1
|
Kim EK, Kim SY, Park JW, Park J, Yea JW, Jo YY, Oh SA. Evaluating the Efficacy of Machine Performance Checks as an Alternative to Winston-Lutz Quality Assurance Testing in the TrueBeam Linear Accelerator with HyperArc. Diagnostics (Basel) 2024; 14:410. [PMID: 38396449 PMCID: PMC10887750 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14040410] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2024] [Revised: 02/07/2024] [Accepted: 02/08/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024] Open
Abstract
HyperArc is a preferred technique for treating brain metastases, employing a single isocenter for multiple lesions. Geometrical isocentricity in the TrueBeam linear accelerator with HyperArc is crucial. We evaluated machine performance checks (MPCs) as an alternative to the Winston-Lutz (WL) test to verify the treatment isocenter. Between January and July 2023, we assessed 53 data points using MPC and Winston-Lutz tests. The isocenter size obtained from the MPC and its sum, including the rotation-induced couch shift, were compared with the maximum total delta value from the Winston-Lutz test. The maximum total delta was 0.68 ± 0.10 mm, while the isocenter size was 0.28 ± 0.02 mm. The sum of the isocenter size and rotation-induced couch shift measured by MPC was 0.61 ± 0.03 mm. During the Winston-Lutz test (without couch rotation), the maximum total delta value was 0.56 ± 0.13 mm. A t-test analysis revealed a significant difference in the isocenter size averages between the Winston-Lutz and MPC outcomes, whereas the Pearson's correlation coefficient yielded no correlation. Our study highlights the necessity for separate MPC and Winston-Lutz tests for isocenter verification. Therefore, the Winston-Lutz test should precede stereotactic radiosurgery for isocenter verification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eun Kyu Kim
- Department of Physics, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 38541, Republic of Korea; (E.K.K.); (S.Y.K.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
| | - Sung Yeop Kim
- Department of Physics, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 38541, Republic of Korea; (E.K.K.); (S.Y.K.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
| | - Jae Won Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea
| | - Jaehyeon Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea
| | - Ji Woon Yea
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea
| | - Yoon Young Jo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea
| | - Se An Oh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea; (J.W.P.); (J.P.); (J.W.Y.); (Y.Y.J.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu 42415, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Alterio D, Zaffaroni M, Bossi P, Dionisi F, Elicin O, Falzone A, Ferrari A, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Sanguineti G, Szturz P, Volpe S, Scricciolo M. Reirradiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: a pragmatic approach, part II: radiation technique and fractionations. LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA 2023:10.1007/s11547-023-01671-0. [PMID: 37415056 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-023-01671-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2023] [Accepted: 06/25/2023] [Indexed: 07/08/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Reirradiation (reRT) of local recurrent/second primary tumors of the head and neck represents a potential curative treatment for patients not candidate to a salvage surgery. Aim of the present study is to summarize literature data on modern radiation techniques and fractionations used in this setting of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS A narrative review of the literature was conducted on three topics: (1) target volume delineation (2) reRT dose and techniques and (3) ongoing studies. Patients treated with postoperative reRT and palliative intent were not considered for the current analysis. RESULTS Recommendations on the target volume contouring have been reported. 3D-Conformal Radiotherapy, Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy, Stereotactic body Radiotherapy Intraoperative Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy and Charged Particles have been analyzed in terms of indication and fractionation in the field of reRT. Ongoing studies on the topic have been reported for IMRT and Charged Particles. Moreover, according to literature data a stepwise approach has been proposed aiming to provide a useful tool to select patients candidate to a curative reRT in daily clinical practice. Two clinical cases were also provided for its application. CONCLUSION Different radiation techniques and fractionations can be used for a second course of radiotherapy in patients with recurrent/second primary tumor of head and neck region. Tumor characteristics as well as radiobiological considerations should be take into account to define the best reRT approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Mattia Zaffaroni
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Paolo Bossi
- Medical Oncology, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy
| | - Francesco Dionisi
- Radiotherapy Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Olgun Elicin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Andrea Falzone
- Unità Operativa Multizonale di Radiologia Ospedale di Rovereto e Arco, Azienda Sanitaria per i Servizi Provinciali di Trento, Trento, Italy
| | - Annamaria Ferrari
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Sanguineti
- Radiotherapy Unit, IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy
| | - Petr Szturz
- Department of Oncology, University of Lausanne (UNIL) and Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Liu X, Tao Y, Yang B, Pang T, Yu L, Li W, Feng S, Liu R, Li J, Liu Z, Qiu J. A novel X-Ray and γ-Ray combination strategy for potential dose escalation in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Med Phys 2023; 50:1855-1864. [PMID: 36458937 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2022] [Revised: 11/16/2022] [Accepted: 11/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) has long been calling for advances in technology of radiotherapy. Patients who received radiotherapy still had high risks of local recurrence, while suffering from gastrointestinal side effects. Based on the inherent characteristics of the x-ray and γ-Ray radiation techniques, here we proposed and investigated an unexplored radiation therapy. PURPOSE To investigate the potential clinical benefit of a novel x-ray and γ-Ray combination radiation technique in patients with LAPC. METHODS Retrospective intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment plans of 10 LAPC patients were randomly selected to compare with dual-modality plans. The prescribed dose to PGTV was 60.2 Gy. The PGTV dose was further escalated in dual-modality plan while maintaining clinically tolerable dose to organs at risk (OARs). Dosimetric comparisons were made and analyzed for three treatment plans (tomotherapy, standard dual-modality plan, escalated dual-modality plan) to assess the ability to increase dose to target volume while minimizing dose in adjacent OARs. Finally, radiobiological models were utilized for comparison. RESULTS All strategies resulted in dosimetrically acceptable plans. Dual-modality plans were present with similar conformity index (CI) and significantly lower gradient index (GI) compared with tomotherapy (3.64 ± 0.37 vs. 4.14 ± 0.61, p = 0.002; 3.64 ± 0.42 vs. 4.14 ± 0.61, p = 0.003). Dmean of PGTV (65.46 ± 3.13 vs. 61.56 ± 1.00, p = 0.009; 77.98 ± 5.86 vs. 61.56 ± 1.00, p < 0.001) and PCTV (55.04 ± 2.14 vs. 53.93 ± 1.67, p = 0.016; 58.24 ± 3.24 vs. 53.93 ± 1.67, p = 0.001) were significantly higher, while Dmean of the stomach was reduced in both dual-modality plans (17.98 ± 10.23 vs. 19.34 ± 9.75, p = 0.024; 17.62 ± 9.92 vs. 19.34 ± 9.75, p = 0.040). The lower V30Gy in the liver (4.83 ± 5.87 vs. 6.23 ± 6.68, p = 0.015; 4.90 ± 5.93 vs. 6.23 ± 6.68, p = 0.016) and lower V45Gy of the small intestine (3.35 ± 3.30 vs. 4.06 ± 3.87, p = 0.052) were found in dual-modality plans. Meanwhile, radiobiological models demonstrated higher probability of tumor control (29.27% ± 9.61% vs. 18.34% ± 4.70%, p < 0.001; 44.67% ± 18.16% vs. 18.34% ± 4.70%, p = 0.001) and lower probability of small intestine complication (2.16% ± 2.30% vs. 1.25% ± 2.72%, p = 0.048) in favor of dual-modality strategy. CONCLUSIONS A novel dual-modality strategy of x-ray and γ-Ray combination radiation appears reliable for target dose escalation and normal tissue dose reduction. This strategy might be beneficial for local tumor control and the protection of normal organs in patients with LAPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xia Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Yinjie Tao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Bo Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Tingtian Pang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Lang Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Wenbo Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Siqi Feng
- Our United Corporation, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China
| | - Renqing Liu
- Our United Corporation, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China
| | - Jinsheng Li
- Our United Corporation, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China
| | - Zhikai Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Jie Qiu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
OHIRA SHINGO, INUI SHOKI, KANAYAMA NAOYUKI, UEDA YOSHIHIRO, MIYAZAKI MASAYOSHI, KOIZUMI MASAHIKO, KONISHI KOJI. Automated Non-coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning for Maxillary Sinus Carcinoma. In Vivo 2023; 37:417-423. [PMID: 36593035 PMCID: PMC9843778 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13094] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM Dosimetric parameters in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT), and automated NC-VMAT (HyperArc, HA) were compared for patients with maxillary sinus carcinoma (MSC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Twenty HA plans were generated to deliver 70.4, 64, and 46 Gy for planning target volumes with high (PTV1), intermediate (PTV2), and low risk (PTV3), respectively. The VMAT and NC-VMAT plans were retrospectively generated using the same optimized parameters as those used in the HA plans. RESULTS For PTV1, the three treatment plans provided comparable target coverages. For PTV2, the D95%, D99%, and Dmin in the HA plans (64.7±1.2, 62.7±2.1 and 54.6±6.2 Gy, respectively) were significantly higher (p<0.05) than those in the VMAT plans (64.3±1.7, 61.9±2.4 and 52.9±6.4 Gy, respectively). The NC-VMAT and HA plans provided significantly higher (p<0.05) dosimetric parameters for PTV3 than those in the VMAT plans, and D99% in the HA was significantly higher than that in the NC-VMAT plans (52.5±3.0 vs. 51.8±2.7 Gy, p<0.05). The doses to the brain and brainstem were lowest in the HA plans (p<0.05). Moreover, dosimetric parameters of the contralateral organs (lens, optic nerve, retina, and parotid) were lower in the HA plans than in the VMAT and NC-VMAT plans. CONCLUSION The HA plans provided the best target coverage and OAR sparing compared with VMAT and NC-VMAT plans for patients with MSC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- SHINGO OHIRA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan,Department of Medical Physics and Engineering, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
| | - SHOKI INUI
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan
| | - NAOYUKI KANAYAMA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan
| | - YOSHIHIRO UEDA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan
| | - MASAYOSHI MIYAZAKI
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan
| | - MASAHIKO KOIZUMI
- Department of Medical Physics and Engineering, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
| | - KOJI KONISHI
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Osaka, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mazonakis M, Tzanis E, Lyraraki E, Damilakis J. Automatic Radiobiological Comparison of Radiation Therapy Plans: An Application to Gastric Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14246098. [PMID: 36551582 PMCID: PMC9776876 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14246098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2022] [Revised: 12/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
(1) Aim: This study was conducted to radiobiologically compare radiotherapy plans for gastric cancer with a newly developed software tool. (2) Methods: Treatment planning was performed on two computational phantoms simulating adult male and female patients. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for gastric cancer were generated with three-photon beam energies. The equivalent uniform dose (EUD), tumor control probability (TCP) of the target and normal tissue control probability (NTCP) of eight different critical organs were calculated. A new software was employed for these calculations using the EUD-based model and dose-volume-histogram data. (3) Results: The IMRT and VMAT plan led to TCPs of 51.3-51.5%, whereas 3D-CRT gave values up to 50.2%. The intensity-modulated techniques resulted in NTCPs of (5.3 × 10-6-3.3 × 10-1)%. The corresponding NTCPs from 3D-CRT were (3.4 × 10-7-7.4 × 10-1)%. The above biological indices were automatically calculated in less than 40 s with the software. (4) Conclusions: The direct and quick radiobiological evaluation of radiotherapy plans is feasible using the new software tool. The IMRT and VMAT reduced the probability of the appearance of late effects in most of the surrounding critical organs and slightly increased the TCP compared to 3D-CRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michalis Mazonakis
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, 71003 Iraklion, Greece
- Correspondence:
| | - Eleftherios Tzanis
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, 71003 Iraklion, Greece
| | - Efrossyni Lyraraki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Iraklion, 71110 Iraklion, Greece
| | - John Damilakis
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, 71003 Iraklion, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
MR-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy for OAR Sparing in Head and Neck Cancers. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14081909. [PMID: 35454816 PMCID: PMC9028510 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14081909] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2022] [Revised: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 03/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Normal tissue toxicities in head and neck cancer persist as a cause of decreased quality of life and are associated with poorer treatment outcomes. The aim of this article is to review organ at risk (OAR) sparing approaches available in MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy and present future developments which hope to improve treatment outcomes. Increasing the spatial conformity of dose distributions in radiotherapy is an important first step in reducing normal tissue toxicities, and MR-guided treatment devices presents a new opportunity to use biological information to drive treatment decisions on a personalized basis. Abstract MR-linac devices offer the potential for advancements in radiotherapy (RT) treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC) by using daily MR imaging performed at the time and setup of treatment delivery. This article aims to present a review of current adaptive RT (ART) methods on MR-Linac devices directed towards the sparing of organs at risk (OAR) and a view of future adaptive techniques seeking to improve the therapeutic ratio. This ratio expresses the relationship between the probability of tumor control and the probability of normal tissue damage and is thus an important conceptual metric of success in the sparing of OARs. Increasing spatial conformity of dose distributions to target volume and OARs is an initial step in achieving therapeutic improvements, followed by the use of imaging and clinical biomarkers to inform the clinical decision-making process in an ART paradigm. Pre-clinical and clinical findings support the incorporation of biomarkers into ART protocols and investment into further research to explore imaging biomarkers by taking advantage of the daily MR imaging workflow. A coherent understanding of this road map for RT in HNC is critical for directing future research efforts related to sparing OARs using image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT).
Collapse
|
7
|
Woods KE, Ma TM, Cook KA, Morris ED, Gao Y, Sheng K, Kishan AU, Hegde JV, Felix C, Basehart V, Narahara K, Shen Z, Tenn S, Steinberg ML, Chin RK, Cao M. A Prospective Phase II Study of Automated Non-Coplanar VMAT for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Initial Report of Feasibility, Safety, and Patient-Reported Outcomes. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14040939. [PMID: 35205686 PMCID: PMC8870161 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14040939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2022] [Revised: 02/07/2022] [Accepted: 02/09/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The delivery of higher radiation doses has been shown to increase local control, and ultimately survival, for head and neck cancer patients, but highly conformal dose distributions are necessary to minimize normal tissue toxicity. Varian’s HyperArc non-coplanar automated treatment planning and delivery technique has been shown to improve dose conformity for intracranial treatment, but its safety and efficacy for head and neck cancer treatment has yet to be verified. This study evaluates the initial results of a prospective clinical trial using HyperArc for recurrent head and neck cancer patients. We demonstrated that HyperArc can enable significant tumor dose escalation compared to conventional volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning while minimizing the dose to organs at risk. Treatment delivery was feasible and safe, with minimal treatment-related toxicities and positive patient-reported quality of life measures. Abstract This study reports the initial results for the first 15 patients on a prospective phase II clinical trial exploring the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of the HyperArc technique for recurrent head and neck cancer treatment. Eligible patients were simulated and planned with both conventional VMAT and HyperArc techniques and the plan with superior dosimetry was selected for treatment. Dosimetry, delivery feasibility and safety, treatment-related toxicity, and patient-reported quality of life (QOL) were all evaluated. HyperArc was chosen over conventional VMAT for all 15 patients and enabled statistically significant increases in dose conformity (R50% reduced by 1.2 ± 2.1, p < 0.05) and mean PTV and GTV doses (by 15.7 ± 4.9 Gy, p < 0.01 and 17.1 ± 6.0 Gy, p < 0.01, respectively). The average HyperArc delivery was 2.8 min longer than conventional VMAT (p < 0.01), and the mean intrafraction motion was ≤ 0.5 ± 0.4 mm and ≤0.3 ± 0.1°. With a median follow-up of 12 months, treatment-related toxicity was minimal (only one grade 3 acute toxicity above baseline) and patient-reported QOL metrics were favorable. HyperArc enabled superior dosimetry and significant target dose escalation compared to conventional VMAT planning, and treatment delivery was feasible, safe, and well-tolerated by patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaley E. Woods
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Ting Martin Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Kiri A. Cook
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, USA;
| | - Eric D. Morris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Yu Gao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Ke Sheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Amar U. Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - John V. Hegde
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Carol Felix
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Vincent Basehart
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Kelsey Narahara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Zhouhuizi Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Stephen Tenn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Michael L. Steinberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
| | - Robert K. Chin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
- Correspondence: (R.K.C.); (M.C.)
| | - Minsong Cao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (K.E.W.); (T.M.M.); (E.D.M.); (Y.G.); (K.S.); (A.U.K.); (J.V.H.); (C.F.); (V.B.); (K.N.); (Z.S.); (S.T.); (M.L.S.)
- Correspondence: (R.K.C.); (M.C.)
| |
Collapse
|