A. Chiara
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by A. Chiara.
Strahlentherapie Und Onkologie | 2007
C. Fiorino; I. Dell'Oca; A. Pierelli; Sara Broggi; Giovanni Mauro Cattaneo; A. Chiara; Elena De Martin; Nadia Di Muzio; Ferruccio Fazio; R. Calandrino
Purpose:To explore the potential of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer.Patients and Methods:Six T1–4 N1–3 patients were considered. A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was planned with inversely optimized conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; dynamic multileaf collimator using the Eclipse-Helios Varian system) and HT. The prescribed (median) doses were 54 Gy, 61.5 Gy, and 64.5 Gy delivered in 30 fractions to PTV1 (planning target volume), PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The same constraints for PTV coverage and for parotids, spinal cord, mandible, optic structures, and brain stem were followed in both modalities. The planner also tried to reduce the dose to other structures (mucosae outside PTV1, larynx, esophagus, inner ear, thyroid, brain, lungs, submental connective tissue, bony structures) as much as possible.Results:The fraction of PTV receiving > 95% of the prescribed dose (V95%) increased from 97.6% and 94.3% (IMRT) to 99.6% and 97% (HT) for PTV1 and PTV3, respectively (p < 0.05); median dose to parotids decreased from 30.1 Gy for IMRT to 25.0 Gy for HT (p < 0.05). Significant gains (p < 0.05) were found for most organs at risk (OARs): mucosae (V30 decreased from 44 cm3 [IMRT] to 18 cm3 [HT]); larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3); thyroid (mean dose: 48.7 Gy vs. 41.5 Gy); esophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3); brain stem (D1%: 45.1 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy).Conclusion:HT improves the homogeneity of dose distribution within PTV and PTV coverage together with a significantly greater sparing of OARs compared to linac five-field IMRT.Ziele:Untersuchung des Potentials der helikalen Tomotherapie (HT) beim Nasopharynxkarzinom.Patienten und Methodik:Sechs T1–4 N1–3-Patienten wurden einbezogen. Eine Technik des simultanen integrierten Boost (SIB) wurde geplant mit invers optimierter konventioneller intensitätsmodulierter Radiotherapie (IMRT; dynamischer Multileaf-Kollimator des Eclipse-Helios Varian-Systems) und mit HT. Die verschriebenen (medianen) Strahlungsdosen waren 54 Gy, 61,5 Gy und 64,5 Gy, die in 30 Fraktionen auf die Planungszielvolumina PTV1, PTV2 bzw. PTV3 gegeben wurden. Bei beiden Modalitäten, HT und IMRT, wurden für die PTV-Erfassung sowie für Parotiden, Rückenmark, Kiefer, optischen Apparat und Stammhirn dieselben Begrenzungen eingehalten. Der Planer versuchte auch, die Strahlungsdosis auf andere Regionen (Mukosa außerhalb von PTV1, Larynx, Ösophagus, Innenohr, Schilddrüse, Hirn, Lunge, Bindegewebe und Knochen unterhalb des Kinns) so stark wie möglich zu reduzieren.Ergebnisse:Der PTV-Anteil, der mehr als 95% der verschriebenen Strahlungsdosis (V95%) erhielt, erhöhte sich für PTV1 und PTV3 von 97,6% bzw. 94,3% (IMRT) auf 99,6% bzw. 97% (HT) (p < 0,05); die mediane Dosis der Parotiden verminderte sich von 30,1 Gy bei IMRT auf 25,0 Gy bei HT (p < 0,05). Signifikante Vorteile (p < 0,05) zeigten sich für die meisten Risikoorgane: Mukosa (V30-Verminderung von 44 cm3 [IMRT] auf 18 cm3 [HT]), Larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3), Schilddrüse (mittlere Strahlungsdosis: 48,7 Gy vs. 41,5 Gy), Ösophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3), Stammhirn (D1%: 45,1 Gy vs. 37,7 Gy).Schlussfolgerung:Verglichen mit der Linac-5-Felder-IMRT verbessert HT die Homogenität der Dosisverteilung innerhalb des PTV und die PTV-Erfassung bei signifkant besserer Schonung von Risikoorganen.
Strahlentherapie Und Onkologie | 2007
C. Fiorino; I. Dell'Oca; A. Pierelli; Sara Broggi; Giovanni Mauro Cattaneo; A. Chiara; Elena De Martin; Nadia Di Muzio; Ferruccio Fazio; R. Calandrino
Purpose:To explore the potential of helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer.Patients and Methods:Six T1–4 N1–3 patients were considered. A simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was planned with inversely optimized conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT; dynamic multileaf collimator using the Eclipse-Helios Varian system) and HT. The prescribed (median) doses were 54 Gy, 61.5 Gy, and 64.5 Gy delivered in 30 fractions to PTV1 (planning target volume), PTV2, and PTV3, respectively. The same constraints for PTV coverage and for parotids, spinal cord, mandible, optic structures, and brain stem were followed in both modalities. The planner also tried to reduce the dose to other structures (mucosae outside PTV1, larynx, esophagus, inner ear, thyroid, brain, lungs, submental connective tissue, bony structures) as much as possible.Results:The fraction of PTV receiving > 95% of the prescribed dose (V95%) increased from 97.6% and 94.3% (IMRT) to 99.6% and 97% (HT) for PTV1 and PTV3, respectively (p < 0.05); median dose to parotids decreased from 30.1 Gy for IMRT to 25.0 Gy for HT (p < 0.05). Significant gains (p < 0.05) were found for most organs at risk (OARs): mucosae (V30 decreased from 44 cm3 [IMRT] to 18 cm3 [HT]); larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3); thyroid (mean dose: 48.7 Gy vs. 41.5 Gy); esophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3); brain stem (D1%: 45.1 Gy vs. 37.7 Gy).Conclusion:HT improves the homogeneity of dose distribution within PTV and PTV coverage together with a significantly greater sparing of OARs compared to linac five-field IMRT.Ziele:Untersuchung des Potentials der helikalen Tomotherapie (HT) beim Nasopharynxkarzinom.Patienten und Methodik:Sechs T1–4 N1–3-Patienten wurden einbezogen. Eine Technik des simultanen integrierten Boost (SIB) wurde geplant mit invers optimierter konventioneller intensitätsmodulierter Radiotherapie (IMRT; dynamischer Multileaf-Kollimator des Eclipse-Helios Varian-Systems) und mit HT. Die verschriebenen (medianen) Strahlungsdosen waren 54 Gy, 61,5 Gy und 64,5 Gy, die in 30 Fraktionen auf die Planungszielvolumina PTV1, PTV2 bzw. PTV3 gegeben wurden. Bei beiden Modalitäten, HT und IMRT, wurden für die PTV-Erfassung sowie für Parotiden, Rückenmark, Kiefer, optischen Apparat und Stammhirn dieselben Begrenzungen eingehalten. Der Planer versuchte auch, die Strahlungsdosis auf andere Regionen (Mukosa außerhalb von PTV1, Larynx, Ösophagus, Innenohr, Schilddrüse, Hirn, Lunge, Bindegewebe und Knochen unterhalb des Kinns) so stark wie möglich zu reduzieren.Ergebnisse:Der PTV-Anteil, der mehr als 95% der verschriebenen Strahlungsdosis (V95%) erhielt, erhöhte sich für PTV1 und PTV3 von 97,6% bzw. 94,3% (IMRT) auf 99,6% bzw. 97% (HT) (p < 0,05); die mediane Dosis der Parotiden verminderte sich von 30,1 Gy bei IMRT auf 25,0 Gy bei HT (p < 0,05). Signifikante Vorteile (p < 0,05) zeigten sich für die meisten Risikoorgane: Mukosa (V30-Verminderung von 44 cm3 [IMRT] auf 18 cm3 [HT]), Larynx (V30: 25 cm3 vs. 11 cm3), Schilddrüse (mittlere Strahlungsdosis: 48,7 Gy vs. 41,5 Gy), Ösophagus (V45: 4 cm3 vs. 1 cm3), Stammhirn (D1%: 45,1 Gy vs. 37,7 Gy).Schlussfolgerung:Verglichen mit der Linac-5-Felder-IMRT verbessert HT die Homogenität der Dosisverteilung innerhalb des PTV und die PTV-Erfassung bei signifkant besserer Schonung von Risikoorganen.
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics | 2013
Sara Broggi; Marie Claire Cantone; A. Chiara; Nadia Di Muzio; B. Longobardi; P. Mangili; I. Veronese
The aim of this paper was the application of the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) approach to assess the risks for patients undergoing radiotherapy treatments performed by means of a helical tomotherapy unit. FMEA was applied to the preplanning imaging, volume determination, and treatment planning stages of the tomotherapy process and consisted of three steps: 1) identification of the involved subprocesses; 2) identification and ranking of the potential failure modes, together with their causes and effects, using the risk probability number (RPN) scoring system; and 3) identification of additional safety measures to be proposed for process quality and safety improvement. RPN upper threshold for little concern of risk was set at 125. A total of 74 failure modes were identified: 38 in the stage of preplanning imaging and volume determination, and 36 in the stage of planning. The threshold of 125 for RPN was exceeded in four cases: one case only in the phase of preplanning imaging and volume determination, and three cases in the stage of planning. The most critical failures appeared related to (i) the wrong or missing definition and contouring of the overlapping regions, (ii) the wrong assignment of the overlap priority to each anatomical structure, (iii) the wrong choice of the computed tomography calibration curve for dose calculation, and (iv) the wrong (or not performed) choice of the number of fractions in the planning station. On the basis of these findings, in addition to the safety strategies already adopted in the clinical practice, novel solutions have been proposed for mitigating the risk of these failures and to increase patient safety. PACS number: 87.55.Qr
Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment | 2017
Sara Broggi; Elisa Scalco; M.L. Belli; Gerlinde Logghe; Dirk Verellen; Stefano Moriconi; A. Chiara; Anna Palmisano; Renata Mellone; C. Fiorino; Giovanna Rizzo
Purpose: To validate and compare the deformable image registration and parotid contour propagation process for head and neck magnetic resonance imaging in patients treated with radiotherapy using 3 different approaches—the commercial MIM, the open-source Elastix software, and an optimized version of it. Materials and Methods: Twelve patients with head and neck cancer previously treated with radiotherapy were considered. Deformable image registration and parotid contour propagation were evaluated by considering the magnetic resonance images acquired before and after the end of the treatment. Deformable image registration, based on free-form deformation method, and contour propagation available on MIM were compared to Elastix. Two different contour propagation approaches were implemented for Elastix software, a conventional one (DIR_Trx) and an optimized homemade version, based on mesh deformation (DIR_Mesh). The accuracy of these 3 approaches was estimated by comparing propagated to manual contours in terms of average symmetric distance, maximum symmetric distance, Dice similarity coefficient, sensitivity, and inclusiveness. Results: A good agreement was generally found between the manual contours and the propagated ones, without differences among the 3 methods; in few critical cases with complex deformations, DIR_Mesh proved to be more accurate, having the lowest values of average symmetric distance and maximum symmetric distance and the highest value of Dice similarity coefficient, although nonsignificant. The average propagation errors with respect to the reference contours are lower than the voxel diagonal (2 mm), and Dice similarity coefficient is around 0.8 for all 3 methods. Conclusion: The 3 free-form deformation approaches were not significantly different in terms of deformable image registration accuracy and can be safely adopted for the registration and parotid contour propagation during radiotherapy on magnetic resonance imaging. More optimized approaches (as DIR_Mesh) could be preferable for critical deformations.
Acta Oncologica | 2015
M.L. Belli; C. Fiorino; F. Zerbetto; R. Raso; Sara Broggi; A. Chiara; Giovanni Mauro Cattaneo; Nadia Di Muzio; Italo Dell’Oca; R. Calandrino
ABSTRACT Background. We investigated the possibility to early identify non-responding patients based on FDG-PET positive lymph nodes (PNs) volume variation assessed with in-room images. Material and methods. Twenty-seven head and neck cancer patients with at least one pre-treatment PNs were retrospectively analyzed; they received 54 Gy, 66 Gy, 69 Gy in 30 fractions on precautionary lymph nodal (N), primary (T) and PET positive (BTV) planning target volumes (PTVs), respectively with Helical TomoTherapy (SIB approach). PNs volume changes during treatment were assessed based on megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) used for image guidance as ratio between volumes at fractions 10/20/30 and at first fraction. Data on T, N and M relapses (rT, rN, rM) were collected for all patients. The difference of PNs volume changes, during treatment, between patients with versus without relapses was tested (Mann-Whitney test). The impact of shrinkage on the corresponding survival curves (Cox proportional-hazard regression), dividing between no/moderate versus large shrinkage (based on ROC curve best cut-off value) was also investigated. Results. Median follow-up was 27.4 m (3.7–108.9). The numbers for rT, rN, rM were 5, 4, 6, respectively. Differences in PNs shrinkage were found between patients with and without rT/rN at all considered timing [fr 20, rT: 0.56 vs. 1.07 (median), p = 0.06; rN: 0.57 vs. 1.25, p = 0.07]. Differences were lower for rM. Survival curves provide high hazard ratios (HR) between PNs changes and rT/rN at all considered timing [fr 20, rT: best cut-off = 0.58, HR 5.1 (95% CI 0.5–49.4), p = 0.12; rN: best cut-off = 0.98, HR 14.9 (1.6–142.9), p = 0.01]. Conclusion. A limited shrinkage of PNs during treatment is associated with poorer outcome in terms of T/N relapses. The early variation of PNs observed on in-room images may provide useful information about the individual response with potential application in guiding an early adaptation of the treatment.
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2016
S. Broggi; I. Dell'Oca; C. Fiorino; Elena Incerti; Maria Picchio; M.L. Belli; Paola Mapelli; A. Chiara; N. Di Muzio; Giovanni Mauro Cattaneo; R. Calandrino
S871 ________________________________________________________________________________ patients with high-risk extremity soft tissue sarcoma. A twotier registration was used to align the tumor VOI within each dynamic frame at TP1 and align the volumes at TP2 to the volumes at TP1. After registration, the voxel-wise transfer constant K within a VOI covering the whole tumor normalized to a reference region of normal tissue area closed to the tumor was calculated. The responder threshold was determined by linear regression via evaluating the 95% confidence interval [-T, T] in the residuals from the reference region. The difference of the voxel-wise ΔK within the tumor between TP1 and TP2 was calculated. Three classes of voxels within the tumor VOI were determined: voxels having ΔK value exceed threshold T were designated in red, below -T were designated in blue, and otherwise designated in green indicating no significant change. The volume fractions with respect to three subvolumes of the tumor VOI were computed as F+ (red voxels), F-(blue voxels) and F0 (green voxels).
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2016
C. Sini; C. Fiorino; L. Perna; B. Noris Chiorda; V. Sacco; M. Pasetti; A. Chiara; R. Calandrino; N. Di Muzio; C. Cozzarini
S807 ________________________________________________________________________________ was maintained as long as the effect metric used for Cox regression had a linear correlation with the true effect metric of at least 0.50. The conclusions held if the trial cohort consisted of an expected high benefit population (22% reduced sample size), but the effect was even stronger if the cohort was a population with modest expected benefit (31% reduced sample size).
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2016
B. Noris Chiorda; C. Sini; C. Fiorino; F. Badenchini; A. Briganti; A. Chiara; C. Deantoni; N. Slim; Nazareno Suardi; F. Montorsi; N. Di Muzio; C. Cozzarini
Results: Finally 550 patients with prostate cancer were included, with median age of 70 years old (47-85), Mean follow-up time was 136.8 months, between 5,6 and 245,8 months. D’Amico risk classification distribution was for low risk, mediun and high 20.4%, 36,5% and 43,1% respectively. RCI distribution categories was as follows 61,5%, 21,8 and 16,7%. Survival analysis showed significant differences (p<0.001) between RCI groups at 5 and 10 years. Survival probability was 98,2 and 88,5% ; 95% and 79,6% ; and 52,2% and 8,9% was respectively for each RCI category.
Physica Medica | 2014
Sara Broggi; Lucia Perna; Francesco Bonsignore; Giuseppe Rinaldin; C. Fiorino; A. Chiara; Cristina Frigerio; Ivana Butti; G. Sangalli; I. Dell'Oca; Nadia Di Muzio; Giovanni Mauro Cattaneo; F. Declich
Clinical Oncology | 2016
N. Di Muzio; A. Fodor; B. Noris Chiorda; S. Broggi; P. Mangili; Riccardo Valdagni; I. Dell'Oca; M. Pasetti; C. Deantoni; A. Chiara; G. Berardi; A. Briganti; R. Calandrino; C. Cozzarini; C. Fiorino