Quantifying false positional corrections due to facial motion using SGRT with open-face Masks

Surface guided radiotherapy practice in paediatric oncology: a survey on behalf of the SIOPE Radiation Oncology Working Group

INTRODUCTION

Surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) is increasingly being implemented to track patient's surface movement and position during radiation therapy. However, limited information is available on the SGRT use in paediatrics. The aim of this double survey was to map SIOPE (European Society for Paediatric Oncology)-affiliated centres using SGRT and to gain information on potential indications, observed, or expected benefits.

METHODS

A double online survey was distributed to 246 SIOPE-affiliated radiotherapy (RT) centres. Multiple choices, yes/no, and open answers were included. The first survey (41 questions) was active from February to March 2021. A shortened version (13 questions) was repeated in March 2023 to detect trends in SGRT use within the same community.

RESULTS

Respectively, 76/142 (54%) and 28/142 (20%) responding centres used and planned to use SGRT clinically, including 4/34 (12%) new centres since 2021. Among the SGRT users, 33/76 (43%) already applied this technology to paediatric treatments. The main benefits of improved patient comfort, better monitoring of intrafraction motion, and more accurate initial patient set-up expected by future users did not differ from current SGRT-users (P = .893). Among non-SGRT users, the main hurdles to implement SGRT were costs and time for installation. In paediatrics, SGRT is applied to all anatomical sites.

CONCLUSION

This work provides information on the practice of SGRT in paediatrics across SIOPE-affiliated RT centres which can serve as a basis for departments when considering the purchase of SGRT systems.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Since little information is available in the literature on the use of SGRT in paediatrics, the results of this double survey can serve as a basis for departments treating children when considering the purchase of an SGRT system.

Patient Education Materials for Immobilisation Masks in Radiation Therapy for Adult Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review

Immobilisation masks (IMs) are used for people with head and neck cancer (HNC) undergoing radiation therapy (RT) treatment to ensure accuracy and reproducibility between treatments. Claustrophobia-related mask anxiety in HNC patients is common and can compromise treatment due to patient distress. This scoping review aimed to describe the content of publicly available Patient Education Materials (PEMs) for people with HNC undergoing RT. Three search engines (Bing, Yahoo, and Google) were systematically searched using standard terms. PEMs in audio-visual or written formats were eligible for inclusion if the target readership was adults with HNC and included content on IMs for RT. Content was appraised using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable and Audio-Visual Materials to assess understandability and actionability. In total, 304 PEMs were identified of which 20 met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen PEMs were webpages, three were PDF format, and one was a standalone video. The understandability and actionability of PEMs ranged between 47 to 100% and 0 to 80%, respectively. PEMs authored by Foundations/Organisations scored higher in understandability (80-100%) and were more likely to discuss mask anxiety coping strategies. In comparison, News sites and IM manufacturers published PEMs with the lowest understandability scores (20-80%). The significant variations in the quality of IM PEMs identified suggest that some sources may be more effective at informing patients about IMs. Although multiple aspects of the PEMs were consistent across the reviewed materials, many PEMs lacked information, and a stronger focus on understandability and actionability is required.

Surface guided radiation therapy with an innovative open-face mask and mouth bite: patient motion management in brain stereotactic radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

To guarantee treatment reproducibility and stability, immobilization devices are essential. Additionally, surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) serves as an accurate complement to frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) by aiding patient positioning and real-time monitoring, especially when non-coplanar fields are in use. At our institute, we have developed a surface-guided SRS (SG-SRS) workflow that incorporates our innovative open-face mask (OM) and mouth bite (MB) to guarantee a precise and accurate dose delivery.

METHODS

This study included 40 patients, and all patients were divided into closed mask (CM) and open-face mask (OM) groups according to different positioning flow. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were performed, and the registration results were recorded before and after the treatment. Then Bland-Altman method was used to analyze the consistency of AlignRT-guided positioning errors and CBCT scanning results in the OM group. The error changes between 31 fractions in one patient were recorded to evaluate the feasibility of monitoring during treatment.

RESULTS

The median of translation error between stages of the AlignRT positioning process was (0.03-0.07) cm, and the median of rotation error was (0.20-0.40)°, which were significantly better than those of the Fraxion positioning process (0.09-0.11) cm and (0.60-0.75)°. The mean bias values between the AlignRT guided positioning errors and CBCT were 0.01 cm, - 0.07 cm, 0.03 cm, - 0.30°, - 0.08° and 0.00°. The 31 inter-fractional errors of a single patient monitored by SGRT were within 0.10 cm and 0.50°.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the SGRT with an innovative open-face mask and mouth bite device could achieve precision positioning accuracy and stability, and the accuracy of the AlignRT system exhibits excellent constancy with the CBCT gold standard. The non-coplanar radiation field monitoring can provide reliable support for motion management in fractional treatment.

Comparison of patient setup accuracy for optical surface-guided and X-ray-guided imaging with respect to the impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The objective of this work is to estimate the patient positioning accuracy of a surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system using an optical surface scanner compared to an X‑ray-based imaging system (IGRT) with respect to their impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).

METHODS

Patient positioning data, both acquired with SGRT and IGRT systems at the same linacs, serve as a basis for determination of positioning accuracy. A total of 35 patients with two different open face masks (578 datasets) were positioned using X‑ray stereoscopic imaging and the patient position inside the open face mask was recorded using SGRT. The measurement accuracy of the SGRT system (in a "standard" and an SRS mode with higher resolution) was evaluated using both IGRT and SGRT patient positioning datasets taking into account the measurement errors of the X‑ray system. Based on these clinically measured datasets, the positioning accuracy was estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. The relevant evaluation criterion, as standard of practice in cranial SRT, was the 95th percentile.

RESULTS

The interfractional measurement displacement vector of the SGRT system, σSGRT, in high resolution mode was estimated at 2.5 mm (68th percentile) and 5 mm (95th percentile). If the standard resolution was used, σSGRT increased by about 20%. The standard deviation of the axis-related σSGRT of the SGRT system ranged between 1.5 and 1.8 mm interfractionally and 0.5 and 1.0 mm intrafractionally. The magnitude of σSGRT is mainly due to the principle of patient surface scanning and not due to technical limitations or vendor-specific issues in software or hardware. Based on the resulting σSGRT, MC simulations served as a measure for the positioning accuracy for non-coplanar couch rotations. If an SGRT system is used as the only patient positioning device in non-coplanar fields, interfractional positioning errors of up to 6 mm and intrafractional errors of up to 5 mm cannot be ruled out. In contrast, MC simulations resulted in a positioning error of 1.6 mm (95th percentile) using the IGRT system. The cause of positioning errors in the SGRT system is mainly a change in the facial surface relative to a defined point in the brain.

CONCLUSION

In order to achieve the necessary geometric accuracy in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy, use of an X‑ray-based IGRT system, especially when treating with non-coplanar couch angles, is highly recommended.

The Remove-the-Mask Open-Source head and neck Surface-Guided radiation therapy system

Background and Purpose

Surface Guided Radiotherapy (SGRT) for head and neck radiotherapy is challenging as obstructions are common and non-rigid facial motion can compromise surface accuracy. The purpose of this work was to develop and benchmark the Remove the Mask (RtM) SGRT system, an open-source system especially designed to address the challenges faced in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer.

Materials and Methods

The accuracy of the RtM SGRT system was benchmarked using a head phantom positioned on a robotic motion platform capable of sub-millimetre accuracy which was used to induce unidirectional shifts and to reproduce three real head motion traces. We also assessed the accuracy of the system in ten humans volunteers. The ground truth motion of the volunteers was obtained using a commercial motion capture system with an accuracy < 0.3 mm.

Results

The mean tracking error of the RtM SGRT system for the ten volunteers was of -0.1 ± 0.4 mm -0.6 ± 0.6 mm and 0.3 ± 0.2 mm, and 0.0 ± 0.2° 0.0 ± 0.1° and 0.0 ± 0.2° for translations and rotations along the left-right, superior-inferior and anterior-posterior axes respectively and we also found similar results in measurements with the head phantom. Forced facial motion was associated with lower tracking accuracy. The RtM SGRT system achieved submillimetre accuracy.

Conclusion

The RtM SGRT system is a low-cost, easy to build and open-source SGRT system that can achieve an accuracy that meets international commissioning guidelines. Its open-source and modular design allows for the development and easy translation of novel surface tracking techniques.

Surface-Guided Radiotherapy: Can We Move on from the Era of Three-Point Markers to the New Era of Thousands of Points?

The surface-guided radiotherapy (SGRT) technique improves patient positioning with submillimeter accuracy compared with the conventional positioning technique of lasers using three-point tattoos. SGRT provides solutions to considerations that arise from the conventional setup technique, such as variability in tattoo position and the psychological impact of the tattoos. Moreover, SGRT provides monitoring of intrafractional motion.

PURPOSE

This literature review covers the basics of SGRT systems and examines whether SGRT can replace the traditional positioning technique. In addition, it investigates SGRT's potential in reducing positioning times, factors affecting SGRT accuracy, the effectiveness of live monitoring, and the impact on patient dosage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study focused on papers published from 2016 onward that compared SGRT with the traditional positioning technique and investigated factors affecting SGRT accuracy and effectiveness.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

SGRT provides the same or better results regarding patient positioning. The implementation of SGRT can reduce overall treatment time. It is an effective technique for detecting intrafraction patient motion, improving treatment accuracy and precision, and creating a safe and comfortable environment for the patient during treatment.

Surface-guided radiotherapy overview: Technical aspects and clinical applications

In radiotherapy, patient positioning has long been ensured by ionizing imaging (kV or MV). Over the past ten years, surface-guided radiotherapy has appeared in radiotherapy departments. It is a continuous three-dimensional acquisition of the surface of the patient, based on the use of several optical cameras. The acquired surface is compared to an expected surface (usually taken from the planning scanner). Operators can constantly appreciate poor position, anatomical deformity or patient shift. Thus, the system allows an aid to the positioning of the patient, possibly without tattooing, but also a follow-up of the patient during the duration of the session. The most obvious contribution of the system concerns the treatment of the breast. In fact, for this location, the bone registration is not ideal and the target is visible in surface-guided radiotherapy. These systems also make it possible to treat in deep inspiration breath hold. But several other locations can benefit from it (pelvis, thorax, etc.).

End to end comparison of surface-guided imaging versus stereoscopic X-rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms

INTRODUCTION

Two end-to-end tests evaluate the accuracy of a surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system (CRAD Catalyst HD) for position verification in comparison to a stereoscopic x-ray imaging system (Brainlab Exactrac ) for single-isocenter, multiple metastases stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using 3D polymer gel inserts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 3D-printed phantom (Prime phantom, RTsafe PC, Athens, Greece) with two separate cylindrical polymer gel inserts were immobilized in open-face masks and treated with a single isocentric, multitarget SRS plan. Planning was done in Brainlab (Elements) to treat five metastatic lesions in one fraction, and initial setup was done using cone beam computed tomography. Positional verification was done using orthogonal X-ray imaging (Brainlab Exactrac) and/or a surface imaging system (CRAD Catalyst HD, Uppsala, Sweden), and shift discrepancies were recorded for each couch angle. Forty-two hours after irradiation, the gel phantom was scanned in a 1.5 Tesla MRI, and images were fused with the patient computed tomography data/structure set for further analysis of spatial dose distribution.

RESULTS

Discrepancies between the CRAD Catalyst HD system and Brainlab Exactrac were <1 mm in the translational direction and <0.5° in the angular direction at noncoplanar couch angles. Dose parameters (DMean% , D95% ) and 3D gamma index passing rates were evaluated for both setup modalities for each planned target volume (PTV) at a variety of thresholds: 3%/2 mm (Exactrac≥93.1% and CRAD ≥87.2%), 5%/2 mm (Exactrac≥95.6% and CRAD ≥94.6%), and 5%/1 mm (Exactrac≥81.8% and CRAD ≥83.7%).

CONCLUSION

Dose metrics for a setup with surface imaging was found to be consistent with setup using x-ray imaging, demonstrating high accuracy and reproducibility for treatment delivery. Results indicate the feasibility of using surface imaging for position verification at noncoplanar couch angles for single-isocenter, multiple-target SRS using end-to-end quality assurance (QA) testing with 3D polymer gel dosimetry.

Augmented reality-guided positioning system for radiotherapy patients

In modern radiotherapy, error reduction in the patients’ daily setup error is important for achieving accuracy. In our study, we proposed a new approach for the development of an assist system for the radiotherapy position setup by using augmented reality (AR). We aimed to improve the accuracy of the position setup of patients undergoing radiotherapy and to evaluate the error of the position setup of patients who were diagnosed with head and neck cancer, and that of patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer. We acquired the patient's simulation CT data for the three‐dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the external surface and organs. The AR tracking software detected the calibration module and loaded the 3D virtual model. The calibration module was aligned with the Linac isocenter by using room lasers. And then aligned the virtual cube with the calibration module to complete the calibration of the 3D virtual model and Linac isocenter. Then, the patient position setup was carried out, and point cloud registration was performed between the patient and the 3D virtual model, such the patient's posture was consistent with the 3D virtual model. Twenty patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer and 20 patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer in the supine position setup were analyzed for the residual errors of the conventional laser and AR‐guided position setup. Results show that for patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer, the difference between the two positioning methods was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). For patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer, the residual errors of the two positioning methods in the superior and inferior direction and anterior and posterior direction were statistically significant (t = −5.80, −4.98, P < 0.05). The residual errors in the three rotation directions were statistically significant (t = −2.29 to −3.22, P < 0.05). The experimental results showed that the AR technology can effectively assist in the position setup of patients undergoing radiotherapy, significantly reduce the position setup errors in patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer, and improve the accuracy of radiotherapy.