Modeling set-up error by daily MVCT for prostate adjuvant treatment delivered in 20 fractions: Implications for the assessment of the optimal correction strategies

The use of tissue fiducial markers in improving the accuracy of post-prostatectomy radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the use of a radiopaque tissue fiducial marker (TFM) in the treatment of prostate cancer patients who undergo post-prostatectomy radiotherapy (PPRT). TFM safety, its role and benefit in quantifying the set-up uncertainties in patients undergoing PPRT image-guided radiotherapy were assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 45 consecutive PPRT patients underwent transperineal implantation of TFM at the level of vesicourethral anastomosis in the retrovesical tissue prior to intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Prostate bed motion was calculated by measuring the position of the TFM relative to the pelvic bony anatomy on daily cone-beam computed tomography. The stability and visibility of the TFM were assessed in the initial 10 patients.

RESULTS

No postoperative complications were recorded. A total of 3,500 images were analysed. The calculated prostate bed motion for bony landmark matching relative to TFM were 2.25 mm in the left-right, 5.89 mm in the superior-inferior, and 6.59 mm in the anterior-posterior directions. A significant 36% reduction in the mean volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy (rV70) was achieved for a uniform planning target volume (PTV) margin of 7 mm compared with the Australian and New Zealand Faculty of Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group recommended PTV margin of 10 mm.

CONCLUSION

The use of TFM was safe and can potentially eliminate set-up errors associated with bony landmark matching, thereby allowing for tighter PTV margins and a consequent favourable reduction in dose delivered to the bladder and rectum, with potential improvements in toxicities.

Megavoltage CT Images of Helical Tomotherapy Unit for Radiation Treatment Simulation: Impact on Feasibility of Treatment Planning in a Prostate Cancer Patient with Bilateral Femoral Prostheses

Metal prosthesis artefacts on CT images can be a significant problem in the definition of volumes of interest, dose calculation and patient setup in modern radiotherapy. We experienced considerable difficulties in defining the organs at risk and treatment volumes on kVCT images of standard CT simulation in a prostate cancer patient due to the presence of bilateral femoral prostheses causing artefacts. As shown in the current case, MVCT images of the patient in the treatment position obtained using a helical tomotherapy unit can provide sufficient morphological information to define the pelvic anatomic structures for radical prostate treatment planning. The patient completed the planned treatment and at 90 days after the end of treatment no severe side effects were recorded. Since there have been few reports on the use of MVCT images to overcome the problem of hip prosthesis artefacts, a brief literature review was also carried out.

Setup error analysis in helical tomotherapy based image-guided radiation therapy treatments

The adequacy of setup margins for various sites in patients treated with helical tomotherapy was investigated. A total of 102 patients were investigated. The breakdown of the patients were as follows: Twenty-five patients each in brain, head and neck (H and N), and pelvis, while 12 patients in lung and 15 in craniospinal irradiation (CSI). Patients were immobilized on the institutional protocol. Altogether 2686 megavoltage computed tomography images were analyzed with 672, 747, 622, 333, and 312 fractions, respectively, from brain, H and N, pelvis, lung, and CSI. Overall systematic and random errors were calculated in three translational and three rotational directions. Setup margins were evaluated using van Herk formula. The calculated margins were compared with the margins in the clinical use for various directions and sites. We found that the clinical isotropic margin of 3 mm was adequate for brain patients. However, in the longitudinal direction it was found to be out of margin by 0.7 mm. In H and N, the calculated margins were well within the isotropic margin of 5 mm which is in clinical use. In pelvis, the calculated margin was within the limits, 8.3 mm versus 10 mm only in longitudinal direction, however, in vertical and lateral directions the calculated margins were out of clinical margins 11 mm versus 10 mm, and 8.7 mm versus 7.0, mm respectively. In lung, all the calculated margins were well within the margins used clinically. In CSI, the variation was found in the middle spine in the longitudinal direction. The clinical margins used in our hospital are adequate enough for sites H and N, lung, and brain, however, for CSI and pelvis the margins were found to be out of clinical margins.

Evaluation of image-guidance strategies for prostate cancer

In this study, set-up accuracy and time consumption of different image-guidance protocols used for prostate cancer patients were compared. Set-up corrections from 60 prostate cancer patients treated on helical tomotherapy (HT) were used to simulate four types of image-guidance protocols which were based on: (i) a limited number of imaging sessions (IG-1), (ii) reduced registration tasks during daily imaging (IG-2), or (iii) and (iv) mixed methods of imaging (IG-3, IG-4). Each protocol was evaluated for three referencing scenarios based on the first fraction, first three fractions and first five fractions. Residual set-up error, the difference between the average set-up correction and the actual correction required, was used to evaluate the accuracy of each protocol. The first five fractions referencing scenario provides the highest reduction of the margins for each image-guidance protocol evaluated in this study. The first type of protocol is the shortest way to the effective correction of the systematic component of set-up error. For the second type of the protocol, the control of the residual errors is better and, as a result, the reduction of the margins is more significant than that obtained for the first one. Moreover, the second type of the protocol provides the highest accuracy of delivered dose. The result obtained for the fourth type of protocol does not decrease the calculated margins or increase their accuracy in correspondence to the no image guidance scheme. The fourth type of the protocol is not recommended as a protocol to be used to increase the conformity of the dose. The choice of the rest protocols should be validated in the context of (i) institutional practice regarding patient set-up procedure and its time consumption, (ii) acceptable balance between the amount of the dose delivered to the organ at risk and the additional imaging dose and (iii) patient anatomical conditions.

Image guidance procedures in radiotherapy for prostate cancer and the influence of body mass index

Purpose

To investigate possible optimisation of the image guidance procedure for the prostate cancer patients with respect to imaging frequency and patient body mass index (BMI).

Methods

The 6,085 setup correction shifts and BMI for 216 prostate cancer patients treated on tomotherapy units in two centres were analysed. Margins needed to account for inter-fraction target motion with daily only automatic correction and with automatic and manual corrections during one, three or five first fractions as a reference for further treatment without imaging were calculated.

Results

The planning target volume margin calculated for the daily automatic correction only scheme was significantly lower than the margins calculated for the image guidance limited to a few initial fractions. Manual corrections after automatic fusion were more important for patients with higher BMI. On average, the patients with normal BMI had manual correction shift of 0·7 mm in anterioposterior direction, while overweight and obese patients required, correspondingly, the shifts of 1·3 and 1·4 mm.

Conclusion

Overweight and obese patients require daily imaging with time saving available by performing automatic kV/MV computed tomography registration only. The patients with normal BMI may be treated with imaging guidance during a few initial treatment fractions.

Comparative analysis of image guidance in two institutions for prostate cancer patients

AIM/BACKGROUND

The analysis of systematic and random errors obtained from the pooled data on inter-fraction prostate motion during radiation therapy in two institutions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of 6085 observations for 216 prostate cancer patients treated on tomotherapy units in two institutions of position correction shifts obtained by co-registration of planning and daily CT studies were investigated. Three independent variables: patient position (supine or prone), target (prostate or prostate bed), and imaging mode (normal or coarse) were analyzed. Systematic and random errors were evaluated and used to calculate the margins for different options of referencing based on the position corrections observed with one, three, or five imaging sessions.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis showed that only the difference between normal and coarse modes of imaging was significant, which allowed to merge the supine and prone position sub-groups as well as the prostate and prostate bed patients. In the normal and coarse imaging groups, the margins calculated using systematic and random errors in the medio-lateral and cranio-caudal directions (5.5 mm and 4.5 mm, respectively) were similar, but significantly different (5.3 mm for the normal mode and 7.1 mm for the coarse mode) in the anterio-posterior direction. The reference scheme based on the first three fractions (R3) was found to be the optimal one.

CONCLUSIONS

The R3 reference scheme effectively reduced systematic and random errors. Larger margins in the anterio-posterior direction should be used during prostate treatment on the tomotherapy unit, as coarse imaging mode is chosen in order to reduce imaging time and dose.

Application of an independent dose calculation software for estimating the impact of inter-fractional setup shifts in Helical Tomotherapy treatments

The purpose of this study is to validate the capability of in-house independent point dose calculation software to be used as a second check for Helical Tomotherapy treatment plans. The software performed its calculations in homogenous conditions (using the Cheese phantom, which is a cylindrical phantom with radius 15 cm and length 18 cm) using a factor-based algorithm. Fifty patients, who were treated for pelvic (10), prostate (14), lung (10), head & neck (12) and brain (4) cancers, were used. Based on the individual patient kVCT images and the pretreatment MVCT images for each treatment fraction, the corresponding daily patient setup shifts in the IEC-X, IEC-Y, and IEC-Z directions were registered. For each patient, the registered fractional setup shifts were grouped into systematic and random shifts. The average systematic dosimetric variations showed small dose deviation for the different cancer types (1.0%-3.0%) compared to the planned dose. Of the fifty patients, only three had percent differences larger than 5%. The average random dosimetric variations showed relatively small dose deviations (0.2%-1.1%) compared to the planned dose. None of the patients had percent differences larger than 5%. By examining the individual fractions of each patient, it is observed that only in 31 out of 1358 fractions the percent differences exceeded the border of 5%. These results indicate that the overall dosimetric impact from systematic and random variations is small and that the software is a capable platform for independent point dose validation for the Helical Tomotherapy modality.

Consideration of the likely benefit from implementation of prostate image-guided radiotherapy using current margin sizes: a radiobiological analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the benefit of introduction of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) to prostate radiotherapy practice with current clinical target volume-planning target volume (PTV) margins of 5-10 mm.

METHODS

Systematic error data collected from 50 patients were used together with a random error of σ=3.0 mm to model non-IGRT treatment. IGRT was modelled with residual errors of Σ=σ=1.5 mm. Population tumour control probability (TCP(pop)) was calculated for two three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy techniques: two-phase and concomitant boost. Treatment volumes and dose prescriptions were ostensibly the same. The relative field sizes of the treatment techniques, distribution of systematic errors and correlations between movement axes were examined.

RESULTS

The differences in TCP(pop) between the IGRT and non-IGRT regimes were 0.3% for the two-phase and 1.5% for the concomitant boost techniques. A 2-phase plan, in each phase of which the 95% isodose conformed to its respective PTV, required fields that were 3.5 mm larger than those required for the concomitant boost plan. Despite the larger field sizes, the TCP (without IGRT) in the two-phase plan was only 1.7% higher than the TCP in the concomitant boost plan. The deviation of craniocaudal systematic errors (p=0.02) from a normal distribution, and the correlation of translations in the craniocaudal and anteroposterior directions (p<0.0001) were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The expected population benefit of IGRT for the modelled situation was too small to be detected by a clinical trial of reasonable size, although there was a significant benefit to individual patients. For IGRT to have an observable population benefit, the trial would need to use smaller margins than those used in this study. Concomitant treatment techniques permit smaller fields and tighter conformality than two phases planned separately.

Three-dimensional patient setup errors at different treatment sites measured by the Tomotherapy megavoltage CT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Reduction of interfraction setup uncertainty is vital for assuring the accuracy of conformal radiotherapy. We report a systematic study of setup error to assess patients' three-dimensional (3D) localization at various treatment sites.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Tomotherapy megavoltage CT (MVCT) images were scanned daily in 259 patients from 2005-2008. We analyzed 6,465 MVCT images to measure setup error for head and neck (H&N), chest/thorax, abdomen, prostate, legs, and total marrow irradiation (TMI). Statistical comparisons of the absolute displacements across sites and time were performed in rotation (R), lateral (x), craniocaudal (y), and vertical (z) directions.

RESULTS

The global systematic errors were measured to be less than 3 mm in each direction with increasing order of errors for different sites: H&N, prostate, chest, pelvis, spine, legs, and TMI. The differences in displacements in the x, y, and z directions, and 3D average displacement between treatment sites were significant (p < 0.01). Overall improvement in patient localization with time (after 3-4 treatment fractions) was observed. Large displacement (> 5 mm) was observed in the 75(th) percentile of the patient groups for chest, pelvis, legs, and spine in the x and y direction in the second week of the treatment.

CONCLUSION

MVCT imaging is essential for determining 3D setup error and to reduce uncertainty in localization at all anatomical locations. Setup error evaluation should be performed daily for all treatment regions, preferably for all treatment fractions.

Image-guided radiotherapy using surgical clips as fiducial markers after prostatectomy: a report of total setup error, required PTV expansion, and dosimetric implications

PURPOSE

To determine the total setup error and the required planning target volume (PTV) margin for prostate bed without image guided radiotherapy (IGRT), and to demonstrate the feasibility and dosimetric benefit of IGRT post prostatectomy using surgical clips.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventeen patients were treated with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) to the prostate bed with a 1cm PTV margin. Three-dimensional shifts of the surgical clips inside the prostate bed were measured with respect to the isocenter from 364 orthogonal kV image pairs, and the total setup error was calculated to determine the required PTV margin. Alternative IMRT plans using 5mm or 1cm PTV expansion were generated and compared for rectal and bladder sparing.

RESULTS

Surgical clips were reproducibly and reliably identified. The mean (standard deviation) shifts in the left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP), axes were: -0.1 mm (1.7 mm), 0.6 mm (2.4 mm), and -2.1 mm (2.6 mm), respectively. The required PTV margins were calculated to be 6, 8, and 9 mm in the LR, AP, and SI axis, respectively. A PTV expansion of 5mm, compared to 1cm, significantly reduced V65 Gy to the rectum by 10%.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of IGRT, a non-uniform PTV margin of 6mm LR, 8mm AP, and 9 mm SI should be considered. Use of clips as fiducial markers can decrease the total setup error, enable a smaller PTV margin, and improve rectal sparing.

Comparison of daily prostate positions during conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer using an integrated CT-linear accelerator system: in-room CT image versus digitally reconstructed radiograph

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to quantify the magnitudes of the position shifts of internal structures together with the correlation between the day-to-day positioning of the prostate and the bony anatomy using an integrated CT-linear accelerator system for external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1176 pretreatment in-room CT images and their digitally reconstructed radio-graph (DRR) pairs from 33 patients were acquired over the course of the study. The differences between the isocenter of the prostate on in-room CT and the isocenter of the bony anatomy on DRR were analyzed. The agreement between positions in each direction was compared using Bland-Altman limits of agreement.

RESULTS

The 95% limits of agreement in lateral (LR), superoinferior (SI), and anteroposterior (AP) directions were -2.98 to 2.49 mm, -4.69 to 5.75 mm, and -8.23 to 7.30 mm, respectively. The isocenter was localized to within 3.0 mm on in-room CT images and DRR 99.0% in LR, 85.1% in SI, and 85.9% in AP.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences between in-room CT images and DRR exist. These data demonstrate that there is a significantly greater shift in the SI and AP directions than in the lateral direction for the entire patient group. Applications such as our image guide system will, with routine clinical use, continue to improve the precision of external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

The European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology-European Institute of Radiotherapy (ESTRO-EIR) report on 3D CT-based in-room image guidance systems: a practical and technical review and guide

The past decade has provided many technological advances in radiotherapy. The European Institute of Radiotherapy (EIR) was established by the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) to provide current consensus statement with evidence-based and pragmatic guidelines on topics of practical relevance for radiation oncology. This report focuses primarily on 3D CT-based in-room image guidance (3DCT-IGRT) systems. It will provide an overview and current standing of 3DCT-IGRT systems addressing the rationale, objectives, principles, applications, and process pathways, both clinical and technical for treatment delivery and quality assurance. These are reviewed for four categories of solutions; kV CT and kV CBCT (cone-beam CT) as well as MV CT and MV CBCT. It will also provide a framework and checklist to consider the capability and functionality of these systems as well as the resources needed for implementation. Two different but typical clinical cases (tonsillar and prostate cancer) using 3DCT-IGRT are illustrated with workflow processes via feedback questionnaires from several large clinical centres currently utilizing these systems. The feedback from these clinical centres demonstrates a wide variability based on local practices. This report whilst comprehensive is not exhaustive as this area of development remains a very active field for research and development. However, it should serve as a practical guide and framework for all professional groups within the field, focussed on clinicians, physicists and radiation therapy technologists interested in IGRT.