好色先生

好色先生

Explore the latest content from across our publications

Log In

Forgot Password?
Create New Account

Loading... please wait

Abstract Details

Comparative Analysis of Tumor Treating Fields Using Conventional versus Alternative Transducer Array Placement for Posterior Fossa Glioblastoma
Neuro-oncology
P2 - Poster Session 2 (5:30 PM-6:30 PM)
7-029
To determine Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) coverage for posterior fossa glioblastoma.

There is an alternative transducer array placement configuration to treat infratentorial tumors using TTFields but coverage for posterior fossa glioblastoma is unknown.


Patient anatomy-based models were created by segmenting MRI images into tissue “masks”.  The physical properties and boundary conditions for physics modeling were set up within COMSOL Multiphysics.  Electric field maps were compared for models using conventional array placement for supratentorial tumors versus alternative array placement for infratentorial tumors.  Electric field–volume histograms (EVHs) and specific absorption rate–volume histograms (SARVHs) were constructed to evaluate volumetric differences between models.


The alternative configuration consists of array placement at the vertex, the bi-occipital regions and the upper neck.  Highest EAUC was found at the epidural space surrounding the spinal cord and scalp for both types of configurations, whereas the lowest was located at the tongue and orbits.  Using the conventional configuration, the gross tumor volume (GTV) had an electric field area under the curve (EAUC) of 40.5 V/m, volume covered with electric field intensity of 150 V/m (VE150) of 0.01%, 95% electric field intensity (E95%) of 30.9 V/m, E50% of 41.1 V/m, and E20% of 46.6 V/m.   The GTV also had a SARAUC of 4.0 W/kg, volume covered with SAR of 6 W/kg (VSAR6) of 0%, SAR95% of 0.6 W/kg, SAR50% of 0.7 W/kg, and SAR20% of 0.8 W/kg.  The alternative configuration produced EAUC of 52.3 V/m, VE150 of 3.6%, E95% of 29.1 V/m, E50% of 44.7 V/m, and E20% of 58.1 V/m, as well as SARAUC of 0.9 W/kg, VSAR6 of 0.3%, SAR95% of 0.6 W/kg, SAR50% of 0.8 W/kg, and SAR20% of 0.9 W/kg.

The alternative array placement provides a higher coverage of electric field (+29%) to the posterior fossa glioblastoma when compared to the conventional configuration.


Authors/Disclosures
Eric T. Wong, MD, FAAN (Rhode Island Hospital)
PRESENTER
Dr. Wong has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Novocure. Dr. Wong has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for ZaiLab. Dr. Wong has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Turning Point Therapeutics. Dr. Wong has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Imvax. The institution of Dr. Wong has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Novocure. The institution of Dr. Wong has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Turning Point Therapeutics. The institution of Dr. Wong has received research support from Novocure. Dr. Wong has received intellectual property interests from a discovery or technology relating to health care. Dr. Wong has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care.
Pyay San (Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Hospital) No disclosure on file
No disclosure on file
No disclosure on file