193 results on '"Zschaeck S"'
Search Results
2. Deep-learning-based automated delineation and classification of lung cancer in [18F]FDG PET/CT
- Author
-
(0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Fitis, E., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Kotzerke, J., Furth, C., Amthauer, H., Elicin, O., Stutz, E., Krcek, R., Zschaeck, S., Hoff, J., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Fitis, E., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Kotzerke, J., Furth, C., Amthauer, H., Elicin, O., Stutz, E., Krcek, R., Zschaeck, S., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Ziel/Aim: Patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a high risk of developing distant metastases. It has been shown that immunotherapy after radiochemotherapy can significantly improve the prognosis. Therefore, biomarkers for individualized therapy escalation are urgently needed. One such biomarker could be the total metabolic volume of primary tumor and lymph node (LN) metastases. However, delineation of LN metastases with currently available methods is time consuming and error-prone. The goal of this study was to investigate to which extend this delineation can be performed with deep learning methods. Methodik/Methods: Automated delineation was performed with a pretrained 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN) previously derived for a different head and neck cancer delineation task. 517 [18F]FDG PET/CT scans of NSCLC patients were used for further network training and testing using a 5-fold cross-validation scheme. In these data, manual delineation and labeling of primary tumor and metastases was performed by an experienced physician serving as the ground truth for network training and testing. Ergebnisse/Results: The derived CNN models are capable of accurate delineation, achieving a Dice similarity coefficient of 0.854. Sensitivity of lesion detection was 0.841 and positive predictive value was 0.847. Accuracy of lesion classification as primary tumor or LN metastases was 82.2%. Schlussfolgerungen/Conclusions: In this work, we present a CNN able to perform delineation of and discrimination between primary tumor and lymph node metastases in NSCLC with only minimal manual corrections possibly required. It thus is able to accelerate study data evaluation in quantitative PET and does also have potential for clinical application.
- Published
- 2024
3. Deep-learning-based automated delineation and classification of metabolic tumor volume in non-small-cell lung cancer in [18F]FDG-PET/CT
- Author
-
(0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Fitis, E., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Kotzerke, J., Furth, C., Amthauer, H., Elicin, O., Stutz, E., Krcek, R., Zschaeck, S., Hoff, J., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Fitis, E., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Kotzerke, J., Furth, C., Amthauer, H., Elicin, O., Stutz, E., Krcek, R., Zschaeck, S., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Aim/Introduction: Patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a high risk of developing distant metastases. It has been shown that applying immunotherapy after radiochemotherapy can significantly improve the prognosis for affected patients. In this context, biomarkers for individualized therapy escalation are urgently needed. One such biomarker could be the total metabolic volume of primary tumor and lymph node (LN) metastases (total tumor burden, TTB). However, delineation of tumor lesions with conventional methods is time consuming and error-prone, especially for the LN metastases. The goal of this study was to investigate feasibility of such delineation with deep learning methods. Materials and Methods: Automated delineation was performed with a 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN) developed with the nnU-Net software package [1]. The default nnU-Net training parameters were modified to provide better training stability with small lesion targets as well as to better balance sensitivity vs. positive predictive value (PPV) of lesion detection. A dataset consisting of 517 [18F]FDG-PET/CT scans of NSCLC patients was used for the network training and testing following 5-fold cross-validation scheme. In these data, the ground truth labels were defined via manual delineation and labeling of primary tumor and metastases by an experienced physician. Results: The derived CNN models were capable of accurate delineation, achieving a mean (median) Dice similarity coefficient of 0.831 (0.891). The sensitivity and PPV of lesion detection was 0.974/0.829/0.887 and 0.963/0.741/0.824 for primary tumor/LN metastases/union of both, respectively. Accuracy of lesion classification as primary tumor or LN metastases was 92.1%. Manually and automatically derived TTBs were highly correlated with R2=0.96 and a mean absolute difference of 5.4 ml (after rejecting 1% of the outliers). Conclusion: In this work, we present CNN models able to perform delineation
- Published
- 2024
4. Prognostic value of total tumor burden measured by FDG-PET in patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer
- Author
-
(0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Fitis, E., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Hoff, J., Zschaeck, S., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Fitis, E., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Hoff, J., and Zschaeck, S.
- Abstract
MOTIVATION: Patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a high risk of developing distant metastases. It was shown that immunotherapy after radiochemotherapy significantly improves the prognosis. Therefore, biomarkers to identify such patients are urgently needed. Here, we investigated the prognostic utility of total tumor burden (TTB) in NSCLC for prediction of distant metastases. METHODS: Altogether, 165 patients (65+/-9)y, 100m) with newly diagnosed NSCLC were included. All patients received FDG-PET/CT prior to definitive radiochemotherapy. In the PET images, the metabolically active volume (MTV) of the primary tumor and of all FDG avid lymph nodes was delineated with an adaptive threshold method. TTB was computed as the cumulative volume of primary tumor and lymph nodes. Survival analysis with respect to freedom from distant metastases (FFDM) was performed. RESULTS: Survival analysis revealed MTV and TTB as prognostic factors for FFDM (P=0.004 and P<0.001, respectively). Hazard ratio (HR) for TTB was significantly higher than HR for MTV (1.9 vs. 2.5, P=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: In the investigated group of patients, the inclusion of lymph nodes into MTV computation significantly increased the prognostic value of FDG-PET. Further investigations are necessary to confirm these preliminary results.
- Published
- 2024
5. Quantitative PSMA-PET parameters in localized prostate cancer: prognostic and potential predictive value
- Author
-
Bela Andela, S., Amthauer, H., Furth, C., Rogasch, J., Beck, M., Mehrhof, F., Ghadjar, P., Hoff, J., Klatte, T., Tahbaz, R., Zips, D., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zschaeck, S., Bela Andela, S., Amthauer, H., Furth, C., Rogasch, J., Beck, M., Mehrhof, F., Ghadjar, P., Hoff, J., Klatte, T., Tahbaz, R., Zips, D., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., and Zschaeck, S.
- Abstract
Background PSMA-PET is increasingly used for staging prostate cancer (PCA) patients. However, it is not clear if quantitative imaging parameters of positron emission tomography (PET) have an impact on disease progression and are thus important for the prognosis of localized PCA. Methods This is a monocenter retrospective analysis of 86 consecutive patients with localized intermediate or high-risk PCA and PSMA-PET before treatment The quantitative PET parameters maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), tumor asphericity (ASP), PSMA tumor volume (PSMA-TV), and PSMA total lesion uptake (PSMA-TLU = PSMA-TV × SUVmean) were assessed for their prognostic significance in patients with radiotherapy or surgery. Cox regression analyses were performed for biochemical recurrence-free survival, overall survival (OS), local control, and loco-regional control (LRC). Results 67% of patients had high-risk disease, 51 patients were treated with radiotherapy, and 35 with surgery. Analysis of metric PET parameters in the whole cohort revealed a significant association of PSMA-TV (p = 0.003), PSMA-TLU (p = 0.004), and ASP (p < 0.001) with OS. Upon binarization of PET parameters, several other parameters showed a significant association with clinical outcome. When analyzing high-risk patients according to the primary treatment approach, a previously published cut-off for SUVmax (8.6) showed a significant association with LRC in surgically treated (p = 0.048), but not in primary irradiated (p = 0.34) patients. In addition, PSMA-TLU (p = 0.016) seemed to be a very promising biomarker to stratify surgical patients. Conclusion Our data confirm one previous publication on the prognostic impact of SUVmax in surgically treated patients with high-risk PCA. Our exploratory analysis indicates that PSMA-TLU might be even better suited. The missing association with primary irradiated patients needs prospective validation with a larger sample size to conclude a predictive potential.
- Published
- 2024
6. Toxicity and Patient Reported Quality of Life after PSMA-PET and mpMRT-Based Focal Dose Escalated Definitive Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Patients: 2-Year Follow-Up of the HypoFocal Phase II Trial
- Author
-
Spohn, S.K.B., primary, Gainey, M., additional, Kamps, M., additional, Jilg, C.A., additional, Gratzke, C., additional, Sigle, A., additional, Mix, M., additional, Ruf, J., additional, Bürkle, S., additional, Sprave, T., additional, Wiehle, R., additional, Serpa, M., additional, Benndorf, M., additional, Zschaeck, S., additional, Ghadjar, P., additional, Baltas, D., additional, Kirste, S., additional, Zamboglou, C., additional, and Grosu, A., additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. Validation of the prognostic value of tumor asphericity and an extracellular matrix-related prognostic gene signature in non-small cell lung cancer patients
- Author
-
(0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Klinger, B., Amthauer, H., Apostolova, I., Blüthgen, N., Cegla, P., Cholewinski, W., Kreißl, M., Zips, D., Hoff, J., Zschaeck, S., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Klinger, B., Amthauer, H., Apostolova, I., Blüthgen, N., Cegla, P., Cholewinski, W., Kreißl, M., Zips, D., Hoff, J., and Zschaeck, S.
- Abstract
Ziel/Aim The aim of the study was an independent evaluation of the prognostic value of a gene expression signature (EPPI) and the PET-derived tumor asphericity (ASP) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Methodik/Methods This was a retrospective evaluation of PET imaging and gene expression data from three public databases and two institutional datasets. Altogether 253 NSCLC patients were included, all treated with curative intent surgery. Clinical parameters, standard PET parameters and ASP were evaluated in all patients. Additional gene expression data was available for 120 patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis were calculated for the primary endpoint progression-free survival (PFS) and additional endpoints. Ergebnisse/Results In the whole cohort a significant association with PFS was observed for ASP (p<0.001) and EPPI (p=0.012). On multivariate testing, EPPI remained significantly associated with PFS (p=0.018) in the subgroup of patients with additional gene expression data, while ASP was significantly associated with PFS in the whole cohort (p=0.012). In stage II patients, ASP was significantly associated with PFS (p=0.009) and a previously published cutoff value for ASP (19.5%) was successfully validated (p=0.008). In patients with additional gene expression data, EPPI showed a significant association with PFS, too (p=0.033). Exploratory combination of ASP and EPPI showed that the combinatory approach has potential to further improve patient stratification compared to the use of only one parameter. Schlussfolgerungen/Conclusions The combination of EPPI and ASP seems to be a very promising approach for improvement of risk stratification in a group of patients with urgent need for a more personalized treatment approach.
- Published
- 2023
8. A convolutional neural network with self-attention for fully automated metabolic tumor volume delineation of head and neck cancer in [18F]FDG PET/CT
- Author
-
(0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Zschaeck, S., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Cegla, P., Lombardo, E., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Holzgreve, A., Albert, N. L., Ferentinos, K., Strouthos, I., Hajiyianni, M., Marschner, S. N., Belka, C., Landry, G., Cholewinski, W., Kotzerke, J., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Hoff, J., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., Zschaeck, S., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Cegla, P., Lombardo, E., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Holzgreve, A., Albert, N. L., Ferentinos, K., Strouthos, I., Hajiyianni, M., Marschner, S. N., Belka, C., Landry, G., Cholewinski, W., Kotzerke, J., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Purpose: PET-derived metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis of the primary tumor are known to be prognostic of clinical outcome in head and neck cancer (HNC). Including evaluation of lymph node metastases can further increase the prognostic value of PET but accurate manual delineation and classification of all lesions is time-consuming and prone to inter-observer variability. Our goal, therefore, was development and evaluation of an automated tool for MTV delineation/classification of primary tumor and lymph node metastases in PET/CT investigations of HNC patients. Methods: Automated lesion delineation was performed with a residual 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN) incorporating a multi-head self-attention block. 698 [18F]FDG PET/CT scans from 3 different sites and 5 public databases were used for network training and testing. An external dataset of 181 [18F]FDG PET/CT scans from 2 additional sites was employed to assess the generalizability of the network. In these data, primary tumor and metastases were interactively delineated and labeled by two experienced physicians. Performance of the trained network models was assessed by 5-fold cross-validation in the main dataset and by pooling results from the 5 developed models in the external dataset. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for individual delineation tasks and the primary tumor/metastasis classification accuracy were used as evaluation metrics. Additionally, a survival analysis using univariate Cox regression was performed comparing achieved group separation for manual and automated delineation, respectively. Results: In the cross-validation experiment, delineation of all malignant lesions with the trained U-Net models achieves DSC of 0.885, 0.805, and 0.870 for primary tumor, LN metastases, and the union of both, respectively. In external testing, the DSC reaches 0.850, 0.724, and 0.823 for primary tumor, LN metastases, and the union of both, respectively. The voxel classificat
- Published
- 2023
9. Combination of tumor asphericity and an extracellular matrix-related prognostic gene signature in non-small cell lung cancer patients
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Klinger, B., Hoff, J., Cegla, P., Apostolova, I., Kreissl, M., Cholewiński, W., Kukuk, E., Strobel, H., Amthauer, H., Blüthgen, N., Zips, D., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zschaeck, S., Klinger, B., Hoff, J., Cegla, P., Apostolova, I., Kreissl, M., Cholewiński, W., Kukuk, E., Strobel, H., Amthauer, H., Blüthgen, N., Zips, D., and (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F.
- Abstract
The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was an independent validation of a gene expression signature ECM-related prognostic and predictive indicator (EPPI) and the novel positron emission tomography (PET) parameter tumor asphericity (ASP) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The whole cohort comprised 253 NSCLC patients, all treated with surgery. Clinical and PET parameters were available for all patients, additional gene expression data for 120 patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses were calculated for progression-free survival (PFS). A significant association with PFS was observed for ASP (p < 0.001) and EPPI (p = 0.012). Upon multivariate testing, ASP was significantly associated with PFS (p = 0.012), and EPPI (p = 0.018) in patients with additional gene data. In stage II patients, ASP was significantly associated with PFS (p = 0.009) and a previously published cutoff value for ASP (19.5%) was successfully validated (p = 0.008). EPPI showed a significant association with PFS in stage II patients, too (p = 0.033). Exploratory combination of ASP and EPPI showed potentially improved stratification. We report the first successful validation of EPPI and ASP in stage II NSCLC patients, combination of both parameters seems encouraging.
- Published
- 2023
10. Einfluss der Ga68-FAPI-46 PET/CT auf die Radiochemotherapie beim lokal rezidivierten oder irresektablen Adenokarzinom des Pankreas
- Author
-
Metzger, G., additional, Zschaeck, S., additional, Rogasch, J., additional, Feldhaus, F., additional, Brenner, W., additional, Siefert, J., additional, Ghadjar, P., additional, Zips, D., additional, Furth, C., additional, Amthauer, H., additional, and Schatka, I., additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. Validation of the prognostic value of tumor asphericity and an extracellular matrix-related prognostic gene signature in non-small cell lung cancer patients
- Author
-
Hofheinz, F., additional, Klinger, B., additional, Amthauer, H., additional, Apostolova, I., additional, Blüthgen, N., additional, Cegla, P., additional, Cholewinski, W., additional, Kreißl, M., additional, Zips, D., additional, van den Hoff, J., additional, and Zschaeck, S., additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
12. Hippocampal Sparing Radiotherapy in adults with Primary Brain Tumors: A comparative planning and dosimetric study using IMPT, IMRT and 3DCRT
- Author
-
Aka, P, Taylor, R, Hugtenburg, R, Lambert, J, Powell, J, Bevolo, T, Gao, M, Gondi, V, Hartsell, W.H, Bolsi, A, Beer, J, Belosi, M.F, Siewert, D, Lomax, A.J, Weber, D.C, Huang, Y.J, Huang, C.C, Chao, P.J, Liu, C, Shang, H, Ding, X, Wang, Y, Mammar, H, Froelich, Sébastien, Alapetite, Claire, Bolle, Stéphanie, Calugaru, Valentin, Feuvret, Loic, Helfre, Sylvie, Champion, Laurence, Goudjil, Farid, Dendal, Remi, Engelholm, S.A, Munck Af Rosenschold, P, Kristensen, I, Smulders, B, Muhic, A, Alkner, S, Jacob, E, Engelholm, S, Aljabab, S, Lui, A, Wong, T, Liao, J, Laramore, G, Parvathaneni, U, Kharouta, M, Pidikiti, R, Jesseph, F, Smith, M, Dobbins, D, Mattson, D, Choi, S, Mansur, D, Machtay, M, Bhatt, A, Lütgendorf-Caucig, C, Dunavölgyi, R, Georg, P, Perpar, A, Fussl, C, Konstantinovic, R, Ulrike, M, Piero, F, Eugen, H, Vidal, M, Gerard, A, Barnel, C, Maneval, D, Herault, J, Claren, A, Doyen, J, Dendale, R, Toutee, A, Pasquie, I, Goudjil, F, Lumbroso Lerouic, L, Levy, C, Desjardins, L, Cassoux, N, Elisei, G, Pella, A, Calvi, G, Ricotti, R, Tagaste, B, Valvo, F, Ciocca, M, Via, R, Mastella, E, Baroni, G, Saotome, N, Yonai, S, Makishima, H, Hara, Y, Inaniwa, T, Sakama, M, Kanematsu, N, Tsuji, H, Furukawa, T, Shirai, T, Sauerwein, W, Finger, P.T, Gallie, B, Gavrylyuk, Y, Thariat, J, Salleron, J, Maschi, C, Fevrier, E, Caujolle, J.P, Hofverberg, P, Angellier, G, Peyrichon, M.L, Breneman, J, Esslinger, H, Pater, L, Vatner, R, Habrand, J.L, Stefan, D, Lesueur, P, Kao, W, Véla, A, Geffrelot, J, Tessonnier, T, Balosso, J, Mahé, M.A, Lim, P.S, Rompokos, V, Chang, Y.C, Royle, G, Gaze, M, Gains, J, Vennarini, S, Francesco, F, Rombi, B, Amichetti, M, Schwarz, M, Lorentini, S, Mee, T, Burnet, N.G, Crellin, A, Kirkby, N.F, Smith, E, Kirkby, K.J, Roggio, M, Buwenge, M, Melchionda, F, Ammendolia, I, Ronchi, L, Cammelli, S, Morganti, A.G, Youn, S.H, Kim, J.Y, Park, H.J, Shin, S.H, Lee, S.H, Hong, E.K, Czerska, K, Winczura, P, Wejs-Maternik, J, Blukis, A, Antonowicz-Szydlowska, M, Rucinski, A, Olko, P, Badzio, A, Kopec, R, Franceschini, D, Cozzi, L, De Rose, F, Meattini, I, Fogliata, A, Cozzi, S, Becherini, C, Tomatis, S, Livi, L, Scorsetti, M, Garda, A, Fattahi, S, Michel, A, Mutter, R, Yan, E, Park, S, Corbin, K, Giap, H, LAM, W.W, Geng, H, Tang, K.K, Lee, T.Y, Kong, C.W, Yang, B, Chiu, T.L, Cheung, K.Y, Yu, S.K, Ma, M, Gao, X, Zhao, Z, Zhao, B, Mullikin, T, Routman, D, Yu, J, Greco, K, Fagundes, M, Shan, J, Daniels, T, Rule, W, DeWees, T, Hu, Y, Bues, M, Sio, T, Liu, W, chenbin, L, yuehu, P, yuenan, W, Bai, Y, Gao, X.S, Zhao, Z.L, Ma, M.W, Ren, X.Y, Salem, A, Woolf, D, Aznar, M, Azadeh, A, Eccles, C, Charlwood, F, Faivre-Finn, C, Teoh, S, Fiorini, F, George, B, Vallis, K, Van den Heuvel, F, Huang, E.Y, Juang, P.J, Pan, S, Hawkins, M, Clarke, M, Lowe, M, Radhakrishna, G, Schaub, S, Bowen, S, Nyflot, M, Chapman, T, Apisarnthanarax, S, Vitek, P, Kubes, J, Vondracek, V, Vinakurau, S, Zamecnik, L, Vitolo, V, Barcellini, A, Brugnatelli, S, Cobianchi, L, Vanoli, A, Fossati, P, Facoetti, A, Dionigi, P, Orecchia, R, Iannalfi, A, Vischioni, B, Ronchi, S, D’Ippolito, E, Petrucci, R, Yamaguchi, H, Honda, M, Hamada, K, Todate, Y, Seto, I, Suzuki, M, Wada, H, Murakami, M, Yu, Z, Zheng, W, Lien-Chun, L, Zhengshan, H, Qing, Z, Jiade, L, Guoliang, J, Fiore, M.R, D'Ippolito, E, Fukumitsu, N, Hayakawa, T, Yamashita, T, Mima, M, Demizu, Y, Suzuki, T, Soejima, T, Hartsell, W, Collins, S, Casablanca, V, Mihalcik, S, Brennan, E, Van Nispen, A, Corbett, A, Mohammed, N, Lee, P, van Nispen, A, Liang, Y.S, Mein, S, Kopp, B, Choi, K, Haberer, T, Debus, J, Abdollahi, A, Mairani, A, Ogino, H, Iwata, H, Hashimoto, S, Nakajima, K, Hattori, Y, Nomura, K, Shibamoto, Y, Li, P, Wu, S, Deng, L, Zhang, G, Zhang, Q, Fu, S, Yang, Z, Zhang, Y, Sasaki, R, Okimoto, T, Akasaka, H, Miyawaki, D, Yoshida, K, Wang, T, Komatsu, S, Fukumoto, T, Shuang, W, Xin, C, zhengshan, H, Shen, F, Vorobyov, N, Andreev, G, Martynova, N, Lyubinsky, A, Kubasov, A, Chen, J, Ma, N, Lu, Y, Zhao, J, Shahnazi, K, Lu, J, Jiang, G, Mao, J, Walser, M, Bojaxhiu, B, Kawashiro, S, Tran, S, Pica, A, Bachtiary, B, Weber, D, Gaito, S, Abravan, A, Richardson, J, Colaco, R, Saunders, D, Brennan, B, Petersen, I, Ahmed, S, Laack, N, Mizoe, J.E, Iizumi, T, Minohara, S, Kusano, Y, Matsuzaki, Y, Tsuchida, K, Serizawa, I, Yoshida, D, Katoh, H, Sakurai, H, Tujii, H, Kim, T.H, Park, J.W, Bo Hyun, K, Hyunjung, K, Sung Ho, M, Sang Soo, K, Sang Myung, W, Young-Hwan, K, Woo Jin, L, Dae Yong, K, Hong, Z, Wang, Z, Koroulakis, A, Molitoris, J, Kaiser, A, Hanna, N, Jiang, Y, Regine, W, DeCesaris, C.M, Choi, J.I, Carr, S.R, Burrows, W.M, Regine, W.F, Simone, C.B, Aihara, T, Hiratsuka, J, Kamitani, N, Higashino, M, Kawata, R, Kumada, H, Ono, K, Chou, Y.C, Dippolito, E, Bonora, M, Alterio, D, Gandini, S, Jereczeck, B.A, Kelly, C, Dobeson, C, Iqbal, S, Chatterjee, S, Hague, C, Li, T, Lin, A, Lukens, J, Slevin, N, Thomson, D, van Herk, M, West, C, Teo, K, Jeans, E, Manzar, G, Patel, S, Ma, D, Lester, S, Foote, R, Friborg, J, Jensen, K, Hansen, C.R, Andersen, E, Andersen, M, Eriksen, J.G, Johansen, J, Overgaard, J, Grau, C, Dědečková, K, Vítek, P, Ondrová, B, Sláviková, S, Zapletalová, S, Zapletal, R, Vondráček, V, Rotnáglová, E, Kwanghyun, J, Woojin, L, Dongryul, O, Yong Chan, A, Paudel, N, Schmidt, S, Ruckman, M, Gans, S, Stauffer, M, Helenowski, I, Patel, U, Samant, S, Gentile, M, Damico, N, Yao, M, Shuja, M, Routman, D.M, Foote, R.L, Garces, Y.I, Neben-Wittich, M.A, Patel, S.H, McGee, L.A, Harmsen, W.S, Ma, D.J, Sommat, K, Tong, A.K.T, Hu, J, Ong, A.L.K, Wang, F, Sin, S.Y, Wee, T.S, Tan, W.K, Fong, K.W, Soong, Y.L, Wallace, N, Fredericks, S, Fitzgerald, T, Vernimmen, F, Petringa, G, Cirrone, P, Agosteo, S, Attili, A, Cammarata, F.P, Cuttone, G, Conte, V, La Tessa, C, Manti, L, Rosenfeld, A, Lojacono, P.A, Hennings, F, Fattori, G, Peroni, M, Lomax, A, Hrbacek, J, Nguyen, H.G, Bach Cuadra, M, Sznitman, R, Schalenbourg, A, Pflaeger, A, Weber, A, Seidel, S, Stark, R, Heufelder, J, Mailhot Vega, R, Bradley, J, Lockney, N, Macdonald, S, Liang, X, Mazal, A, Mendenhall, N, Sher, D, Korreman, S.S, Andreasen, S, Petersen, J.B, Offersen, B.V, Gergelis, K, Jethwa, K, Whitaker, T, Shiraishi, S, Shumway, D, Press, R, Shelton, J, Zhang, C, Dang, Q, Tian, S, Shu, T, Seldon, C, Jani, A, Zhou, J, McDonald, M, Gort, E, Beukema, J.C, Spijkerman-Bergsma, M.J, Both, S, Langendijk, J.A, Matysiak, W.P, Brouwer, C.L, Baba, K, Numajiri, H, Murofushi, K, Oshiro, Y, Mizumoto, M, Onishi, K, Nonaka, T, Ishikawa, H, Okumura, T, Dominietto, M, Adam, K, Ahlhelm, F.J, Safai, S, Abdul-Jabbar, L, Song, J, Tseng, Y. D, Rockhill, J, Fink, J, Chang, L, Halasz, L. M, Guntrum, F, Steinmeier, T, Nagaraja, S, Jazmati, D, Geismar, D, Timmermann, B, Plaude, S, Lynch, C, Petras, K, Chang, J, Grimm, S, Lukas, R, Kumthekar, P, Merrell, R, Kalapurakal, J, Gross, J, Hoppe, B, Simone, C, Nichols, R.C, Pham, D, Mohindra, P, Chon, B, Morris, C, Li, Z, Flampouri, S, Powell, J.R, Murray, L, Burnet, N, Fernandez, S, Lingard, Z, McParland, L, O’Hara, D, Whitfield, G, Short, S.C, Guan, X, Gao, J, Hu, W, Yang, J, Xing, X, Hu, C, Kong, L, Zou, Z, Thomas, H, Sasidharan, B.K, Rengan, R, Zeng, J, Busold, S, Heese, J, Cerello, P, Bottura, L, Felcini, E, Ferrero, V, Monaco, V, Pennazio, F, de Rijk, G, Chang, H, KyungDon, C, Byunghun, H, Gyuseong, C, Chilukuri, S, Jalali, R, Panda, P.K, Korn, G, Larosa, G, Russo, A, Schillaci, F, Scuderi, V, Margarone, D, Fredén, E, Almhagen, E, Mejaddam, Y, Siegbahn, A, Guardiola, C, Gómez, F, Prieto-Pena, J, Fleta, C, De Marzi, L, Prezado, Y, Kabolizadeh, P, Reitemeier, P, Navin, M, Hamstra, D, Anderson, J, Stevens, C, Bartolucci, L, Adrien, C, Lejars, M, Vaillant, M, Fourquet, A, Robillard, M, Costa, E, Kirova, Y, Kolano, A.M, Degiovanni, A, Farr, J.B, Kundel, S, Pinto, M, Kurichiyanil, N, Würl, M, Englbrecht, F, Hillbrand, M, Schreiber, J, Parodi, K, Kurup, A, Magliari, A, Perez, J, Masui, S, Asano, T, Owen, H, Burt, G, Apsimon, R, Pitman, S, Popovici, M.A, Vasilache, R, Safavi-Naeini, M, Chacon, A, Howell, N, Middleton, R.J, Fraser, B, Guatelli, S, Rendina, L, Matsufuji, N, Gregoire, M.C, Sikora, K, Pettingell, J, Crocker, M, Saplaouras, A, Snijders, A, Mao, J.H, Nakamura, K, Bin, J, Gonsalves, A, Mao, H.S, Steinke, S, Roach, M, Leemans, W, Blakely, E, Takayama, K, Tan, T.S, Wee, J.T.S, Tuan, J.K.L, Wang, M.L.C, Quah, J.S.H, Tay, N.C.W, Lee, J.C.L, Lim, J.K.H, Oei, A.A, Tan, J.M, Park, S.Y, Chow, W.W.L, Omar, Y.B, Chew, P.G, Taylor, P, Lee, J, Tsurudome, T, Hirabayashi, M, Tsutsui, H, Yoshida, J, Takahashi, N, Kamiguchi, N, Hashimoto, A, Tachikawa, T, Mikami, Y, Kumata, Y, Wang, M, Chua, E.T, Wee, J, Wong, F.Y, Tuan, J, Master, Z, Wong, S, Welsh, J, Hentz, C, Pankuch, M, DeJongh, F, Xia, Y, Aitkenhead, A.H, Appleby, R, Merchant, M.J, MacKay, R.I, Young, H, Hughes, V, Alsulimane, M, Barajas, C.A, Taylor, J, Casse, G, Omar, A, Burdin, S, Boon, C, Lester, J, Thomas, A.J, Khan, A, Huthart, L, Leaver, K, Snell, J, Warlow, A, Burigo, L.N, Oborn, B, Belosi, F, Fredh, A, van de Water, S, Schneider, T, Patriarca, A, Bergs, J, Hierso, E, Hirayama, R, Martínez-Rovira, I, Seksek, O, Shirato, H, Nakamura, T, Ogino, T, Akimoto, T, Tamamura, H, Nishimoto, N, Proton-Net, G, Shimizu, S, Fabiano, S, Bangert, M, Guckenberger, M, Unkelbach, J, Mcauley, G, Teran, A, Slater, J, Wroe, A, Boon, I, Clorley, J, Owen, K, Oliver, T, Cicchetti, A, Ballarini, F, Rancati, T, Carrara, M, Zaffaroni, N, Bezawy, R. El, Carante, M, Valdagni, R, Faccini, R, Forte, G.I, Dhinsey, S, Greenshaw, T, Parsons, J, Welsch, C, Stock, M, Grevillot, L, Kragl, G, Carlino, A, Martino, G, Hug, E, Arya, H, Chirayath, V.A, Jin, M, Weiss, A.H, Glass, G.A, Chi, Y, Kaplan, L.P, Perez, R.A, Vestergaard, A, Gittings, E, Stamper, J, Beltran, C, Mark, P, Furutani, K, McAuley, G, Gordon, J, Boisseau, P, Dart, A, Nett, W, Kollipara, S, Grossmann, M, Actis, O, Diete, W, Rudolf, D, Klein, H.U, Kramert, R, Meer, D, Venkataraman, C, Waterstradt, T, Hérault, J, Bergerot, J.M, Hsi, W.C, Zhou, R, Zhang, X, Yang, F, Yinxiangzi, S, Sun, J, Li, X, Zhiling, C, Yuehu, P, Mengya, G, Haiyun, K, Qi, L, Zhentang, Z, Lin, Y.H, Tan, H.Q, Tan, L.K.R, Ang, K.W, Xiufang, L, Milkowski, K, Pang, D, Jones, M, Mizota, M, Tsunashima, Y, Himukai, T, Ogata, R, Uno, T, Ouyang, L, Jia, B, Li, D, Paul, K, Pullia, M, Savazzi, S, Lante, V, Foglio, S, Donetti, M, Falbo, L, Casalegno, L, Rousseau, M, Shinomiya, K, Yazawa, T, Iseki, Y, Kanai, Y, Hirata, Y, Powers, J, Solovev, A, Chernukha, A, Saburov, V, Shegai, P, Ivanov, S, Kaprin, A, Stolarczyk, L, Mojżeszek, N, Van Hoey, O, Farah, J, Domingo, C, Mares, V, Ploc, O, Trinkl, S, Harrison, R, Toltz, A, Nevitt, Z, Bloch, C, Taddei, P, Saini, J, Regmi, R, Yuntao, S, Jinxing, Z, Yap, J.S.L, Hentz, M, Silverman, J, Jolly, S, Boogert, S, Nevay, L, Kacperek, A, Schnuerer, R, Resta-Lopez, J, Zeng, X, Zheng, J, Li, M, Han, M, Song, Y, Holm, A, Korreman, S, Petersen, J.B.B, Bäumer, C, Fuenstes, C, Janson, M, Matic, A, Wulff, J, Psoroulas, S, Lomax, T, Arjomandy, B, Athar, B, Tesfamicael, B, Bejarano Buele, A, Deemer, J, Kozlyuk, V, VanSickle, K, Bolt, R, van Goethem, M.J, Langendijk, J, van t Veld, A, Chen, K.L, Wlodarczyk, B, Wu, H, Chen, Z, Shen, L, Fachouri, N, Placidi, L, Böhlen, T, Ieko, Y, Iwai, T, Nemoto, K, Suzuki, K, Kanai, T, Miyasaka, Y, Harada, M, Yamashita, H, Kubota, I, Kayama, T, Jensen, M.F, Bræmer-Jensen, P, Randers, P, Søndergaard, C.S, Nørrevang, O, Taasti, V.T, Kong, H, Yin, C, Gu, M, Liu, M, Shu, H, Chongxian, Y, Haiyang, Z, Juan, Z, Ming, L, Manzhou, Z., Liying, Z, Kecheng, C, Xiaolei, D, Castro, J, Freire, J, Cremades, M, Moral, L, Rico, P, Ares, C, Miralbell, R, Shi, J, Xia, J, Wang, B, Li, Q, Liu, X, Sung, C.C, Chen, W.P, Liao, T.Y, Takashina, M, Hamatani, N, Tsubouchi, T, Yagi, M, Mizoe, J, Titt, U, Mirkovic, D, Yepes, P, Wang, Q, Grosshans, D, Wieser, H.P, Mohan, R, Vadrucci, M, Xiao, G, Cai, X, Li, G, Yuan, Y, Lu, R, Sun, G, Zhang, M, Deming, L, lianhua, O, Takada, K, Tanaka, S, Matsumoto, Y, Naito, F, Kurihara, T, Nakai, K, Matsumura, A, Sakae, T, Shamurailatpam, D, P, K, Mp, N, A, M, Kg, G, T, R, C, S, J, R, Rozes, A, Dutheil, P, Batalla, A, Vela, A, Rana, S, Bennouna, J, Gutierrez, A, He, P, Shen, G, Dai, Z, Ma, Y, Chen, W, Pandey, J, Chirvase, C, Osborne, M, Ilsley, E, Di Biase, I, Kato, T, Hirose, K, Arai, K, Motoyanagi, T, Harada, T, Takeuchi, A, Kato, R, Tanaka, H, Mitsumoto, T, Takai, Y, Bolsa-Ferruz, M, Palmans, H, Chen, Y.S, Wu, S.W, Huang, H.C, Wang, H.T, Yeh, C.Y, Chen, H.H, Cook, H, Lourenço, A, Dal Bello, R, Magalhaes Martins, P, Hermann, G, Kihm, T, Seimetz, M, Brons, S, Seco, J, De Saint-Hubert, M, Swakon, J, De Freitas Nascimento, L, Tessaro, V.B, Poignant, F, Gervais, B, Beuve, M, Galassi, M.E, Harms, J, Chang, C.W, Zhang, R, Lin, Y, Langen, K, Liu, T, Lin, L, Howard, M, Denbeigh, J, Remmes, N, Debrot, E, Herman, M, Huang, Y.Y, Tsai, S.H, Fang, F.M, Mizuno, H, Sagara, T, Yamazaki, Y, Kato, M, Oyama, S, Pembroke, C, Joslin-Tan, T, Maggs, R, O’Neil, K, Barrett-Lee, P, Staffurth, J, Resch, A, Heyes, P, Georg, D, Fuchs, H, Hideyuki, M, katsuhisa, N, Wataru, Y, Samnøy, A.T, Ytre-Hauge, K.S, Povoli, M, Kok, A, Summanwar, A, Linh, T, Malinen, E, Röhrich, D, Asp, J, Santos, A, Afshar, V.S, Zhang, W.Q, Bezak, E, a, M, k, G, p, K, mp, N, t, R, c, S, j, R, Smith, B, Hammer, C, Hyer, D, DeWerd, L, Culberson, W, Brooke, M, Straticiuc, M, Craciun, L, Matei, C.E, Radu, M, Xiao, M, Paschalis, S, Joshi, P, Price, T, Mehta, M, Graça, J, Biglin, E, Aitkenhead, A, Price, G, Williams, K, Chadwick, A, Schettino, G, Robinson, A, Kirkby, K, Catanzano, D, Cessac, R, Rutherford, R, Ahmed, A, Mohammadi, A, Tashima, H, Yamaya, T, Chavez Barajas, C, Taylor, A, Vossebeld, J, Barwick, I, CHEON, W, Jo, K, Ahn, S.W, Cho, J, Han, Y, Choi, H.H.F, Cheung, C.W, Cohilis, M, Lee, J.A, Sterpin, E, Souris, K, Mundy, D, Petasecca, M, Rosenfeld, A.B, Boso, A, Di Fulvio, A, Becchetti, F.D, Torres-Isea, R.O, Febbraro, M, Gagnon-Moisan, F, Feng, Y, Fontana, M, Etxebeste, A, Dauvergne, D, Letang, J.M, Testa, E, Sarrut, D, Maxim, V, Gajewski, J, Durante, M, Garbacz, M, Krah, N, Krzempek, K, Schiavi, A, Skrzypek, A, Tommasino, F, Ruciński, A, Gillin, M, Sahoo, N, Zhu, X.R, Van Delinder, K.W, Crawford, D, Khan, R, Gräfe, J, Kakiuchi, G, Shioyama, Y, Shimokomaki, R, Huang, Z, Wang, W, Sheng, Y, Lee, M.W, Jan, M.L, Hong, J.H, Okamoto, K, Sato, H, Kalantan, S, Boston, A, Kang, Y, Shen, J, Casey, W, Vern-Gross, T, Wong, W, McGee, L, Halyard, M, Keole, S, Kelleter, L, Radogna, R, Saakyan, R, Basharina-Freshville, A, Attree, D, Volz, L, Komenda, W, Krzempek, D, Mierzwińska, G, Barbara, M, Kopeć, R, Lan, J.H, Chang, F.X, Lin, C.H, Lee, T.F, Ahn, S, Cheon, W, Lee, M, Letellier, V, Osorio, J, Dreindl, R, Livingstone, J, Gallin-Martel, M.L, Létang, J.M, Marcatili, S, Morel, C, Maggi, P, Chen, H, Yang, H, Panthi, R, Mackin, D, Peterson, S, Beddar, S, Polf, J, Masuda, T, Nishio, T, Sano, A, Tomozawa, H, Nishio, A, Tsuneda, M, Okamoto, T, Karasawa, K, Miszczynska Giza, O, Sánchez-Parcerisa, D, Herraiz, J. L, Rojo-Santiago, J, Udias, J.M, Mitrović, U, Hager, M, List, I, Fischer, C, Cecowski, M, Gajšek, R, Mizutani, S, Hotta, K, Baba, H, Tanizaki, N, Yamaguchi, T, Moon, S.Y, Rah, J.E, Yoon, M, Shin, D, Nebah, P, Dugas, J, Syh, J, Maynard, M, Marsh, N, Rosen, L, Nichiporov, D, Watts, D.A, Chen, Y, Petterson, M, Lee, W.D, Penfold, S.N, Ruebel, N, Piersimoni, P, Mille, M, Mossahebi, S, Chen-Mayer, H, Allport, P, Green, S, Shaikh, S, Walker, D, Qamhiyeh, S, Levegruen, S, Kutscher, S, Kranke, H, Olbrich, G, Stuschke, M, Baran, J, Pawlik-Niedzwiecka, M, Moskal, P, Rutherford, H, Poenisch, F, Martin, C, Wu, R, Mayo, L.L, Shah, S.J, Frank, S.J, Gunn, G.B, Sakurai, Y, Takata, T, Kondo, N, Schlegel, N, Deng, Y, Sun, W, Wu, X, Yap, J, Zhang, H, Szumlak, T, Schuy, C, Simeonov, Y, Zink, K, Graeff, C, Weber, U, Allred, B, Robertson, D, Dewees, T, Gagneur, J, Stoker, J, Stützer, K, Valentini, C, Agolli, L, Hölscher, T, Thiele, J, Dutz, A, Löck, S, Krause, M, Baumann, M, Richter, C, Takayanagi, T, Uesaka, T, Nakamura, Y, Unlu, M.B, Kuriyama, Y, Uesugi, T, Ishi, Y, Umegaki, K, Matsuura, T, Watts, D. A, Huisman, B, Valladolid Onecha, V, Fraile, L.M, Sanchez Parcerisa, D, España, S, Ze, W, Chen, H.Y, Chuang, K.S, Wilson, M, Lui, J, Noble, D, Holloway, S, Yap, J.H.H, Chew, M.M.L, Pang, P.P, Lim, C.J.C, Gan, S.A, Tan, T.W.K, Shen, Z.M, Moyers, M, Qianxia, W, Chen, H.L, Li, J, Lin, J, Zhao, L, Myers, W, Ates, O, Faught, J, Yan, Y, Faught, A, Sobczak, D, Hua, C.H, Moskvin, V, Merchant, T, Henkner, K, Ecker, S, Chaudhri, N, Ellerbrock, M, Jäkel, O, Hernandez Morales, D, Augustine, K, Johnson, J, Younkin, J, Fiorina, E, Mattei, I, Morrocchi, M, Sarti, A, Traini, G, Valle, S.M, Bert, C, Karger, C.P, Kamada, T, Scholz, M, DeLuca, P.M, De Simoni, M, Dong, Y, Embriaco, A, Fischetti, M, Mancini-Terracciano, C, Mirabelli, R, Muraro, S, Lens, E, de Blécourt, A, Schaart, D, Vos, F, van Dongen, K, Berthold, J, Khamfongkhruea, C, Petzoldt, J, Wohlfahrt, P, Pausch, G, Janssens, G, Smeets, J, Shamblin, J, Blakey, M, Moore, R, Matteo, J, Schreuder, N, Derenchuk, V, Shin, J, Jee, K.W, Clasie, B.M, Depauw, N, Batin, E, Madden, T.M, Schuemann, J, Paganetti, H, Kooy, H.M, Daniel, M, Abbassi, L, Arsène-Henry, A, Amessis, M, Maes, S, O’Ryan-Blair, A, Laval, G, Ermoian, R, Taddei, P. J, Andersson, K, Norrlid, O, Lindbäck, E, Vallhagen Dahlgren, C, Witt Nyström, P, Argota Perez, R, Sharma, M.B, Elstrøm, U.V, Bizzocchi, N, Albertini, F, Branco, D, Kry, S, Rong, J, Frank, S, Followill, D, Busch, K, Muren, L.P, Thörnqvist, S, Andersen, A.G, Pedersen, J, Dong, L, Cao, W, Bai, X, Van Lobenstein, N, Traneus, E, Anson, C, Comi, S, Marvaso, G, Russo, S, Giandini, T, Avuzzi, B, Ciardo, D, Cattani, F, Jereczek-Fossa, B, Cotterill, J, Esposito, M, Winter, A, Allinson, N, Liu, G, Yan, D, Jawad, S, Dilworth, J, Chen, P, Ackermann, B, Florijn, M, Sharfo, A.W.M, Wiggenraad, R.G.J, van Santvoort, J.P.C, Petoukhova, A.L, Hoogeman, M.S, Mast, M.E, Dirkx, M.L.P, Fujitaka, S, Fujii, Y, Nihongi, H, Nakayama, S, Ho, M.W, Artz, M, Tong, K.T.A, Hytonen, R, Koponen, T, Niemela, P, Iancu, G, Lautenschlaeger, S, Eberle, F, Horst, F, Ringbaek, T, Engenhart-Cabillic, R, Kim, M.J, Hong, C.S, Kim, Y.B, Park, S.H, Kim, J.S, Reiterer, J, Steffal, C, Gora, J, Kann, T, Schratter-Sehn, A.U, Li, H, Chen, M, wu, R, Li, Y, zhang, X, Gautam, A, poenisch, F, sahoo, N, Zhu, R, Lin, M, Chang, J.T.C, Maeda, Y, Sato, Y, Shibata, S, Bou, S, Yamamoto, K, Sasaki, M, Fuwa, N, Takamatsu, S, Kume, K, Lim, F, Faller, F, Stiller, W, Ming, X, Hui, H, Mukawa, T, Takashi, Y, Stephenson, L, Pang, E.P.P, Paz, A.E, Yoshida, Y, Righetto, R, Vecchi, C, Alparone, A, De Spirito, M, Radhakrishnan, S, Chandrashekaran, A, Nandigam, J, Sarma, Y, Rechner, L, Munck af Rosenschöld, P, Bäck, A, Johansen, T.S, Schut, D.A, Aznar, M.C, Nyman, J, Ren, X, Rosas, S, Vanderstraeten, R, Jyske, T, Jari, L, Yuenan, W, Henthorn, N, Warmenhoven, J, Merchant, M, Kirkby, N, Ranald, M, Stefanowicz, S, Zschaeck, S, Troost, E.G.C, Stubington, E, Ehrgott, M, Nohadani, O, Shentall, G, Sun, T, yin, Y, Lin, X, Yoshimura, T, Matsuo, Y, Yamazaki, R, Takao, S, Miyamoto, N, Toussaint, L, Indelicato, D.J, Lassen-Ramshad, Y, Kirby, K, Mikkelsen, R, Di Pinto, M, Høyer, M, Stokkevåg, C.H, Van Herk, M, Shortall, J, Green, A, Vasquez Osorio, E, Mackay, R, Navratil, M, Andrlik, M, Chiang, Y.Y, Yeh, Y.H, Yeh, Y.J, Chang, T.C, Eaton, B, Yang, X, Esiashvili, N, Gu, W, Ruan, D, O’Connor, D, Zou, W, Tsai, M.Y, Jia, X, Sheng, K, Hyde, C, Chen, P.Y, Deraniyagala, R, Petoukhova, A, Klaassen, L, Habraken, S, Jacobs, J, Sattler, M, Verhoeven, K, Klaver, Y, Widesott, L, Fracchiolla, F, Algranati, C, Scifoni, E, Scartoni, D, Farace, P, Kröniger, K, Bauer, J, Nilsson, R, Chen, X, Liu, R, Sun, B, Mutic, S, Zhang, T, Zhao, T, Kajdrowicz, T, Wochnik, A, Swakoń, J, Małecki, K, Michalec, B, Moffitt, G, Wootton, L, Hardemark, B, Sandison, G, Emery, R, Stewart, R, Reidel, C.A, Finck, C, Deisher, A, Mahajan, A, Michael, H, Ahn, S.H, Kwang Hyeon, K, Chankyu, K, Youngmoon, G, Shinhaeng, C, Se Byeong, L, Young Kyung, L, Haksoo, K, Dongho, S, Jong Hwi, J, Ali, Y, Monini, C, Maigne, L, Alshaikhi, J, D’Souza, D, Amos, R. A, Baumann, K.S, Gomà, C, Flatten, V, Lautenschläger, S, Abdel-Rehim, A, Wan Chan Tseung, H.S, Ma, J, Kamal Syed, H, Boscolo, D, Krämer, M, Fuss, M, Braunroth, T, Rabus, H, Baek, W.Y, Brown, H, Alshammari, H, Brownstein, J, Giantsoudi, D, Wang, C.C, Grassberger, C, Chen, C, Chan, M.F, Mah, D, Hojo, Y, Xu, C, Elia, A, Fung, A, Nguyen, B.N, Oyervides, M, Koska, B, Kamal Sayed, H, Kim, C, Kim, Y.J, Lee, S.B, Goh, Y, Cho, S, Jeong, J.H, Kim, H, Lim, Y.K, Koh, W.Y.C, Lew, W.S, Lee, C.L.J, Kollitz, E, Han, H, Kim, C.H, Kroll, C, Riboldi, M, Newhauser, W, Dedes, G, Fuglsang Jensen, M, Nyström, U.H, Skyt, P.S, Hoffmann, L, Sloth Møller, D, Dokic, I, Kuo, S.H, Tai, P.L, Cheng, S.W, Chong, N.S, Yeom, Y.S, Kuzmin, G, Griffin, K, Langner, U, Jung, J.W, Lee, C, Lee, C.C, Hsu, W, Chao, T.C, Liamsuwan, T, Pischom, N, Tangboonduangjit, P, Suchada, T, Zheng, D, Rutenberg, M, Dhabaan, A, Harrabi, S, MARAFINI, M, Gioscio, E, Yunsheng, D, Alphonse, G, Rodriguez Lafrasse, C, Testa, É, Morris, B, Asavaphatiboon, S, DeBlois, D, Yam, M, Sękowski, P, Skwira-Chalot, I, Matulewicz, T, Flynn, R, Verbeek, N, Smyczek, S, Brualla, L, Lei, Y, Ghavidel, B, Curran, W, Beitler, J, Yu, H.W, Jeng, S.C, Tsai, Y.C, Chiou, J.F, Yusa, K, Dai, T, Yuan, P, Shafai-Erfani, G, Shu, H.K, Pepin, M, Tryggestad, E.J, Abdel Rehim, A, Johnson, J.E, Herman, M.G, Lee, S.C, Sheu, R.J, Ödén, J, Ramos-Mendez, J, Perl, J, Faddegon, B, Alaka, B.G, Bentefour, E.H, Samuel, D, Biradar, B, Frusti, P, Den Otter, L.A, Kurz, C, Stanislawski, M, Landry, G, Meijers, A, Knopf, A.C, Dickmann, J, Wesp, P, Rit, S, Johnson, R.P, Bashkirov, V, Schulte, R.W, Hoyle, B, Johnson, R, Schulte, R, Weller, J, Cotterill, J.V, Waltham, C, Allport, P.P, Taylor, M, Rogers, J, Evans, P.M, Allinson, N.M, Henry, T, Ardenfors, O, Gudowska, I, Poludniowski, G, Dasu, A, Lai, Y, Yuncheng, Z, Yiping, S, Mingwu, J, Xun, J, Yujie, C, Meric, I, Mattingly, J, Moustafa, A, Skjerdal, K, Moteabbed, M, Harisinghani, M, Efstathiou, J.A, Lu, H.M, Kabuki, S, Mizowaki, T, Ofierzynski, R, Paysan, P, Strzelecki, A, Lucca, R, Patch, S, Mustapha, B, Santiago-Gonzalez, D, Pettersen, H.E.S, Sølie, J, Levegrün, S, Pöttgen, C, Meyer, E, Collins-Fekete, C.A, Bashkirov, V.A, Wang, Y.M, Sung, K.C, Wang, C.J, Wu, H.Y, Winter, M, Bauer, U, Hansmann, T, Naumann, J, Peters, A, Pilz, K, Troost, E, Yan, S, Greenhalgh, J, Li, S, Bortfeld, T, Flanz, J, Ytre-Hauge, K, Zhang, L, Sharp, G.C, Cascio, E.W, Flanz, J.B, Tang, J, Zhu, J, Zhang, J, Uh, J, Sarosiek, C, Ricci, J, Coutrakon, G, Ozoemelam, I, van der Graaf, E.R, Maciej, K, Zhang, N, Brandenburg, S, Dendooven, P, Niepel, K, Yohannes, I, Dietrich, O, Ertl-Wagner, B, Pappas, E, Sølie, J.R, Odland, O.H, Ghesquiere-Dierickx, L.M.H, Felix Bautista, R, Gehrke, T, Jakubek, J, Turecek, D, Martisikova, M, Malekzadeh, E, Rajabi, H, Kalantari Mahmoudabadi, F, Meschini, G, d’Arenzo, D, Comini, D, Huynh, M.T, Paganelli, C, Fontana, G, Mancin, A, Preda, L, Su, Z, Henderson, R, Nichols, C, Bryant, C, Mendenhall, W, Boyer, B, Geerebaert, Y, Gevin, O, Koumeir, C, Magniette, F, Manigot, P, Poirier, F, Servagent, N, Thiebaux, C, Verderi, M, Chen, Y.R, Anderle, K, Jeraj, R, Chuter, R, Allan, I, Patel, I, MacKay, R, Harrison, K, Hoole, A, Thomas, S, Jena, R, Liao, Z, Zhu, R.X, Freeman, M, Espy, M, Aulwes, E, Magnelind, P, Merrill, F, Neukirch, L, Sidebottom, R, Tang, Z, Tupa, D, Wilde, C, Shusharina, N, Fullerton, B, Adams, J, Sharp, G, Chan, A, Dolde, K, Naumann, P, Dávid, C, Kachelrieß, M, Saito, N, Pfaffenberger, A, Wolf, M, Lis, M, Moreau, J, Buttion, M, Molitoris, J.K, Simone-, C.B, Regele, H, Bula, C, Danuser, S, Kang, M, Lin, H, Ribeiro, C. O, Dumont, D, Terpstra, J, Knopf, A, Wagenaar, D, Kierkels, R, van der Schaaf, A, Scandurra, D, Sijtsema, M, Korevaar, E, van den Hoek, A, O’Neil, M, Chung, H, Sala, I, Ramirez, H, Guerrero, T, Mondlane, G, Butkus, M.B, Stewart, R.D, Carlson, D.J, Ingram, S, Ytre-Hauge, K. Smeland, Rørvik, E, Perales, A, Carabe, A, Baratto-Roldan, A, Kimstrand, P, Cortes-Giraldo, M, Bertolet, A, Barato-Roldan, A, Baiocco, G, Barbieri, S, Mei, Z, Fan, K, Tang, K, Wang, J, Zhu, H, Sung, W, McNamara, A, Tran, L.T, Qi, Y, Xu, X, Pei, X, Chiang, Y, Chien-Hau, C, Chung-Chi, L, Chuan-Jong, T, Tsi-Chian, C, Wang, L, Cao, J, Wang, X, Lin, E, Minami, K, Kondo, R, Khoei, S, Shirvalilou, S, Khoee, S, Jamali Raoufi, N, Karimi, M.R, Shakeri-Zadeh, A, Patera, V, Rinaldi, I, Sas-Korczynska, B, Deng, W, Karagounis, I, Huynh, K, Maity, A, Abel, E, Santa Cruz, G, Monti Hughes, A, Herrera, M, Trivillin, V, Portu, A, Garabalino, M, Schwint, A, Gonzalez, S, Saint Martin, G, Santa Cruz, I, Tamari, Y, Watanabe, T, Masunaga, S.I, Wittig, A, Nigg, D, Stecher-Rasmussen, F, Moss, R, Igawa, K, Akita, K, Akabori, K, Hattori, K.J, Arima, H, Motoyama, K, Higashi, T, Trivillin, V.A, Pozzi, E.C.C, Thorp1, S.I, Curotto1, P, Garabalino1, M.A, Itoiz, M.E, Santa Cruz, I.S, Ramos, P.S, Palmieri, M.A, Schwint, A.E, Gadan, M.A, Thorp, S.I, Curotto, P, Portu, A.M, Thorp, S, Trivillin, V. A, Schwint, A. E, Fukuo, Y, Kanemitsu, T, Fukumura, M, Kosaka, T, Hiramatsu, R, Kuroiwa, T, Miyatake, S, Kawabata, S, Kirihata, M, Goldfinger, J.A, Garabalino, M.A, Pozzi, E.C, Ramos, P, De Leo, L.N, Yu, Q, Engelbrecht, M, Sioen, S, Miles, X, Nair, S, Ndimba, R, Baeyens, A, Vandevoorde, C, Buizza, G, Meng, J, Takai, N, Ogami, M, Nakamura, S, Ohba, Y, Liu, R.F, Zhang, Q.N, Wang, X.H, Luo, H.T, Kong, Y.R, Jansen, J, Tirinato, L, Marafioti, M.G, Hanley, R, Yao, X.Q, Pagliari, F, Huang, C.Y, Wong, W.K.R, Ho, Y.W, Nam, P.H, Koryakin, S.N, Troshina, M.V, Koryakina, E.V, Potetnya, V.I, Baykuzina, R.M, Lychagin, A.A, Ulyanenko, S.E, Molinelli, S, Giuseppe, M, Tran, L, Bolst, D, James, B, Steinsberger, T, Alliger, C, Dahle, T.J, Rusten, E, Wright, P, Forsback, S, Silvoniemi, A, Minn, H, Andersson, S, Buti, G, Barragán Montero, A.M, Vasquez-Osario, E, Sabouri, P, Nkenge, K, Yi, B, Burigo, L, Greilich, S, Thomas, R, Clark, C, Lourenco, A, Oancea, C, Granja, C, Kodaira, S, Coplan, M, Graybill, J, Lutz, L, Shahi, C, Su, J.J, Thompson, A, Romano, F, Shipley, D, Hong, T.S, Labarbe, R, Wolfgang, J.A, Meyer, S, Bortfeldt, J, Lämmer, P, Schnürle, K, Peters, N, Möhler, C, Hofmann, C, Koschik, A, Bryce-Atkinson, A, Van Nugteren, J, De Rijk, G, Kirby, G, Dutoit, B, Vignati, A, Ahmadi Ganjeh, Z, Fausti, F, Giordanengo, S, Hammad Ali, O, Sacchi, R, Shakarami, Z, Cirio, R, Inoue, J, Tachibana, M, Shimizu, Y, Ochi, T, Amano, D, Miyashita, T, Cooley, J, Nyamane, S, Zwart, T, Wagner, M, Lu, M, Rosenthal, S, Hashimoto, T, Katoh, N, Tamura, H, Emert, F, Missimer, J, Eichenberger, P, Gmuer, C, Spengler, C, Kamp, F, Hofmaier, J, Reiner, M, Belka, C, Van Ooteghem, G, Dasnoy-Sumell, D, Geets, X, Chen, C.C, Galbreath, G, Shmulenson, R, Pinheiro de Almeida, I, van Elmpt, W, Vilches Freixas, G, Unipan, M, Verhaegen, F, Bosmans, G, Garcia, G, Cevallos Robalino, L, Guzman-Garcia, K, Vega-Carrillo, H.R, Gomez-Ros, J.M, Gallego, E, Hintenlang, K, Martin, M, Gupta, N, Meissner, J, Smathers, J, Ainsley, C, Yin, L, Jagt, T, Breedveld, S, van Haveren, R, Nout, R, Astreinidou, E, Staring, M, Heijmen, B, Hoogeman, M, Stokes, W, Matter, M, Nenoff, L, Toramatsu, C, Wakizaka, H, Nitta, M, Nishikido, F, Hirano, Y, Yoshida, E, Miller, J, Maris, A, Kalle, R, Franco, G, Kierkels, R.G.J, van den Hoek, J.G.M, Bijl, H.P, Dieters, M, Steenbakkers, R.J.H.M, Dejongh, F, DeJongh, E, Rykalin, V, Karonis, N, Ordonez, C, Duffin, K, Winans, J, Neph, R, Sanchez-Parcerisa, D, Lopez-Aguirre, M, Dolcet Llerena, A, Udias, J, Oxley, D, Besson, R, Meier, G, Nanz, A, Schorta, M, Fleury, E, Trnková, P, Erdal, E, Hassan, K, Beenakker, J.W, Pignol, J.P, Matysiak, W, Tian, L, Zepter, S, Winterhalter, C, Shim, S, Gouldstone, C, Trnkova, P, Vatnitsky, S, Liu, K, Li, E, Zhuangming, S, Lowenstein, J, De Wilde, O, Bossier, V, Lerot, X, Pouppez, A, Xx, X, Verburg, J, Hueso-Gonzalez, F, Ruggieri, T, Amato, C, Ghesquiere-Dierickx, L, Felix-Bautista, R, Deville, C, Barsky, A, Vapiwala, N, Mohamad, O, Tabuchi, T, Nitta, Y, Nomoto, A, Kasuya, G, Choy, H, Miyashiro, I, Bush, D, Chuong, M, Kozarek, J, Rubens, M, Larson, G, Vargas, C, Hung, S.P, Hsieh, C.E, Huang, B.S, Tsang, N.M, Smith, N, Viehman, J, Harmsen, W, Elswick, S, Boughey, J, Harless, C, Jimenez, R, Hickey, S, DePauw, N, Ho, A, Taghian, A, MacDonald, S, Meek, A, Hedrick, S, Baliga, S, Gallotto, S, Lewy, J, Patteson, B, Speroni, S, Omsberg, A, Tarbell, N, Musolino, P, Yock, T, Indelicato, D, Rotondo, R, Mailhot, R, Uezono, H, Bradfield, S, Agarwal, V, Gillies, C, Gosling, A, Casares-Magaz, O, Eskildsen, S.F, Lassen, Y, Hasle, H, Tofting-Olesen, K, Alapetite, C, Puget, S, Nauraye, C, Beccaria, K, Bolle, S, Doz, F, Sainte-Rose, C, Bouffet, E, Zerah, M, Wu, J, Qiu, X, Hua, W, Mao, Y, Frakulli, R, Kramer, P.H, Glas, M, Blase, C, Tippelt, S, Konrath, L, Gruber, N, Schallerbauer-Peter, A, Mock, U, Niyazi, M, Niemierko, A, Schapira, E, Kim, V, Oh, K.S, Hwang, W.L, Busse, P.M, Loeffler, J.S, Shih, H.A, Appel, H, Tseng, Y.D, Tsai, H, Sinesi, C, Rossi, C, Badiyan, S, Kotecha, R, Pike, L, Horick, N, Yeap, B, Franck, K, Wang, I, Loeffler, J, McKenna, M, Shih, H, Kountouri, M, Kole, A.J, Murray, F.R, Kliebsch, U, Combescure, C, iannalfi, A, Riva, G, Dougherty, J, Kruse, J, Iott, M, Brown, P, Olivier, K, Brodin, P, Kabarriti, R, Schechter, C, Kalnicki, S, Garg, M, Tomé, W, Lu, J.J, Chen, P.J, Dhanireddy, B, Severo, C, Lee, C.H, Lin, C.R, Rosier, L, Mathis, T, DeLaney, T, Lin, S, O’Meara, E, Powell, T, Hong, T, Hall, D, Liu, A, Ntentas, G, Dedeckova, K, Darby, S, Cutter, D, Zapletalova, S, Chen, Y.L, Miao, R, Lee, H, Hsiao-Ming, L, Choy, E, Cote, G, Eulitz, J, Lutz, B, Enghardt, W, Lühr, A, Mcmahon, S, Prise, K, Sung Hyun, L, Tansho, R, Mizushima, K, Warmenhoven, J.W, Hufnagl, A, Friedrich, T, Deycmar, S, Gruber, S, Dörr, W, Pruschy, M, Waissi, W, Burckel, H, Nicol, A, Noel, G, Yousef, I, Koizumi, M, Santa Cruz, G.A, González, S.J, Longhino, J, Provenzano, L, Oña, P, Rao, M, Cantarelli, M.D.L.Á, Leiras, A, Olivera, M.S, Alessandrini, P, Brollo, F, Boggio, E, Costa, H, Ventimiglia, R, Binia, S, Nievas, S.I, Langle, Y, Eijan, A.M, Colombo, L.L, Kawai, K, Nakamura, H, Natsuko, K, Masaki, H, Nakada, M, Furuse, M, Miyatake, S.I, Koivunoro, H, Kankaanranta, L, González, S, Joensuu, H, Sokol, O, Hild, S, Wiedemann, J, Köthe, A, Perry, D, Batie, M, Mascia, A, Sertorio, M, Luhr, A, Suckert, T, Müller, J, Beyreuther, E, Gotz, M, Haase, R, Schürer, M, Tillner, F, von Neubeck, C, Davis, A, Sishc, B, Saha, J, Ding, L, Story, M, Wagner, S, Kim, S.Y, Geary, S, Woodruff, T, Xu, T, Meng, Q, Gilchrist, S, Perentesis, J.P, Zheng, Y, Wells, S.I, Kong, Y, Liu, Y, Geng, Y, Knoll, M, Schwager, C, Schlegel, J, Schnölzer, M, Ding, L.H, Aroumougame, A, Chen, B, Saha, D, Pompos, A, Carter, R, Nickson, C, Thomson, J, Hill, M, Rodrigues, D, Snider, J, Sharma, A, Zakhary, M, Kara, L, Vujaskovic, Z, Dykstra, M, Best, T, Keane, F, Khandekar, M, Fintelmann, F, Willers, H, Singh, P, Eley, J, Malyapa, R, Mahmood, J, Hårdemark, B, Sandison, G.A, Wootton, L.S, Miyoaka, R.S, Laramore, G.E, Yang, P, van der Weide, H, Maduro, J, Heesters, M, Gawryszuk, A, Davila-Fajardo, R, Langendijk, H, Eckhard, M, Maxwell, A, VanNamen, K, Cashin, M, Jacovic, A, Dunn, M, kim, T, Jung, J, Kim, J, Swerdloff, S, Saunders, A, Thomas, J, Kidani, T, Okada, A, Tomida, K, Pennington, H, Xiaoqiang, L, Weigang, H, An, Q, Di, Y, Craig, S, Inga, G, Peyman, K, Xuanfeng, D, Cunningham, C, de Kock, M, Slabbert, J, Panaino, C.M, Phoenix, B, Regan, P.H, Shearman, R, Collins, S.M, Taylor, M.J, Grayson, M, Kato, K, Choi, H, Jang, J.W, Shin, W.G, Min, C.H, McMahon, S, Padilla Cabal, F, Fragoso, J.A, Resch, A.F, Katsis, A, Girdhani, S, Marshall, A, Jackson, I, Bentzen, S, Parry, R, Gantz, S, Schellhammer, S, Hoffmann, A, Delorme, R, Dos Santos, M, Salmon, R, Öden, J, Bullivant, K, Rucksdashal, R, Ferret, E, Covington, F, Rice, S, Decesaris, C, Siddiqui, O, Kowalski, E, Samanta, S, and Rothwell, B
- Subjects
Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0642 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0180 ,Biology: Biology and Clinical InterfacePTC58-0685 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0385 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0546 ,Clinics: EyePTC58-0714 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0528 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0507 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0661 ,Biology: Translational and Biomarkers Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0221 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0531 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0653 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy CombinationsPTC58-0163 ,Clinics: Sarcoma - LymphomaPTC58-0055 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy CombinationsPTC58-0166 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0198 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0421 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0560 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0709 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0664 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0286 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0666 ,Biology: Translational and Biomarkers Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0346 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0547 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0308 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0549 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle Design Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0111 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0050 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0587 ,Biology: Biology and Clinical InterfacePTC58-0454 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0052 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0395 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0534 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0072 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0533 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0538 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0113 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0633 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0431 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle DesignPTC58-0230 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling SimulationPTC58-0179 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0365 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0319 ,Biology: Translational and Biomarkers Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0697 ,Biology: Biology and Clinical InterfacePTC58-0663 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0240 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0177 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0363 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0487 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0209 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0206 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0294 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0127 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling SimulationPTC58-0068 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0062 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0692 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0723 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0494 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0643 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0521 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0402 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0405 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0273 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0397 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0648 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0489 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0617 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0616 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and Optimisation Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0668 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0188 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0625 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0654 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0655 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy Combinations Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0133 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0313 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0659 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0290 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0064 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0396 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0281 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0427 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0669 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0191 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and Optimisation Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0217 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0303 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0665 ,Clinics: Sarcoma - LymphomaPTC58-0495 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0398 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0667 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0425 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0541 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0584 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0540 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy Combinations Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0163 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0224 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0229 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0249 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle Design Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0555 ,Clinics: PediatricPTC58-0463 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0556 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0498 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0078 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0270 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0032 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0274 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0614 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0026 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0280 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0091 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0593 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy CombinationsPTC58-0012 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0025 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0146 ,Clinics: Sarcoma - LymphomaPTC58-0261 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0110 ,Clinics: Lung / Sarcoma / LymphomaPTC58-0733 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0554 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0597 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and Optimisation Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0330 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0115 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0598 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0040 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0282 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0399 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0283 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0569 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0647 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0506 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0047 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0067 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0409 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0065 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0586 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative Dosimetry PTC58-0393 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0712 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0645 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0683 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0107 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0266 ,Physics: Monitoring and Modelling MotionPTC58-0530 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0341 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0172 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0456 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0170 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0458 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0034 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0417 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0413 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0492 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0168 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0724 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0694 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0005 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0696 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0453 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0366 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0197 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle DesignPTC58-0652 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0017 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0338 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0539 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0390 ,Physics: Image Guidance Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0651 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0660 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0360 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0297 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0147 ,Scientific: RTTPTC58-0388 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0484 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0301 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0485 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0304 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and Delivery Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0532 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0575 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0306 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0589 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0344 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0225 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0381 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0467 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0585 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0416 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0228 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0348 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0234 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0101 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0386 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0118 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0265 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0119 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0218 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0267 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0387 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0142 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0269 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle DesignPTC58-0620 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0048 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0220 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0461 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0029 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0571 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0046 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0557 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0211 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0131 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0373 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0411 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0595 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0361 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0414 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0537 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0628 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0271 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0307 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0359 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0354 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0419 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0035 ,Biology: BNCTPTC58-0474 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0460 ,Biology: BNCTPTC58-0596 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0222 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0193 ,Clinics: PediatricPTC58-0312 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0441 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0701 ,Clinics: EyePTC58-0536 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0205 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0140 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0208 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0020 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0195 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0717 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0325 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0015 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0634 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0646 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0566 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0134 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0376 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling SimulationPTC58-0462 ,Biology: BNCTPTC58-0567 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0527 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0482 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0693 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0518 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0686 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0202 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0322 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0564 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0680 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0247 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0682 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0440 ,Biology: Translational and BiomarkersPTC58-0514 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle Design Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0178 ,Clinics: EyePTC58-0520 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0231 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0424 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0471 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0356 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0491 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0250 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0650 ,Biology: Biology and Clinical InterfacePTC58-0719 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0232 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0353 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0511 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0219 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0238 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0512 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and Delivery Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0401 ,Clinics: PediatricPTC58-0688 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0457 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0214 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0459 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0516 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0372 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0011 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0254 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0332 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0468 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling SimulationPTC58-0357 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0649 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0006 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0212 ,Physics: Image Guidance Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0565 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0018 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0019 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0576 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0335 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0577 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0621 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0426 ,Physics: Commissioning New Facilities Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0268 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0423 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0184 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0149 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0378 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0257 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0662 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0627 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0186 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0185 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0144 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0602 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0189 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0315 ,Clinics: Head and neckPTC58-0300 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0347 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0082 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0443 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and Delivery Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0629 ,Physics: Adaptive Therapy Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0007 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0472 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0515 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and Optimisation Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0606 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0450 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0657 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0551 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0192 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0675 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0194 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0544 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0199 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0037 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0207 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0434 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0036 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0278 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0394 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0151 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0154 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0428 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0116 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0435 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0681 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0323 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0583 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0448 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0251 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0721 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0203 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0455 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0130 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0679 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0329 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0604 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0449 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0132 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0607 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0122 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0243 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0165 ,Oral AbstractsPhysics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0437 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0377 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0125 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0245 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0337 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0334 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0121 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0563 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0321 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0477 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0480 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0010 ,Clinics: EyePTC58-0684 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0496 ,Clinics: Head and neckPTC58-0676 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0137 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle Design Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0256 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0117 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0552 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0310 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0672 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0436 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0452 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0331 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0213 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling SimulationPTC58-0272 ,Clinics: EyePTC58-0326 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0568 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0444 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0379 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0095 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0053 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0438 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0317 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0497 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0375 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0056 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0124 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0009 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0014 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0374 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0727 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0578 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0470 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0204 ,Clinics: Head and neckPTC58-0227 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0446 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0190 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0609 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0689 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0021 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0262 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0081 ,Clinics: GIPTC58-0726 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0145 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0573 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0027 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0028 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0148 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0635 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0215 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0336 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0535 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0187 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0084 ,General: New Investigator SessionPTC58-0339 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0420 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0523 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0088 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0112 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0182 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0615 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0080 ,Biology: BNCTPTC58-0085 ,Physics: Adaptive Therapy Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0722 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0253 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0255 ,Clinics: PediatricPTC58-0703 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0499 ,Physics: Image Guidance Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0380 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0259 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0288 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0045 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative DosimetryPTC58-0619 ,Clinics: PediatricPTC58-0707 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0196 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0074 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0077 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0073 ,Biology: BNCTPTC58-0075 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0093 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0161 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0371 ,Physics: Monitoring and Modelling MotionPTC58-0181 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0120 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0362 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0364 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0473 ,Scientific: RTTPTC58-0641 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0296 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0004 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0128 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0316 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and Delivery Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0236 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0008 ,General: New Investigator SessionPTC58-0673 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0167 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0289 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0284 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0522 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0164 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0285 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0623 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0502 ,Clinics: GUPTC58-0293 ,Biology: Translational and BiomarkersPTC58-0599 ,Biology: BNCTPTC58-0063 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0656 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0592 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0092 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0302 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0464 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0352 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0465 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0476 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0100 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0235 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0349 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0094 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and Delivery Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0367 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0400 ,Biology: Translational and BiomarkersPTC58-0244 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0640 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0355 ,General: New Investigator SessionPTC58-0320 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0057 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0174 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0295 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0529 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0123 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0171 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0049 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0731 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0223 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0102 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0466 ,Scientific: RTTPTC58-0503 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0389 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0108 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0109 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0736 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0343 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0342 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0237 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0711 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0581 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0114 ,Clinics: Base of SkullPTC58-0730 ,Clinics: Head and neckPTC58-0383 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0559 ,Clinics: Base of SkullPTC58-0613 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0691 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0054 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0210 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0729 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0574 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0239 ,Scientific: RTTPTC58-0637 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0579 ,Clinics: Lung / Sarcoma / LymphomaPTC58-0176 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0699 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0156 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0333 ,Biology: Translational and BiomarkersPTC58-0345 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0369 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0509 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling SimulationPTC58-0658 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0051 ,General: New Investigator SessionPTC58-0548 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0241 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0412 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0024 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0226 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon, Proton and Photons Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0069 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0562 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0561 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0201 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0439 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0445 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0324 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0031 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0558 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0392 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0678 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle DesignPTC58-0090 ,General: New Investigator SessionPTC58-0630 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon / Proton and Photons Carbons / Proton and PhotonPTC58-0524 ,Physics: Commissioning New FacilitiesPTC58-0713 ,Clinics: GI, GU, BreastPTC58-0139 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0248 ,Clinics: CNS / Pediatrics / Lung Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0368 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment PlanningPTC58-0519 ,General: New Horizons SessionPTC58-0720 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0083 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0311 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0674 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0553 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0023 ,Scientific: RTTPTC58-0612 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0677 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0545 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0601 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0725 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0098 ,Physics: Dose Calculation and OptimisationPTC58-0605 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon / Proton and Photons Carbons / Proton and PhotonPTC58-0517 ,Biology: Translational and Biomarkers Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0618 ,Physics: Monitoring and Modelling MotionPTC58-0481 ,Clinics: GI / Sarcoma Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0071 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0351 ,Physics: 4D Treatment and DeliveryPTC58-0702 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0734 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0611 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0486 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative Dosimetry Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0442 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy CombinationsPTC58-0327 ,Clinics: Head and Neck / EyePTC58-0096 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0159 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0708 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0097 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0350 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon / Proton and Photons Carbons / Proton and PhotonPTC58-0016 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0104 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative Dosimetry Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0433 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0608 ,Biology: Translational and Biomarkers Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0610 ,Clinics: Head and neckPTC58-0058 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0715 ,Clinics: Head and neckPTC58-0298 ,Clinics: EyePTC58-0099 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0086 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0089 ,Clinics: Lung / Sarcoma / LymphomaPTC58-0200 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0157 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0141 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0260 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0264 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0513 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0631 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0469 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0384 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0639 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0700 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0136 ,Clinics: BreastPTC58-0706 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0079 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy Combinations Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0406 ,Clinics: Base of SkullPTC58-0382 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0624 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle DesignPTC58-0173 ,Biology: Drug and Immunotherapy CombinationsPTC58-0358 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0690 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0061 ,Clinics: Lung / Sarcoma / LymphomaPTC58-0580 ,Physics: Monitoring and Modelling MotionPTC58-0162 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0550 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0430 ,Clinics: Lung / Sarcoma / LymphomaPTC58-0103 ,General: New Investigator SessionPTC58-0252 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0704 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0418 ,Clinics: Base of SkullPTC58-0572 ,Clinics: Lung / Sarcoma / LymphomaPTC58-0106 ,Physics: Beam Delivery and Nozzle DesignPTC58-0022 ,Physics: Monitoring and Modelling MotionPTC58-0279 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0447 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0622 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0644 ,Biology: Biology and Clinical InterfacePTC58-0490 ,Clinics: CNS / Skull BasePTC58-0716 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0292 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon / Proton and Photons Carbons / Proton and PhotonPTC58-0570 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0059 ,Physics: Quality Assurance and VerificationPTC58-0710 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon / Proton and Photons Carbons / Proton and PhotonPTC58-0216 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0404 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0525 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0526 ,Poster AbstractsClinics: CNSPTC58-0328 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0070 ,Clinics: Eye / Breast / Pelvis Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0135 ,Biology: BNCT Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0391 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0510 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0636 ,Physics: Treatment PlanningPTC58-0638 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0408 ,Physics: Absolute and Relative Dosimetry Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0632 ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0318 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment PlanningPTC58-0246 ,Clinics: PediatricsPTC58-0504 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0160 ,Physics: Image Guidance Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0076 ,Physics: Monitoring and Modelling MotionPTC58-0143 ,Biology: Mathematical Modelling and SimulationPTC58-0718 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0671 ,Clinics: LungPTC58-0183 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0670 ,Report ,Physics: Treatment Planning Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0422 ,Biology: Biological Differences between Carbon / Proton and Photons Carbons / Proton and PhotonPTC58-0129 ,Physics: Adaptive Therapy Poster Discussion SessionsPTC58-0705 ,Biology: Enhanced Biology in Treatment PlanningPTC58-0258 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0030 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0150 ,Biology: Biology and Clinical InterfacePTC58-0479 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0153 ,Clinics: PediatricPTC58-0087 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0152 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0155 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0033 ,General: New HorizonsPTC58-0158 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0429 ,Biology: Translational and BiomarkersPTC58-0287 ,Physics: Adaptive TherapyPTC58-0403 ,Physics: Image GuidancePTC58-0309 - Published
- 2020
13. A convolutional neural network for automated delineation and classification of metabolic tumor volume in head and neck cancer in FDG-PET/CT
- Author
-
(0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Cegła, P., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Kotzerke, J., Zschaeck, S., Hoff, J., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Cegła, P., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Kotzerke, J., Zschaeck, S., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Aim: Image derived PET parameters such as metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis, and tumor asphericity of the primary tumor have been shown to be prognostic of clinical outcome of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). Evaluation of lymph node metastases in addition to the primary tumor further increases the prognostic value of PET. Such analysis requires, however, accurate delineation and classification of all lesions which is very time-consuming when performed manually. The goal of this study is development of an automated tool for MTV delineation of primary tumor and lymph node metastases in HNC in PET/CT. Methods: Automated delineation of the HNC cancer lesions was performed with a residual 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN). 698 FDG PET/CT scans from 3 different sites and 4 public databases were used for network training (N=558) and testing (N=140). In these data, primary tumor and metastases were manually delineated and accordingly labeled by an experienced physician. This manual delineation served as the ground truth for network training. Performance of the trained network model was assessed in the test data using the Dice similarity coefficient for primary tumor, metastases, and the union of all lesions, respectively. Results: The derived U-Net model is capable of accurate delineation of malignant lesions achieving a Dice coefficient of 0.847 for indiscriminative segmentation. Treating primary tumor and lymph node metastases as distinct classes yields Dice coefficients of 0.840 and 0.714 for the respective delineations. Conclusions: In this work, we present the first CNN model for MTV delineation and classification in HNC. The developed network model allows to quickly perform satisfactory delineation of (and discrimination between) primary tumor and lymph node metastases in HNC with only minimal manual corrections possibly required. It thus is able to improve and to accelerate study data evaluation in quantitative PET and does als
- Published
- 2022
14. A convolutional neural network for automated delineation and classification of metabolic tumor volume in head and neck cancer
- Author
-
(0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Cegła, P., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Hajiyianni, M., Kotzerke, J., Zschaeck, S., Hoff, J., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Cegła, P., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Hajiyianni, M., Kotzerke, J., Zschaeck, S., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Deep Learning based approaches for automated analysis of tomographic image data are drawing ever increasing attention in Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. With the advent of the new generation of PET scanners with massively enlarged axial field of view (“total body PET”) the importance of integrating such approaches into clinical workflows will further increase. In the present study we report on our application of a convolutional neural network (CNN) for automated survival analysis in head and neck cancer (HNC): PET parameters such as metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis, and asphericity of the primary tumor are known to be prognostic of clinical outcome in HNC patients. Additionally including evaluation of lymph node metastases further increases the prognostic value of PET. However, accurate manual delineation and classification of all lesions is time consuming and incompatible with clinical routine. Our goal, therefore, was development and evaluation of an automated tool for MTV delineation/classification of primary tumor and lymph node metastases in HNC in PET. Automated delineation of the HNC cancer lesions was per- formed with a residual 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN). 698 FDG PET/CT scans from 3 different sites and 4 public databases were used for network training and testing. In these data, primary tumor and metastases were manually delineated (with assistance of semi-automatic tools) and accordingly labeled by an experienced physician. Performance of the trained network models was assessed by 5-fold cross validation using the Dice similarity coefficient for individual delineation tasks. Additionally, survival analysis using univariate Cox regression was performed. Delineation of all malignant lesions with the trained U-Net model achieves a Dice coefficient of 0.866 when not dis- criminating between primary tumor and lymph nodes. Treating primary tumor and lymph node metastases as distinct classes yields Dice coefficients of 0.835
- Published
- 2022
15. Correction to: Value of PET imaging for radiation therapy
- Author
-
Lapa, C., Nestle, U., Albert, N. L., Baues, C., Beer, A., Buck, A., Budach, V., Bütof, R., Combs, S. E., Derlin, T., Eiber, M., Fendler, W. P., Furth, C., Gani, C., Gkika, E., Grosu, A.-L., Henkenberens, C., Ilhan, H., Löck, S., Marnitz-Schulze, S., Miederer, M., Mix, M., Nicolay, N. H., Niyazi, M., Pöttgen, C., Todica, A. S., Weber, W., Wegen, S., Wiegel, T., Zamboglou, C., Zips, D., Zöphel, K., Zschaeck, S., Thorwarth, D., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Lapa, C., Nestle, U., Albert, N. L., Baues, C., Beer, A., Buck, A., Budach, V., Bütof, R., Combs, S. E., Derlin, T., Eiber, M., Fendler, W. P., Furth, C., Gani, C., Gkika, E., Grosu, A.-L., Henkenberens, C., Ilhan, H., Löck, S., Marnitz-Schulze, S., Miederer, M., Mix, M., Nicolay, N. H., Niyazi, M., Pöttgen, C., Todica, A. S., Weber, W., Wegen, S., Wiegel, T., Zamboglou, C., Zips, D., Zöphel, K., Zschaeck, S., Thorwarth, D., and (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C.
- Abstract
Correction to: Strahlenther Onkol 2021 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-021-01812-2
- Published
- 2022
16. Correlation Between Quantitative PSMA PET Parameters and Clinical Risk Factors in Non-Metastatic Primary Prostate Cancer Patients
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Andela, S. B., Amthauer, H., Furth, C., Rogasch, J. M., Beck, M., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Huang, K., Zschaeck, S., Andela, S. B., Amthauer, H., Furth, C., Rogasch, J. M., Beck, M., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., and Huang, K.
- Abstract
Background PSMA PET is frequently used for staging of prostate cancer patients. Furthermore, there is increasing interest to use PET information for personalized local treatment approaches in surgery and radiotherapy, especially for focal treatment strategies. However, it is not well established which quantitative imaging parameters show highest correlation with clinical and histological tumor aggressiveness. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of 135 consecutive patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer and PSMA PET before any treatment. Clinical risk parameters (PSA values, Gleason score and D’Amico risk group) were correlated with quantitative PET parameters maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), mean SUV (SUVmean), tumor asphericity (ASP) and PSMA tumor volume (PSMA-TV). Results Most of the investigated imaging parameters were highly correlated with each other (correlation coefficients between 0.20 and 0.95). A low to moderate, however significant, correlation of imaging parameters with PSA values (0.19 to 0.45) and with Gleason scores (0.17 to 0.31) was observed for all parameters except ASP which did not show a significant correlation with Gleason score. Receiver operating characteristics for the detection of D’Amico high-risk patients showed poor to fair sensitivity and specificity for all investigated quantitative PSMA PET parameters (Areas under the curve (AUC) between 0.63 and 0.73). Comparison of AUC between quantitative PET parameters by DeLong test showed significant superiority of SUVmax compared to SUVmean for the detection of high-risk patients. None of the investigated imaging parameters significantly outperformed SUVmax. Conclusion Our data confirm prior publications with lower number of patients that reported moderate correlations of PSMA PET parameters with clinical risk factors. With the important limitation that Gleason scores were only biopsy-derived in this study, there is no indication that the investigated additional parameters
- Published
- 2022
17. 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography of Head and Neck Cancer: Location and HPV Specific Parameters for Potential Treatment Individualization
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Weingärtner, J., Lombardo, E., Marschner, S., Hajiyianni, M., Beck, M., Zips, D., Li, Y., Lin, Q., Amthauer, H., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Hoff, J., Budach, V., Kotzerke, J., Ferentinos, K., Karagiannis, E., Kaul, D., Gregoire, V., Holzgreve, A., Albert, N. L., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0002-8029-5755) Bachmann, M., (0000-0003-4846-1271) Kopka, K., (0000-0003-1776-9556) Krause, M., Baumann, M., Kazmierska, J., Cegla, P., Cholewinski, W., Strouthos, I., Zöphel, K., Majchrzak, E., Landry, G., Belka, C., Stromberger, C., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zschaeck, S., Weingärtner, J., Lombardo, E., Marschner, S., Hajiyianni, M., Beck, M., Zips, D., Li, Y., Lin, Q., Amthauer, H., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Hoff, J., Budach, V., Kotzerke, J., Ferentinos, K., Karagiannis, E., Kaul, D., Gregoire, V., Holzgreve, A., Albert, N. L., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0002-8029-5755) Bachmann, M., (0000-0003-4846-1271) Kopka, K., (0000-0003-1776-9556) Krause, M., Baumann, M., Kazmierska, J., Cegla, P., Cholewinski, W., Strouthos, I., Zöphel, K., Majchrzak, E., Landry, G., Belka, C., Stromberger, C., and (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F.
- Abstract
Purpose 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is utilized for staging and treatment planning of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). Some older publications on the prognostic relevance showed inconclusive results, most probably due to small study sizes. This study evaluates the prognostic and potentially predictive value of FDG-PET in a large multi-center analysis. Methods Original analysis of individual FDG-PET and patient data from 16 international centers (8 institutional datasets, 8 public repositories) with 1104 patients. All patients received curative intent radiotherapy/chemoradiation (CRT) and pre-treatment FDG-PET imaging. Primary tumors were semi-automatically delineated for calculation of SUVmax, SUVmean, metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG). Cox regression analyses were performed for event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), loco-regional control (LRC) and freedom from distant metastases (FFDM). Results FDG-PET parameters were associated with patient outcome in the whole cohort regarding clinical endpoints (EFS, OS, LRC, FFDM), in uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Several previously published cut-off values were successfully validated. Subgroup analyses identified tumor- and human papillomavirus (HPV) specific parameters. In HPV positive oropharynx cancer (OPC) SUVmax was well suited to identify patients with excellent LRC for organ preservation. Patients with SUVmax of 14 or less were unlikely to develop loco-regional recurrence after definitive CRT. In contrast FDG PET parameters deliver only limited prognostic information in laryngeal cancer. Conclusion FDG-PET parameters bear considerable prognostic value in HNSCC and potential predictive value in subgroups of patients, especially regarding treatment de-intensification and organ-preservation. The potential predictive value needs further validation in appropriate control groups. Further research on advanced imaging appro
- Published
- 2022
18. Randomisierte Studie zum Vergleich von Nebenwirkungen nach Protonen- versus Photonen- Strahlentherapie bei Patienten mit fortgeschrittenem nichtkleinzelligen Bronchialkarzinom
- Author
-
(0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Zschaeck, S., Bütof, R., Czekalla, M., (0000-0003-4261-4214) Richter, C., (0000-0002-8178-3144) Stützer, K., (0000-0003-1776-9556) Krause, M., Baumann, M., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Zschaeck, S., Bütof, R., Czekalla, M., (0000-0003-4261-4214) Richter, C., (0000-0002-8178-3144) Stützer, K., (0000-0003-1776-9556) Krause, M., and Baumann, M.
- Abstract
Bronchialkarzinome sind in Deutschland die dritthäufigste Tumorerkrankung. Trotz erheblicher therapeutischer Fortschritte ist die Prognose der Lungentumoren nach wie vor ungünstig, die relative 5-Jahres- Überlebensrate nach Diagnose eines Bron- chialkarzinoms beträgt lediglich 16 % [3]. Hinsichtlich der Tumorart werden nicht- kleinzellige (NSCLC) und kleinzellige Bron- chialkarzinome unterschieden. Bei fortgeschrittenen NSCLC besteht die Standardtherapie aus einer gleichzei- tig durchgeführten Radiochemotherapie, gefolgt von einer Immuntherapie. In Metaanalysen konnte die Überlegenheit der simultanen Radiochemotherapie ge- genüber einem sequenziellen Vorgehen gezeigt werden.
- Published
- 2022
19. Prognosic value of total tumor burden measured by FDG-PET in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx: first results of a multicenter evaluation
- Author
-
Hofheinz, F., additional, Hajiyianni, M., additional, Cegła, P., additional, Ferentinos, K., additional, Thiele, F., additional, Kaźmierska, J., additional, Furth, C., additional, Kotzerke, J., additional, van den Hoff, J., additional, and Zschaeck, S., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
20. A convolutional neural network for automated delineation and classification of metabolic tumor volume in head and neck cancer in FDG-PET/CT
- Author
-
Nikulin, P., additional, Hofheinz, F., additional, Maus, J., additional, Cegła, P., additional, Furth, C., additional, Kaźmierska, J., additional, Rogasch, J., additional, Kotzerke, J., additional, Zschaeck, S., additional, and van den Hoff, J., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
21. A convolutional neural network for automated delineation and classification of metabolic tumor volume in head and neck cancer
- Author
-
Nikulin, P., Hofheinz, F., Maus, J., Cegła, P., Furth, C., Kaźmierska, J., Rogasch, J., Hajiyianni, M., Kotzerke, J., Zschaeck, S., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Deep Learning based approaches for automated analysis of tomographic image data are drawing ever increasing attention in Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. With the advent of the new generation of PET scanners with massively enlarged axial field of view (“total body PET”) the importance of integrating such approaches into clinical workflows will further increase. In the present study we report on our application of a convolutional neural network (CNN) for automated survival analysis in head and neck cancer (HNC): PET parameters such as metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis, and asphericity of the primary tumor are known to be prognostic of clinical outcome in HNC patients. Additionally including evaluation of lymph node metastases further increases the prognostic value of PET. However, accurate manual delineation and classification of all lesions is time consuming and incompatible with clinical routine. Our goal, therefore, was development and evaluation of an automated tool for MTV delineation/classification of primary tumor and lymph node metastases in HNC in PET. Automated delineation of the HNC cancer lesions was per- formed with a residual 3D U-Net convolutional neural network (CNN). 698 FDG PET/CT scans from 3 different sites and 4 public databases were used for network training and testing. In these data, primary tumor and metastases were manually delineated (with assistance of semi-automatic tools) and accordingly labeled by an experienced physician. Performance of the trained network models was assessed by 5-fold cross validation using the Dice similarity coefficient for individual delineation tasks. Additionally, survival analysis using univariate Cox regression was performed. Delineation of all malignant lesions with the trained U-Net model achieves a Dice coefficient of 0.866 when not dis- criminating between primary tumor and lymph nodes. Treating primary tumor and lymph node metastases as distinct classes yields Dice coefficients of 0.835 and 0.757 for the respective delin- eations. The univariate Cox analysis reveals that, both, manually as well as automatically derived total MTVs are highly prognostic with similar hazard ratios (HR) with respect to overall survival (HR=1.8; P
- Published
- 2022
22. Randomisierte Studie zum Vergleich von Nebenwirkungen nach Protonen- versus Photonen- Strahlentherapie bei Patienten mit fortgeschrittenem nichtkleinzelligen Bronchialkarzinom
- Author
-
Troost, E. G. C., Zschaeck, S., Bütof, R., Czekalla, M., Richter, C., Stützer, K., Krause, M., and Baumann, M.
- Abstract
Bronchialkarzinome sind in Deutschland die dritthäufigste Tumorerkrankung. Trotz erheblicher therapeutischer Fortschritte ist die Prognose der Lungentumoren nach wie vor ungünstig, die relative 5-Jahres- Überlebensrate nach Diagnose eines Bron- chialkarzinoms beträgt lediglich 16 % [3]. Hinsichtlich der Tumorart werden nicht- kleinzellige (NSCLC) und kleinzellige Bron- chialkarzinome unterschieden. Bei fortgeschrittenen NSCLC besteht die Standardtherapie aus einer gleichzei- tig durchgeführten Radiochemotherapie, gefolgt von einer Immuntherapie. In Metaanalysen konnte die Überlegenheit der simultanen Radiochemotherapie ge- genüber einem sequenziellen Vorgehen gezeigt werden.
- Published
- 2022
23. PSMA-PET- and mpMRI-guided focal radiation dose escalation in primary prostate cancer patients – a planned safety analysis of a two-armed prospective phase II trial (HypoFocal)
- Author
-
Spohn, S.K.B., primary, Gainey, M., additional, Kamps, M., additional, Gratzke, C., additional, Ruf, J., additional, Benndorf, M., additional, Zschaeck, S., additional, Ghadjar, P., additional, Baltas, D., additional, Grosu, A.L., additional, and Zambolgou, C., additional
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
24. High precision position control using an adaptive friction compensation approach
- Author
-
Amthor, A., Zschaeck, S., and Ament, C.
- Subjects
Control systems -- Analysis ,Friction -- Models - Published
- 2010
25. A convolutional neural network for fully automated blood SUV determination to facilitate SUR computation in oncological FDG-PET
- Author
-
Nikulin, P., Hofheinz, F., Maus, J., Li, Y., Bütof, R., Lange, C., Furth, C., Zschaeck, S., Kreissl, M. C., Kotzerke, J., and Hoff, J.
- Subjects
SUR ,standardized uptake ratio ,standardized uptake value ,convolutional neural network ,FDG-PET ,SUV - Abstract
Purpose: The standardized uptake value (SUV) is widely used for quantitative evaluation in oncological FDG-PET but has well-known shortcomings as a measure of the tumor’s glucose consumption. The standard uptake ratio (SUR) of tumor SUV and arterial blood SUV (BSUV) possesses an increased prognostic value but requires image-based BSUV determination, typically in the aortic lumen. However, accurate manual ROI delineation requires care and imposes an additional workload which makes the SUR approach less attractive for clinical routine. The goal of the present work was the development of a fully automated method for BSUV determination in whole-body PET/CT. Methods: Automatic delineation of the aortic lumen was performed with a convolutional neural network (CNN), using the U-Net architecture. 946 FDG PET/CT scans from several sites were used for network training (N = 366) and testing (N = 580). For all scans, the aortic lumen was manually delineated, avoiding areas affected by motion-induced attenuation artifacts or potential spill-over from adjacent FDG-avid regions. Performance of the network was assessed using the fractional deviations of automatically and manually derived BSUVs in the test data. Results: The trained U-Net yields BSUVs in close agreement with those obtained from manual delineation. Comparison of manually and automatically derived BSUVs shows excellent concordance: the mean relative BSUV difference was (mean ± SD) = (-0.5± 2.2)% with a 95% confidence interval of [−5.1, 3.8]% and a total range of [-10.0, 12.0]%. For four test cases the derived ROIs were unusable (
- Published
- 2021
26. Generation of biological hypotheses by functional imaging links tumor hypoxia to radiation induced tissue inflammation/ glucose uptake in head and neck cancer
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Zöphel, K., Seidlitz, A., Zips, D., Kotzerke, J., Baumann, M., Troost, E. G. C., Löck, S., and Krause, M.
- Subjects
FMISO PET ,inflammation ,hypoxia ,FDG PET ,head and neck cancer ,radiotherapy - Abstract
Background and purpose: Positron emission tomography (PET) is a functional imaging modality which is able to deliver tracer specific biological information, e.g. about glucose uptake, inflammation or hypoxia of tumors. We performed a proof-of-principle study that used different tracers and expanded the analytical scope to non-tumor structures to evaluate tumor-host interactions. Materials and Methods: Based on a previously reported prospective imaging study on 50 patients treated with curative intent chemoradiation (CRT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, PET-based hypoxia and normal tissue inflammation measured by repeat 18F-fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) PET and 18F-fluorodesoxyglucose (FDG) PET, respectively, were correlated using the Spearman correlation coefficient R. PET parameters determined before and during CRT (week 1, 2 and 5), were associated with local tumor control and overall survival. Results: Tumor hypoxia at all measured times showed an inverse correlation with mid-treatment FDG-uptake of non-tumor affected oral (sub-)mucosa with R values between -0.35 and -0.6 (all p
- Published
- 2021
27. Meta-Analyse individueller Hypoxie Positronenemissionstomographie Scans von vier prospektiven Studien an Kopf-Hals Patienten
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Loeck, S., Hofheinz, F., Zips, D., Mortensen, Sakso L., Zophel, K., Troost, E., Boeke, S., Sakso, M., Moennich, D., Seidlitz, A., Johansen, J., Skripcak, T., Gregoire, V, Overgaard, J., Baumann, M., and Krause, M.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
28. Radiofrequency applicator concepts for thermal magnetic resonance of brain tumors at 297 MHz (7.0 Tesla)
- Author
-
Oberacker, E., Kuehne, A., Oezerdem, C., Nadobny, J., Weihrauch, M., Beck, M., Zschaeck, S., Diesch, C., Eigentler, T.W., Waiczies, H., Ghadjar, P., Wust, P., Winter, L., and Niendorf, T.
- Subjects
Cardiovascular and Metabolic Diseases ,Technology Platforms - Abstract
PURPOSE: Thermal intervention is a potent sensitizer of cells to chemo- and radiotherapy in cancer treatment. Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a potential clinical target, given the cancer's aggressive nature and resistance to current treatment options. The annular phased array (APA) technique employing electromagnetic waves in the radiofrequency (RF) range allows for localized temperature increase in deep seated target volumes (TVs). Reports on clinical applications of the APA technique in the brain are still missing. Ultrahigh field magnetic resonance (MR) employs higher frequencies than conventional MR and has potential to provide focal temperature manipulation, high resolution imaging and noninvasive temperature monitoring using an integrated RF applicator (ThermalMR). This work examines the applicability of RF applicator concepts for ThermalMR of brain tumors at 297 MHz (7.0 Tesla). METHODS: Electromagnetic field (EMF) simulations are performed for clinically realistic data based on GBM patients. Two algorithms are used for specific RF energy absorption rate based thermal intervention planning for small and large TVs in the brain, aiming at maximum RF power deposition or RF power uniformity in the TV for 10 RF applicator designs. RESULTS: For both TVs , the power optimization outperformed the uniformity optimization. The best results for the small TV are obtained for the 16 element interleaved RF applicator using an elliptical antenna arrangement with water bolus. The two row elliptical RF applicator yielded the best result for the large TV. DISCUSSION: This work investigates the capacity of ThermalMR to achieve targeted thermal interventions in model systems resembling human brain tissue and brain tumors.
- Published
- 2020
29. Value of PET imaging for radiation therapy
- Author
-
Lapa, C., Nestle, U., Albert, N., Baues, C., Beer, A., Buck, A., Budach, V., Bütof, R., Combs, S., Derlin, T., Eiber, M., Fendler, W., Furth, C., Gani, C., Gkika, E., Grosu, A., Henkenberens, C., Ilhan, H., Löck, S., Marnitz-Schulze, S., Miederer, M., Mix, M., Nicolay, N., Niyazi, M., Pöttgen, C., Rödel, C., Schatka, I., Schwarzenboeck, S., Todica, A., Weber, W., Wegen, S., Wiegel, T., Zamboglou, C., Zips, D., Zöphel, K., Zschaeck, S., Thorwarth, D., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Lapa, C., Nestle, U., Albert, N., Baues, C., Beer, A., Buck, A., Budach, V., Bütof, R., Combs, S., Derlin, T., Eiber, M., Fendler, W., Furth, C., Gani, C., Gkika, E., Grosu, A., Henkenberens, C., Ilhan, H., Löck, S., Marnitz-Schulze, S., Miederer, M., Mix, M., Nicolay, N., Niyazi, M., Pöttgen, C., Rödel, C., Schatka, I., Schwarzenboeck, S., Todica, A., Weber, W., Wegen, S., Wiegel, T., Zamboglou, C., Zips, D., Zöphel, K., Zschaeck, S., Thorwarth, D., and (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C.
- Abstract
This comprehensive review written by experts in their field gives an overview on the current status of incorporating positron emission tomography (PET) into radiation treatment planning. Moreover, it highlights ongoing studies for treatment individualisation and per-treatment tumour response monitoring for various primary tumours. Novel tracers and image analysis methods are discussed. The authors believe this contribution to be of crucial value for experts in the field as well as for policy makers deciding on the reimbursement of this powerful imaging modality.
- Published
- 2021
30. Dose-escalated simultaneously integrated boost photon or proton therapy in pancreatic cancer in an in silico study: gastrointestinal organs remain critical
- Author
-
Stefanowicz, S., Wlodarczyk, W., Frosch, S., Zschaeck, S., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Stefanowicz, S., Wlodarczyk, W., Frosch, S., Zschaeck, S., and (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C.
- Abstract
Purpose To compare the dosimetric results of an in silico study among intensity-modulated photon (IMRT) and robust multi-field optimized intensity-modulated proton (rMFO-IMPT) treatment techniques using a dose-escalated simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) approach in locally recurrent or locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Material and Methods For each of 15 locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients, a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), a Tomotherapy (TOMO), and an rMFO-IMPT treatment plan was optimized on free-breathing treatment planning computed tomography (CT) images. For the photon treatment plans, doses of 66Gy and 51Gy, both as SIB in 30 fractions, were prescribed to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and to the planning target volume (PTV), respectively. For the proton plans, a dose prescription of 66Gy(RBE) to the GTV and of 51Gy(RBE) to the clinical target volume (CTV) was planned. For each SIB-treatment plan, doses to the targets and OARs were evaluated and statistically compared. Results All treatment techniques reached the prescribed doses to the GTV and CTV or PTV. The stomach and the bowel, of the latter in particular the duodenum and the small bowel, were found to be frequently exposed to doses exceeding 50Gy, irrespective of the treatment technique. For doses below 50Gy, the IMPT technique was statistically significant superior to both IMRT techniques regarding decreasing dose to the OARs, e.g. volume of the bowel receiving 15Gy (V15Gy) was reduced for rMFO compared to VMAT (p=0.003) and TOMO (p<0.001). Conclusion With all photon and proton techniques investigated, the radiation dose to gastrointestinal OARs remained critical when treating patients with unresectable locally advanced or locally recurrent pancreatic cancer using a dose-escalated SIB approach.
- Published
- 2021
31. A convolutional neural network for fully automated blood SUV determination to facilitate SUR computation in oncological FDG-PET
- Author
-
(0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Li, Y., Bütof, R., Lange, C., Furth, C., Zschaeck, S., Kreissl, M. C., Kotzerke, J., (0000-0003-4039-4780) Hoff, J., (0000-0002-4568-4018) Nikulin, P., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., (0000-0002-7195-9927) Maus, J., Li, Y., Bütof, R., Lange, C., Furth, C., Zschaeck, S., Kreissl, M. C., Kotzerke, J., and (0000-0003-4039-4780) Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Purpose: The standardized uptake value (SUV) is widely used for quantitative evaluation in oncological FDG-PET but has well-known shortcomings as a measure of the tumor’s glucose consumption. The standard uptake ratio (SUR) of tumor SUV and arterial blood SUV (BSUV) possesses an increased prognostic value but requires image-based BSUV determination, typically in the aortic lumen. However, accurate manual ROI delineation requires care and imposes an additional workload which makes the SUR approach less attractive for clinical routine. The goal of the present work was the development of a fully automated method for BSUV determination in whole-body PET/CT. Methods: Automatic delineation of the aortic lumen was performed with a convolutional neural network (CNN), using the U-Net architecture. 946 FDG PET/CT scans from several sites were used for network training (N = 366) and testing (N = 580). For all scans, the aortic lumen was manually delineated, avoiding areas affected by motion-induced attenuation artifacts or potential spill-over from adjacent FDG-avid regions. Performance of the network was assessed using the fractional deviations of automatically and manually derived BSUVs in the test data. Results: The trained U-Net yields BSUVs in close agreement with those obtained from manual delineation. Comparison of manually and automatically derived BSUVs shows excellent concordance: the mean relative BSUV difference was (mean ± SD) = (-0.5± 2.2)% with a 95% confidence interval of [−5.1, 3.8]% and a total range of [-10.0, 12.0]%. For four test cases the derived ROIs were unusable (<1 ml). Conclusion: CNNs are capable of performing robust automatic image-based BSUV determination. Integrating automatic BSUV derivation into PET data processing workflows will significantly facilitate SUR computation without increasing the workload in the clinical setting.
- Published
- 2021
32. Whole-lesion SUVmax including lymph node metastases for the prediction of distant metastases from head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: first results of a multicenter evaluation
- Author
-
Hajiyianni, M, additional, Zschaeck, S, additional, van den Hoff, J, additional, and Hofheinz, F, additional
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
33. Simultaneous Integrated Boost Or Sequential Boost (Chemo)Radiation For Locally Advanced Head And Neck Cancer: The Same Is The Same?
- Author
-
Stromberger, C., primary, Stsefanenka, A., additional, Kalinauskaite, G., additional, Beck, M., additional, Coordes, A., additional, Zschaeck, S., additional, Piwonski, I., additional, Beck-Broichsitter, B., additional, Kofla, G., additional, and Budach, V., additional
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
34. PO-1063: Do we need a PTV around the boost in simultaneously integrated boost approaches of abdominal tumors?
- Author
-
Stefanowicz, S., primary, Zschaeck, S., additional, and Troost, E.G.C., additional
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
35. Asphericity as a measure of spatial heterogeneity predicts therapy outcome in FDG-PET of patients with esophageal carcinoma
- Author
-
Hofheinz, F, additional, Li, Y, additional, van den Hoff, J, additional, and Zschaeck, S, additional
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
36. Prognostic value of baseline [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography parameters MTV, TLG and asphericity in an international multicenter cohort of nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Li, Y., Lin, Q., Beck, M., Amthauer, H., Bauersachs, L., Hajiyianni, M., Rogasch, J., Ehrhardt, V. H., Kalinauskaite, G., Weingärtner, J., Hartmann, V., (0000-0003-4039-4780) Hoff, J., Budach, V., Stromberger, C., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zschaeck, S., Li, Y., Lin, Q., Beck, M., Amthauer, H., Bauersachs, L., Hajiyianni, M., Rogasch, J., Ehrhardt, V. H., Kalinauskaite, G., Weingärtner, J., Hartmann, V., (0000-0003-4039-4780) Hoff, J., Budach, V., Stromberger, C., and (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F.
- Abstract
Purpose [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) parameters have shown prognostic value in nasopharyngeal carcinomas (NPC), mostly in monocenter studies. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic impact of standard and novel PET parameters in a multicenter cohort of patients. Methods The established PET parameters metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG) and maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) as well as the novel parameter tumor asphericity (ASP) were evaluated in a retrospective multicenter cohort of 114 NPC patients with FDG-PET staging, treated with (chemo)radiation at 8 international institutions. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis with respect to overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), distant metastases-free survival (FFDM), and locoregional control (LRC) was performed for clinical and PET parameters. Results When analyzing metric PET parameters, ASP showed a significant association with EFS (p = 0.035) and a trend for OS (p = 0.058). MTV was significantly associated with EFS (p = 0.026), OS (p = 0.008) and LRC (p = 0.012) and TLG with LRC (p = 0.019). TLG and MTV showed a very high correlation (Spearman’s rho = 0.95), therefore TLG was subesequently not further analysed. Optimal cutoff values for defining high and low risk groups were determined by maximization of the p-value in univariate Cox regression considering all possible cutoff values. Generation of stable cutoff values was feasible for MTV (p<0.001), ASP (p = 0.023) and combination of both (MTV+ASP = occurrence of one or both risk factors, p<0.001) for OS and for MTV regarding the endpoints OS (p<0.001) and LRC (p<0.001). In multivariable Cox (age >55 years + one binarized PET parameter), MTV >11.1ml (hazard ratio (HR): 3.57, p<0.001) and ASP > 14.4% (HR: 3.2, p = 0.031) remained prognostic for OS. MTV additionally remained prognostic for LRC (HR: 4.86 p<0.001) and EFS (HR: 2.51 p = 0.004). Bootstrappi
- Published
- 2020
37. Combined tumor plus nontumor interim FDG‐PET parameters are prognostic for response to chemoradiation in squamous cell esophageal cancer
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Li, Y., Bütof, R., Lili, C., Hua, W., Troost, E., Beck, M., Amthauer, H., Kaul, D., Kotzerke, J., Baur, A., Ghadjar, P., Baumann, M., Krause, M., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zschaeck, S., Li, Y., Bütof, R., Lili, C., Hua, W., Troost, E., Beck, M., Amthauer, H., Kaul, D., Kotzerke, J., Baur, A., Ghadjar, P., Baumann, M., Krause, M., and (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F.
- Abstract
We have investigated the prognostic value of two novel interim 18F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG‐PET) parameters in patients undergoing chemoradiation (CRT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): one tumor parameter (maximal standardized uptake ratio rSUR) and one normal tissue parameter (change of FDG uptake within irradiated nontumor‐affected esophagus ∆ SUVNTO). PET data of 134 European and Chinese patients were analyzed. Parameter establishment was based on 36 patients undergoing preoperative CRT plus surgery, validation was performed in 98 patients receiving definitive CRT. Patients received PET imaging prior and during fourth week of CRT. Clinical parameters, baseline PET parameters, and interim PET parameters (rSUR and ∆ SUVNTO) were analyzed and compared to event‐free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), loco‐regional control (LRC) and freedom from distant metastases (FFDM). Combining rSUR and ∆ SUVNTO revealed a strong prognostic impact on EFS, OS, LRC and FFDM in patients undergoing preoperative CRT. In the definitive CRT cohort, univariate analysis with respect to EFS revealed several staging plus both previously established interim PET parameters as significant prognostic factors. Multivariate analyses revealed only rSUR and ∆ SUVNTO as independent prognostic factors (p = 0.003, p = 0.008). Combination of these parameters with the cutoff established in preoperative CRT revealed excellent discrimination of patients with a long or short EFS (73% vs . 17% at 2 years, respectively) and significantly discriminated all other endpoints (OS, p < 0.001; LRC, p < 0.001; FFDM, p = 0.02), even in subgroups. Combined use of interim FDG‐PET derived parameters ∆ SUVNTO and rSUR seems to have predictive potential, allowing to select responders for definitive CRT and omission of surgery.
- Published
- 2020
38. Individual patient data meta-analysis of FMISO and FAZA hypoxia PET scans from head and neck cancer patients undergoing definitive radio-chemotherapy
- Author
-
Zschaeck, S., Löck, S., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zips, D., Mortensen, L., Zöphel, K., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Boeke, D., Saksoe, M., Mönnich, D., Seidlitz, A., Johansen, J., Skripcak, T., Gregoire, V., Overgaard, J., Baumann, M., (0000-0003-1776-9556) Krause, M., Zschaeck, S., Löck, S., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Zips, D., Mortensen, L., Zöphel, K., (0000-0001-9550-9050) Troost, E. G. C., Boeke, D., Saksoe, M., Mönnich, D., Seidlitz, A., Johansen, J., Skripcak, T., Gregoire, V., Overgaard, J., Baumann, M., and (0000-0003-1776-9556) Krause, M.
- Abstract
Background and purpose: Tumor hypoxia plays an important role in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). Various positron emission tomography (PET) tracers promise non-invasive assessment of tumor hypoxia. So far, the applicability of hypoxia PET is hampered by monocentric imaging trials with few patients. Materials and methods: Multicenter individual patient data based meta-analysis of the original PET data from four prospective imaging trials was performed. All patients had localized disease and were treated with curatively intended radio(-chemo)therapy. Hypoxia PET imaging was performed with 18F-Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO, 102 patients) or 18F-Fluoroazomycin-arabinoside (FAZA, 51 patients). Impact of hypoxia PET parameters on loco-regional control (LRC) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed by uni- and multivariable Cox regression. Results: Baseline characteristics between participating centers differed significantly, especially regarding T stage (p<0.001), tumor volume (p<0.001) and p16 status (p=0.009). The commonly used hypoxia parameters, maximal tumor-to-muscle ratio (TMRmax) and hypoxic volume with 1.6 threshold (HV1.6), showed a strong association with LRC (p=0.001) and OS (p<0.001). These findings were irrespective of the radiotracer and the same cut-off values could be applied for FMISO and FAZA (TMRmax>2.0 or HV1.6>1.5 ml). The effect size of TMRmax was similar for subgroups of patients defined by radiotracer, p16 status and FDG-PET parameters for LRC and OS, respectively. Conclusion: PET measured hypoxia is robust and has a strong impact on LRC and OS in HNSCC. The most commonly investigated tracers FMISO and FAZA can probably be used equivalently in multicenter trials. Optimal strategies to improve the dismal outcome of hypoxic tumors remain elusive.
- Published
- 2020
39. PET measured hypoxia and MRI parameters in re-irradiated head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: findings of a prospective pilot study
- Author
-
Rogasch, J., Beck, M., Stromberger, C., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Ghadjar, P., Wust, W., Budach, V., Amthauer, H., Tinhofer, I., Furth, C., Walter-Rittel, T., Zschaeck, S., Rogasch, J., Beck, M., Stromberger, C., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Ghadjar, P., Wust, W., Budach, V., Amthauer, H., Tinhofer, I., Furth, C., Walter-Rittel, T., and Zschaeck, S.
- Abstract
Background: Tumor hypoxia measured by dedicated tracers like [18F]fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) is a well-established prognostic factor in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) treated with definitive chemoradiation (CRT). However, prevalence and characteristics of positron emission tomography (PET) measured hypoxia in patients with relapse after previous irradiation is missing. Here we report imaging findings of a prospective pilot study in HNSCC patients treated with re-irradiation. Methods: In 8 patients with recurrent HNSCC, diagnosed at a median of 18 months after initial radiotherapy/CRT, [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET/CT (n=8) and FMISO-PET/MRI (n=7) or FMISO-PET/CT (n=1) were performed. Static FMISO-PET was performed after 180 min. MRI sequences in PET/MRI included diffusion-weighted imaging with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and contrast enhanced T1w imaging (StarVIBE). Lesions (primary tumor recurrence, 4; cervical lymph node, 1; both, 3) were delineated on FDG-PET and FMISO-PET data using a background-adapted threshold-based method. SUVmax and SUVmean in FDG- and FMISO-PET were derived, as well as maximum tumor-to-muscle ratio (TMRmax) and hypoxic volume with 1.6-fold muscle SUVmean (HV1.6) in FMISO-PET. Intensity of lesional contrast enhancement was rated relative to contralateral normal tissue. Average ADC values were derived from a 2D region of interest in the tumor. Results: In FMISO-PET, median TMRmax was 1.7 (range: 1.1-1.8). Median HV1.6 was 0.05 ml (range: 0-7.3 ml). Only in 2/8 patients, HV1.6 was ≥1.0 ml. In FDG-PET, median SUVmax was 9.3 (range: 5.0-20.1). On contrast enhanced imaging four lesions showed decreased and four lesions increased contrast enhancement compared to non-pathologic reference tissue. Median average ADC was 1,060 ×106 mm2/s (range: 840-1,400 ×106 mm2/s). Conclusions: This pilot study implies that hypoxia detectable by FMISO-PET may not be as prevalent as expected among loco-regional recurrent HNSCC. A
- Published
- 2020
40. A FDG-PET radiomics signature detects esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who do not benefit from chemoradiation
- Author
-
Li, Y., Beck, M., Päßler, T., Lili, C., Wu, H., Ha, D., Amthauer, H., Biebl, M., Thuss-Patience, P., Berger, J., Stromberger, C., Tinhofer, I., Kruppa, J., Budach, V., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Lin, Q., Zschaeck, S., Li, Y., Beck, M., Päßler, T., Lili, C., Wu, H., Ha, D., Amthauer, H., Biebl, M., Thuss-Patience, P., Berger, J., Stromberger, C., Tinhofer, I., Kruppa, J., Budach, V., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Lin, Q., and Zschaeck, S.
- Abstract
Detection of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) who do not benefit from standard chemoradiation (CRT) is an important medical need. Radiomics using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is a promising approach. In this retrospective study of 184 patients with locally advanced ESCC. 152 patients from one center were grouped into a training cohort (n = 100) and an internal validation cohort (n = 52). External validation was performed with 32 patients treated at a second center. Primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and local control (LC). FDG-PET radiomics features were selected by Lasso-Cox regression analyses and a separate radiomics signature was calculated for each endpoint. In the training cohort radiomics signatures containing up to four PET derived features were able to identify non-responders in regard of all endpoints (DFS p < 0.001, LC p = 0.003, OS p = 0.001). After successful internal validation of the cutoff values generated by the training cohort for DFS (p = 0.025) and OS (p = 0.002), external validation using these cutoffs was successful for DFS (p = 0.002) but not for the other investigated endpoints. These results suggest that pre-treatment FDG-PET features may be useful to detect patients who do not respond to CRT and could benefit from alternative treatment.
- Published
- 2020
41. Prognostic value of SUR in patients with trimodality treatment of locally advanced esophageal carcinoma
- Author
-
Bütof, R., Hofheinz, F., Zöphel, K., Schmollack, J., Jentsch, C., Zschaeck, S., Kotzerke, J., Hoff, J., and Michael Baumann, M.
- Subjects
MTV ,SUR ,prognostic value ,esophageal cancer ,FDG-PET ,SUV - Abstract
The prognosis of patients with esophageal carcinoma remains dismal despite ongoing efforts to improve treatment options. For locally advanced tumors, several randomized trials have shown the benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery compared to surgery alone. The aim of this exploratory study was to evaluate the prognostic value of different baseline positron emission tomography (PET) parameters and their potentially additional prognostic impact at the end of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Furthermore, the standard uptake ratio (SUR) as a new parameter for quantification of tumor metabolism was compared to the conventional PET parameters metabolic active volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), and standardized uptake value (SUV) taking into account known basic parameters. Methods: 18F-FDG-PET/CT was performed in 76 consecutive patients ((60±10) years, 71 males) with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer before and during the last week of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. MTV of the primary tumor was delineated with an adaptive threshold method. The blood SUV was determined by manually delineating the aorta in the low dose CT. SUR values were computed as scan time corrected ratio of tumor SUVmax and mean blood SUV. Univariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis with respect to locoregional control (LRC), freedom from distant metastases (FFDM), and overall survival (OS) was performed. Additionally, independence of PET parameters from standard clinical factors was analyzed with multivariate Cox regression. Results: In multivariate analysis two parameters showed a significant correlation with all endpoints: restaging MTV and restaging SUR. Furthermore, restaging TLG was prognostic for LCR and FFDM. For all endpoints the largest effect size was found for restaging SUR. The only basic factors remaining significant in multivariate analyses were histology for OS and FFDM and age for LRC. Conclusion: PET provides independent prognostic information for OS, LRC, and FFDM in addition to standard clinical parameters in this patient cohort. Our results suggest that the prognostic value of tracer uptake can be improved when characterized by SUR rather than by SUV. Overall, our investigation revealed a higher prognostic value of restaging parameters compared to baseline PET; therapy-adjustments would still be possible at this point of time. Further investigations are required to confirm these hypothesis-generating results.
- Published
- 2019
42. Interobserver variability of image–derived arterial blood SUV in FDG–PET
- Author
-
Hofheinz, F., Maus, J., Zschaeck, S., Rogasch, J., Schramm, G., Oehme, L., Apostolova, I., Kotzerke, J., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Ziel/Aim: The standardized uptake value (SUV) is essentially the only means for quantitative evaluation of static FDG PET. However, the SUV approach has well-known shortcomings which adversely affect the reliability of the SUV as a surrogate of the metabolic rate of glucose consumption. The standard uptake ratio (SUR), i.e. the uptake time corrected ratio of tumor SUV to image-derived arterial blood SUV, has been shown to overcome most of these shortcomings and to increase the prognostic value in comparison to SUV. However, it is unclear, to what extent the SUR approach is vulnerable to observer variability of the required blood SUV (BSUV) determination. The goal of the present work was the investigation of the interobserver variability of image-derived BSUV. Methodik/Methods: FDG PET/CT scans from 83 patients were included. BSUV was determined by 8 individuals, each applying a dedicated delineation tool for the BSUV determination in the aorta. Altogether 5 different delineation tools were used. With each used tool, delineation was performed for the whole patient group, resulting in 12 distinct observations per patient. Interobserver variability of BSUV determination was assessed using the fractional deviations of the individual observers from the observer-average for the considered patient. Ergebnisse/Results: Interobserver variability in the pooled data amounts to SD=2.8% and is much smaller than the intersubject variability of BSUV (SD=16%). Averaged over the whole patient group, deviations of individual observers from the observer average are very small and fall in the range [-0.96,1.05]%. However, interobserver variability partly differs distinctly for different patients (range: [0.7,7.4]%). Schlussfolgerungen/Conclusions: The present investigation proofs unambiguously that the image-based manual determination of BSUV in the aorta provides sufficient accuracy and reproducibility for the purposes of the SUR approach. This finding is in line with the already demonstrated superiority of SUR in comparison to SUV in first clinical studies.
- Published
- 2019
43. CT imaging during treatment improves radiomic models for patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer
- Author
-
Leger, S., Zwanenburg, A., Pilz, K., Zschaeck, S., Zöphel, K., Kotzerke, J., Schreiber, A., Zips, D., Krause, M., Baumann, M., Troost, E., Richter, C., and Löck, S.
- Subjects
Radiomic risk modelling ,Imaging during treatment ,Patient stratification ,Computed tomography - Abstract
Background and purpose: The development of radiomic risk models to predict clinical outcome is usually based on pre-treatment imaging, such as computed tomography (CT) scans used for radiation treatment planning. Imaging data acquired during the course of treatment may improve their prognostic performance. We compared the performance of radiomic risk models based on the pre-treatment CT and CT scans acquired in the second week of therapy. Material and methods: Treatment planning and second week CT scans of 78 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with primary radiochemotherapy were collected. 1538 image features were extracted from each image. Prognostic models for loco-regional tumour control (LRC) and overall survival (OS) were built using 6 feature selection methods and 6 machine learning algorithms. Prognostic performance was assessed using the concordance index (C-Index). Furthermore, patients were stratified into risk groups and differences in LRC and OS were evaluated by log-rank tests. Results: The performance of radiomic risk model in predicting LRC was improved using the second week CT scans (C-Index: 0.79), in comparison to the pre-treatment CT scans (C-Index: 0.65). This was confirmed by Kaplan–Meier analyses, in which risk stratification based on the second week CT could be improved for LRC (p = 0.002) compared to pre-treatment CT (p = 0.063). Conclusion: Incorporation of imaging during treatment may be a promising way to improve radiomic risk models for clinical treatment adaption, i.e., to select patients that may benefit from dose modification.
- Published
- 2019
44. Robust optimierte intensitäts-modulierte Protonentherapie mit simultan integriertem Boost reduziert die periphere Dosis im Normalgewebe bei Patienten mit nicht-metastasiertem Pankreaskarzinom
- Author
-
Stefanowicz, S., Zschaeck, S., and Troost, E. G. C.
- Abstract
Fragestellung Für Patienten mit einem grenzwertig resektablen oder irresektablen, lokal fortgeschrittenen, nicht metastasierten Pankreaskarzinom (LAPC) sind die neoadjuvante oder primäre Radiochemotherapie neben der neoadjuvanten/primären Chemotherapie Behandlungsoptionen. Aufgrund der angrenzenden, strahlensensitiven Risikoorgane (OAR) und der dadurch limitierten Dosisverschreibung ist die durch die Strahlentherapie erzielte lokale Kontrolle derzeit unzureichend. Eine simultane Bestrahlung des elektiven Volumens mit der aktuellen Standarddosis und eines simultan integrierten, dosisintensivierten Boosts (SIB) auf das Tumorvolumen (GTV) könnte den Therapieerfolg zukünftig verbessern. In dieser in-silico Bestrahlungsplanungsstudie wurde unter Anwendung eines dosiseskalierten SIBs die robust optimierte intensitäts-modulierte Protonentherapie (IMPT) mit der photonen-basierten, volumenmodulierte Strahlentherapie (VMAT) dosimetrisch verglichen. Methodik Für fünf Patienten mit einem LAPC wurden je ein robust multi-field optimierter IMPT und ein VMAT Bestrahlungsplan auf frei-geatmeten Bestrahlungsplanungs-CTs in der Bestrahlungsplanungssoftware RayStation generiert. Für die VMAT Pläne wurde eine Dosisabdeckung von mindestens 95% des GTVs (Boost) bzw. des elektiven Planungszielvolumens (PTV=CTV+5mm) mit im Minimum 95% der verschriebene Dosis von 66Gy bzw. 51Gy vorgesehen (D95%≥95%). Eine Dosis von 107% in 2% des Volumens sollte nicht überschritten werden (D2%≤107%). Aufgrund der robusten Optimierung mit Unsicherheitsparametern von 5mm (Positionierung) und 3.5% (Reichweite) wurden bei der IMPT die entsprechenden Dosen (RBE) auf das GTV bzw. CTV verschrieben. Die Dosisgrenzwerte der OARs richteten sich nach lokalen und QUANTEC Vorgaben. Jeder Bestrahlungsplan wurde dosimetrisch ausgewertet, und die Ergebnisse miteinander verglichen. Ergebnis Alle Bestrahlungspläne erreichten die verschriebenen Dosen. Aufgrund der an das Zielvolumen angrenzenden oder überlappende OARs Leber, Darm und Magen wurde bei diesen Organen in allen Bestrahlungsplänen mindestens ein Dosisgrenzwert überschritten. Während die VMAT-Technik das Magen-Volumen, welches eine Dosis von 50Gy erlangte (V50Gy), reduzierte (Median V50Gy: VMAT 1.2cm3 vs. IMPT 4.5cm3), zeigte die IMPT eine geringere Dosis in den übrigen Organen, z.B. Leber (Median V30Gy: VMAT 93.6cm3 vs. IMPT 39.2cm3). Darüber hinaus wurde durch die IMPT die periphere Dosis außerhalb des CTVs (V20Gy) im umliegenden Normalgewebe erheblich verringert (Median V20Gy: VMAT 1483.4cm3 vs. IMPT 756.2cm3). Schlussfolgerung Unter Vernachlässigung der inter- und intrafraktionellen Organbewegung ist die Dosiseskalation mit SIB sowohl für robust optimierte IMPT- als auch VMAT-Technik anwendbar. Im Vergleich zur VMAT reduziert die IMPT die Dosis in den umliegenden Geweben. Bedingt durch die robuste Optimierung, erhöht die IMPT allerdings die V50Gy für mit dem Zielvolumen überlappende OARs. Weitere Patienten werden in die Studie eingeschlossen.
- Published
- 2019
45. Robust intensity-modulated proton therapy with simultaneous integrated boost reduces the low-dose to surrounding tissues in pancreatic cancer patients
- Author
-
Stefanowicz, S., Zschaeck, S., and Troost, E. G. C.
- Abstract
Purpose or Objective Neoadjuvant or primary radiochemotherapy (RCT) are treatment options for patients with borderline resectable or unresectable locally advanced non-metastatic pancreatic cancer, respectively. Currently, the potential of RCT is hampered by an insufficient dose prescription to the target, limited by the close-by radiosensitive organs at risk (OAR). Dose-escalation to the gross tumor volume (GTV) along with the current standard dose to the elective volume using a simultaneous integrated boost approach (SIB) may lead to improved therapeutic outcome. In this in-silico feasibility study on SIB dose-escalation, we compared volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using photons with robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Material and Methods For each of five locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients, a VMAT and a robust multi-field optimized IMPT treatment plan were optimized on free-breathing treatment planning CTs using the RayStation treatment planning system (V5.99, RaySearch Laboratories AB, Sweden). For the photon treatment plan, the doses prescribed to 95% of the GTV and of the planning target volume (PTV: clinical target volume, CTV, plus a 5 mm margin) were to be at least 95% of 66Gy and 51Gy respectively, both in 30 fractions. For the proton plan, robust optimization to the CTV (instead of the PTV) with a setup uncertainty of 5mm and a density uncertainty of 3.5% was chosen, thus prescribing the dose of 51Gy(RBE) to 95% of the CTV (GTV with a margin and elective volume). The OAR dose constraints adhered to local guidelines and QUANTEC. For each treatment plan, doses to GTV, CTV, and OARs as well as the volume of normal tissue outside the CTV receiving a dose of ≥ 20Gy(RBE) (V20Gy) were compared. Results All treatment plans reached the prescribed doses to the GTV and CTV/PTV, irrespective of the technique. In some patients, doses to the bowel, stomach and liver exceeded the constraints since that OARs were next to or within the target volume. While the VMAT technique reduced the V50Gy of the bowel (median V50Gy: VMAT 20.4ccm vs. IMPT 23.3ccm) and stomach (median V50Gy: VMAT 1.2ccm vs. IMPT 4.5ccm), the radiation doses to the remaining gastrointestinal organs were lower for IMPT, e.g. liver (median V30Gy: VMAT 93.6ccm vs. IMPT 39.2ccm) and kidneys (median V20Gy of left/right kidney: VMAT 21.0ccm/16.1ccm vs. IMPT 13.8ccm/12.1ccm). Overall, the IMPT technique showed a lower dose deposition outside the targets for the surrounding normal tissue (median V20Gy: VMAT 1483.4ccm vs. IMPT 756.2ccm). Conclusion Disregarding the inter- and intra-fractional organ motion, dose escalation is possible for both treatment techniques. In comparison to VMAT, IMPT reduced the dose to the surrounding normal tissue, including relevant organs at risk. However, robust optimization increased the high-dose level to OARs overlapping with the target volume. Further patients will be included in this study and presented during the DKFK 2019.
- Published
- 2019
46. Robust intensity-modulated proton therapy with dose-escalated simultaneous integrated boost reduces the low-dose to surrounding tissues in pancreatic cancer patients
- Author
-
Stefanowicz, S., Zschaeck, S., and Troost, E. G. C.
- Abstract
Purpose This in-silico study on simultaneous integrated boost dose-escalation in non-metastatic pancreatic cancer patients dosimetrically compared robust multi-field optimized intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Material and Methods For five patients, both treatment plans were optimized on free-breathing CTs using RayStation. For VMAT, at least 95% of the prescribed doses of 66Gy and 51Gy to the boost (GTV) and PTV (CTV+5mm), respectively, were to cover 95% of the targets. For IMPT, robust optimization with a setup uncertainty of 5mm and a density uncertainty of 3.5% was applied to the GTV and CTV, with the aforementioned dose levels (RBE) again covering 95% of the targets. The OAR dose constraints adhered to local guidelines and QUANTEC. Results All treatment plans reached the prescribed doses to the targets. Doses to the bowel, stomach and/or liver exceeded at least one constraint in all treatment plans, since those OARs were next to or within the targets. While VMAT reduced the median V50Gy of the stomach, doses to the remaining gastrointestinal organs, e.g. liver and kidneys, were lower for IMPT (Fig. 1). Overall, IMPT deposited less low dose outside the CTV (Fig. 2, median integral V20Gy: 1483.4ccm vs. 756.2ccm). Conclusion Disregarding inter- and intra-fractional organ motion, dose escalation with IMPT and VMAT is possible. IMPT reduced the dose to surrounding normal tissues, except for OARs overlapping with the target volume, in which the dose was higher due to the robust optimization approach. Additional patients will be included in this study.
- Published
- 2019
47. Interobserver variability of image-derived arterial blood SUV in whole-body FDG-PET
- Author
-
Hofheinz, F, additional, Maus, J, additional, Zschaeck, S, additional, Rogasch, J, additional, Schramm, G, additional, Oehme, L, additional, Apostolova, I, additional, Kotzerke, J, additional, and van den Hoff, J, additional
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
48. Interobserver variability of image-derived arterial blood SUV in whole-body FDG PET
- Author
-
Hofheinz, F., Maus, J., Zschaeck, S., Rogasch, J., Schramm, G., Oehme, L., Apostolova, I., Kotzerke, J., Hoff, J., Hofheinz, F., Maus, J., Zschaeck, S., Rogasch, J., Schramm, G., Oehme, L., Apostolova, I., Kotzerke, J., and Hoff, J.
- Abstract
Background: Today, the standardized uptake value (SUV) is essentially the only means for quantitative evaluation of static [18 F-]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) investigations. However, the SUV approach has several well-known shortcomings which adversely affect the reliability of the SUV as a surrogate of the metabolic rate of glucose consumption. The standard uptake ratio (SUR), i.e., the uptake time-corrected ratio of tumor SUV to image-derived arterial blood SUV, has been shown in the first clinical studies to overcome most of these shortcomings, to decrease test-retest variability, and to increase the prognostic value in comparison to SUV. However, it is unclear, to what extent the SUR approach is vulnerable to observer variability of the additionally required blood SUV (BSUV) determination. The goal of the present work was the investigation of the interobserver variability of image-derived BSUV. Methods: FDG PET/CT scans from 83 patients (72 male, 11 female) with non-small cell lung cancer (N = 46) or head and neck cancer (N = 37) were included. BSUV was determined by 8 individuals, each applying a dedicated delineation tool for the BSUV determination in the aorta. Two of the observers applied two further tools. Altogether, five different delineation tools were used. With each used tool, delineation was performed for the whole patient group, resulting in 12 distinct observations per patient. Intersubject variability of BSUV determination was assessed using the fractional deviations for the individual patients from the patient group average and was quantified as standard deviation (SDis ), 95% confidence interval, and range. Interobserver variability of BSUV determination was assessed using the fractional deviations of the individual observers from the observer-average for the considered patient and quantified as standard deviations (SDp , SDd ) or root mean square (RMS), 95% confidence interval, and range in each patient, each obser
- Published
- 2019
49. Confirmation of the prognostic value of pretherapeutic tumor SUR and MTV in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
- Author
-
(0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Li, Y., Steffen, I., Lin, Q., Lili, C., Hua, W., (0000-0003-4039-4780) Hoff, J., Zschaeck, S., (0000-0001-8016-4643) Hofheinz, F., Li, Y., Steffen, I., Lin, Q., Lili, C., Hua, W., (0000-0003-4039-4780) Hoff, J., and Zschaeck, S.
- Abstract
Purpose The prognosis for patients with inoperable esophageal carcinoma is still poor and the reliability of individual therapy outcome prediction based on clinical parameters is not convincing. In a recent publication, we were able to show that PET can provide independent prognostic information in such a patient group and that the tumor-to-blood standard uptake ratio (SUR) can improve the prognostic value of tracer uptake values. The present investigation addresses the question of whether the distinctly improved prognostic value of SUR can be confirmed in a similar patient group that was examined and treated at a different site. Methods 18F-FDG PET/CT was performed in 147 consecutive patients (115 male, 32 female, mean age: 62 years) with newly diagnosed esophageal squamous cell carcinoma prior to definitive radiochemotherapy. In the PET images, the metabolic active volume (MTV) of the primary tumor was delineated with an adaptive threshold method. For the resulting ROIs, SUVmax and total lesion glycolysis (TLG = MTV × SUVmean) were computed. The blood SUV was determined by manually delineating the aorta in the low-dose CT. SUR values were computed as ratio of tumor SUV and blood SUV. Univariate Cox regression and Kaplan–Meier analysis with respect to overall survival (OS), distant-metastases-free survival (DM), and locoregional control (LRC) was performed. Additionally, a multivariate Cox regression including clinically relevant parameters was performed. Results Univariate Cox regression revealed MTV, TLG, and SURmax as significant prognostic factors for OS. MTV as well as TLG were significant prognostic factors for LRC while SURmax showed only a trend for significance. None of the PET parameters was prognostic for DM. In univariate analysis, SUVmax was not prognostic for any of the investigated clinical endpoints. In multivariate analysis (T-stage, N-stage, MTV, and SURmax), MTV was an independent prognostic factor for OS and showed a trend for significance for L
- Published
- 2019
50. P005 - PSMA-PET- and mpMRI-guided focal radiation dose escalation in primary prostate cancer patients – a planned safety analysis of a two-armed prospective phase II trial (HypoFocal)
- Author
-
Spohn, S.K.B., Gainey, M., Kamps, M., Gratzke, C., Ruf, J., Benndorf, M., Zschaeck, S., Ghadjar, P., Baltas, D., Grosu, A.L., and Zambolgou, C.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.