Wagner, Daniela Melanie

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","31"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Radiation Oncology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","3"],["dc.contributor.author","Vorwerk, Hilke"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagner, Daniela"],["dc.contributor.author","Hess, Clemens Friedrich"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T11:10:55Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T11:10:55Z"],["dc.date.issued","2008"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using sliding window technique utilises a leaf sequencing algorithm, which takes some control system limitations like dose rates (DR) and velocity of the leafs (LV) into account. The effect of altering these limitations on the number of monitor units and radiation dose to the organs at risk (OAR) were analysed. Methods: IMRT plans for different LVs from 1.0 cm/sec to 10.0 cm/sec and different DRs from 100 MU/min to 600 MU/min for two patients with prostate cancer and two patients with squamous cell cancer of the scalp (SCCscalp) were calculated using the same \"optimal fluence map\". For each field the number of monitor units, the dose volume histograms and the differences in the \"actual fluence maps\" of the fields were analysed. Results: With increase of the DR and decrease of the LV the number of monitor units increased and consequentially the radiation dose given to the OAR. In particular the serial OARs of patients with SCCscalp, which are located outside the end position of the leafs and inside the open field, received an additional dose of a higher DR and lower LV is used. Conclusion: For best protection of organs at risk, a low DR and high LV should be applied. But the consequence of a low DR is both a long treatment time and also that a LV of higher than 3.0 cm/sec is mechanically not applicable. Our recommendation for an optimisation of the discussed parameters is a leaf velocity of 2.5 cm/sec and a dose rate of 300-400 MU/min (prostate cancer) and 100-200 MU/min (SCCscalp) for best protection of organs at risk, short treatment time and number of monitor units."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1748-717X-3-31"],["dc.identifier.isi","000260418200001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","18811954"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/4321"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/53311"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Biomed Central Ltd"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Impact of different leaf velocities and dose rates on the number of monitor units and the dose-volume-histograms using intensity modulated radiotherapy with sliding-window technique"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","21"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Radiation Oncology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","6"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagner, Daniela"],["dc.contributor.author","Vorwerk, Hilke"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:59:10Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:59:10Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.description.abstract","Purpose: To verify the dose distribution and number of monitor units (MU) for dynamic treatment techniques like volumetric modulated single arc radiation therapy - Rapid Arc - each patient treatment plan has to be verified prior to the first treatment. The purpose of this study was to develop a patient related treatment plan verification protocol using a two dimensional ionization chamber array (MatriXX, IBA, Schwarzenbruck, Germany). Method: Measurements were done to determine the dependence between response of 2D ionization chamber array, beam direction, and field size. Also the reproducibility of the measurements was checked. For the patient related verifications the original patient Rapid Arc treatment plan was projected on CT dataset of the MatriXX and the dose distribution was calculated. After irradiation of the Rapid Arc verification plans measured and calculated 2D dose distributions were compared using the gamma evaluation method implemented in the measuring software OmniPro (version 1.5, IBA, Schwarzenbruck, Germany). Results: The dependence between response of 2D ionization chamber array, field size and beam direction has shown a passing rate of 99% for field sizes between 7 cm x 7 cm and 24 cm x 24 cm for measurements of single arc. For smaller and larger field sizes than 7 cm x 7 cm and 24 cm x 24 cm the passing rate was less than 99%. The reproducibility was within a passing rate of 99% and 100%. The accuracy of the whole process including the uncertainty of the measuring system, treatment planning system, linear accelerator and isocentric laser system in the treatment room was acceptable for treatment plan verification using gamma criteria of 3% and 3 mm, 2D global gamma index. Conclusion: It was possible to verify the 2D dose distribution and MU of Rapid Arc treatment plans using the MatriXX. The use of the MatriXX for Rapid Arc treatment plan verification in clinical routine is reasonable. The passing rate should be 99% than the verification protocol is able to detect clinically significant errors."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1748-717X-6-21"],["dc.identifier.isi","000288098400001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","21342509"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/5926"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/23825"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Biomed Central Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","1748-717X"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Two years experience with quality assurance protocol for patient related Rapid Arc treatment plan verification using a two dimensional ionization chamber array"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","593"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Radiotherapy and Oncology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","596"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","93"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagner, Daniela"],["dc.contributor.author","Christiansen, Hans"],["dc.contributor.author","Wolff, Hendrik"],["dc.contributor.author","Vorwerk, Hilke"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T11:21:46Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T11:21:46Z"],["dc.date.issued","2009"],["dc.description.abstract","Purpose: The analysis was designed to identify the optimal radiation technique for patients with malignant glioma Methods A volumetric-modulated radiation treatment technique (RapidArc), an IMRT technique anti a 3D conformal technique were calculated on Computed tomograms of 14 consecutive patients with malignant glioma. The treatment plans were compared with each other using dose-volume histograms Results The 3D conformal technique showed a good PTV coverage. if PTV was distant to organs at risk (OAR). If PTV was nearby OAR, the 3D technique revealed a poor PTV coverage in contrast to both intensity-modulated techniques The conventional IMRT technique showed a slightly better PTV coverage than RapidArc The advantages of RapidArc were a shorter treatment time, less monitor units and a small V(107%) Conclusions: If PTV is distant to OAR. the use of 3D conformal technique is sufficient. Otherwise an intensity-modulated technique should be used RapidArc was faster than conventional IMRT and should be preferred if PTV coverage is adequate (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd All rights reserved Radiotherapy and Oncology 93 (2009) 593-596"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.radonc.2009.10.002"],["dc.identifier.isi","000272762900037"],["dc.identifier.pmid","19897266"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/6277"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/55855"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Elsevier Ireland Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","0167-8140"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Radiotherapy of malignant gliomas: Comparison of volumetric single arc technique (RapidArc), dynamic intensity-modulated technique and 3D conformal technique"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","455"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Radiotherapy and Oncology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","460"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","91"],["dc.contributor.author","Vorwerk, Hilke"],["dc.contributor.author","Beckmann, Gabriele"],["dc.contributor.author","Bremer, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Degen, Maria"],["dc.contributor.author","Dietl, Barbara"],["dc.contributor.author","Fietkau, Rainer"],["dc.contributor.author","Gsaenger, Tammo"],["dc.contributor.author","Hermann, Robert Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Herrmann, Markus Karl Alfred"],["dc.contributor.author","Hoeller, Ulrike"],["dc.contributor.author","van Kampen, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Koerber, Wolfgang"],["dc.contributor.author","Maier, Burkhard"],["dc.contributor.author","Martin, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Metz, Michael"],["dc.contributor.author","Richter, Ronald"],["dc.contributor.author","Siekmeyer, Birgit"],["dc.contributor.author","Steder, Martin"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagner, Daniela"],["dc.contributor.author","Hess, Clemens Friedrich"],["dc.contributor.author","Weiss, Elisabeth"],["dc.contributor.author","Christiansen, Hans"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:29:37Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:29:37Z"],["dc.date.issued","2009"],["dc.description.abstract","Purpose: Differences in the delineation of the gross target volume (GTV) and planning target volume (PTV) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer are considerable. The focus of this work is on the analysis of observer-related reasons while controlling for other variables. Methods: In three consecutive patients, eighteen physicians from fourteen different departments delineated the GTV and M in CT-slices using a detailed instruction for target delineation. Differences in the volumes, the delineated anatomic lymph node compartments and differences in every delineated pixel of the contoured volumes in the CT-slices (pixel-by-pixel-analysis) were evaluated for different groups: ten radiation oncologists from ten departments (ROs), four haematologic oncologists and chest physicians from four departments (HOs) and five radiation oncologists from one department (RO1D). Results: Agreement (overlap >= 70% of the contoured pixels) for the GTV and PTV delineation was found in 16.3% and 23.7% (ROs), 30.4% and 38.6% (HOs) and 32.8% and 35.9% (RO1D), respectively. Conclusion: A large interobserver variability in the PTV and much more in the GTV delineation were observed in spite of a detailed instruction for delineation. The variability was smallest for group RO1D where due to repeated discussions and uniform teaching a better agreement was achieved. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 91 (2009) 455-460"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.radonc.2009.03.014"],["dc.identifier.isi","000266749200028"],["dc.identifier.pmid","19339069"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/6276"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/16693"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Elsevier Ireland Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","0167-8140"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","The delineation of target volumes for radiotherapy of lung cancer patients"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","77"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Radiation Oncology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","5"],["dc.contributor.author","Wolff, Hendrik Andreas"],["dc.contributor.author","Wagner, Daniela M."],["dc.contributor.author","Christiansen, Hans"],["dc.contributor.author","Hess, Clemens Friedrich"],["dc.contributor.author","Vorwerk, Hilke"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:39:13Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:39:13Z"],["dc.date.issued","2010"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Stereotactic-Radio-Surgery (SRS) using Conformal-Arc-Therapy (CAT) is a well established irradiation technique for treatment of intracranial targets. Although small safety margins are required because of very high accuracy of patient positioning and exact online localisation, there are still disadvantages like long treatment time, high number of monitor units (MU) and covering of noncircular targets. This planning study analysed whether Rapid Arc (RA) with stereotactic localisation for single-fraction SRS can solve these problems. Methods: Ten consecutive patients were treated with Linac-based SRS. Eight patients had one or more brain metastases. The other patients presented a symptomatic vestibularis schwannoma and an atypic meningeoma. For all patients, two plans (CAT/RA) were calculated and analysed. Results: Conformity was higher for RA with additional larger low-dose areas. Furthermore, RA reduced the number of MU and the treatment time for all patients. Dose to organs at risk were equal or slightly higher using RA in comparison to CAT. Conclusions: RA provides a new alternative for single-fraction SRS irradiation combining advantages of short treatment time with lower number of MU and better conformity in addition to accuracy of stereotactic localisation in selected cases with uncomplicated clinical realization."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1748-717X-5-77"],["dc.identifier.isi","000282548200001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","20836871"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/5658"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/18942"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Biomed Central Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","1748-717X"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Single fraction radiosurgery using Rapid Arc for treatment of intracranial targets"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]