM displacements were 
      also compared with those measured by sequential CT scans. RESULTS: Analysis in 
      the paired CMVM and IMVM displacements shows a significant mean difference of 0.9 
      +/- 3.3 mm in the lateral and 6.0 +/- 5.1 mm in the superoinferior directions (p 
      < 0.0001), whereas no significant difference was detected in the anteroposterior 
      direction between the two methods. Comparison of the computed tomography scan and 
      IMVM measured displacements shows no significant difference between the two 
      methods, with mean values of 0.2 +/- 1.7 mm in the lateral, -0.3 +/- 1.6 mm in 
      the anteroposterior, and 0.1 +/- 1.4 mm in the superoinferior directions. 
      CONCLUSIONS: A significant systematic difference exists between cross-modality 
      and intramodality methods when assessing prostate alignment during daily EBRT. 
      Because displacements assessed by IMVM are consistent with those assessed by 
      computed tomography scan, a more accurate prostate alignment appears to be 
      obtained when the IMVM method is used.
FAU - Cury, Fabio L B
AU  - Cury FL
AD  - Department of Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, 
      Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
FAU - Shenouda, George
AU  - Shenouda G
FAU - Souhami, Luis
AU  - Souhami L
FAU - Duclos, Marie
AU  - Duclos M
FAU - Faria, Sergio L
AU  - Faria SL
FAU - David, Marc
AU  - David M
FAU - Verhaegen, Frank
AU  - Verhaegen F
FAU - Corns, Robert
AU  - Corns R
FAU - Falco, Tony
AU  - Falco T
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20061023
PL  - United States
TA  - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
JT  - International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics
JID - 7603616
SB  - IM
MH  - Humans
MH  - Male
MH  - Movement
MH  - Prospective Studies
MH  - Prostate/*diagnostic imaging
MH  - Prostatic Neoplasms/*diagnostic imaging/*radiotherapy
MH  - Tomography, X-Ray Computed
MH  - Ultrasonography, Interventional/*methods
EDAT- 2006/10/24 09:00
MHDA- 2007/01/12 09:00
CRDT- 2006/10/24 09:00
PHST- 2006/03/27 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2006/07/12 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2006/07/19 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2006/10/24 09:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2007/01/12 09:00 [medline]
PHST- 2006/10/24 09:00 [entrez]
AID - S0360-3016(06)02778-7 [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.07.1375 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Dec 1;66(5):1562-7. doi: 
      10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.07.1375. Epub 2006 Oct 23.