Interfraction positional variation in pancreatic tumors using daily breath-hold cone-beam computed tomography with visual feedback

A systematic review of tumour position reproducibility and stability in breath-hold for radiation therapy of the upper abdomen

Background and purpose

Upper abdominal malignancies are relatively rare, and although surgery is considered the primary treatment option, radiation therapy has an emerging role in the management of liver, pancreas, kidney and adrenal gland tumours. Furthermore, stereotactic radiation therapy for the management of upper abdominal metastases is an expanding clinical indication. Breath-hold is one respiratory motion management strategy used in upper abdominal radiation therapy, and the reproducibility, and stability of breath-hold is critical for overall treatment accuracy.

Materials and methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted in Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases with keyword and vocabulary terms related to radiation therapy, breath-hold and upper abdominal tumours.

Results

Following screening against the selection criteria, 41 studies were included. Breath-hold reproducibility was the most commonly reported outcome and exhale breath-hold was the most common type. Studies were either prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and the mean sample size was 19 participants. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed, and the mean quality assessment score for included studies was 90 % (77-100 %). Median exhale breath-hold cranio-caudal inter-fraction reproducibility was 0.6 mm, (IQR 0.3-1.6 mm), compared to inspiratory breath-hold 0.0 mm (IQR -0.6-2.97 mm). Stability measurements were ≤3 mm in 71 % of studies, irrespective of breath-hold type.

Discussion

Formulating institutional protocols for best clinical practice regarding breath-hold for upper abdominal tumours is challenging, given the significant variation in practices, interventions and definitions observed in the literature. Further investigation to individualise breath-hold strategies and safety margins is warranted.

Assessment of interfraction dose variation in pancreas SBRT using daily simulation MR images

Pancreatic Cancer is associated with poor treatment outcomes compared to other cancers. High local control rates have been achieved by using hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to treat pancreatic cancer. Challenges in delivering SBRT include close proximity of several organs at risk (OARs) and target volume inter and intra fraction positional variations. Magnetic resonance image (MRI) guided radiotherapy has shown potential for online adaptive radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer, with superior soft tissue contrast compared to CT. The aim of this study was to investigate the variability of target and OAR volumes for different treatment approaches for pancreatic cancer, and to assess the suitability of utilizing a treatment-day MRI for treatment planning purposes. Ten healthy volunteers were scanned on a Siemens Skyra 3 T MRI scanner over two sessions (approximately 3 h apart), per day over 5 days to simulate an SBRT daily simulation scan for treatment planning. A pretreatment scan was also done to simulate patient setup and treatment. A 4D MRI scan was taken at each session for internal target volume (ITV) generation and assessment. For each volunteer a treatment plan was generated in the Raystation treatment planning system (TPS) following departmental protocols on the day one, first session dataset (D1S1), with bulk density overrides applied to enable dose calculation. This treatment plan was propagated through other imaging sessions, and the dose calculated. An additional treatment plan was generated on each first session of each day (S1) to simulate a daily replan process, with this plan propagated to the second session of the day. These accumulated mock treatment doses were assessed against the original treatment plan through DVH comparison of the PTV and OAR volumes. The generated ITV showed large variations when compared to both the first session ITV and daily ITV, with an average magnitude of 22.44% ± 13.28% and 25.83% ± 37.48% respectively. The PTV D95 was reduced by approximately 23.3% for both plan comparisons considered. Surrounding OARs had large variations in dose, with the small bowel V30 increasing by 128.87% when compared to the D1S1 plan, and 43.11% when compared to each daily S1 plan. Daily online adaptive radiotherapy is required for accurate dose delivery for pancreas cancer in the absence of additional motion management and tumour tracking techniques.

Assessing target localization accuracy across different soft-tissue matching protocols using end-exhalation breath-hold cone-beam computed tomography in patients with pancreatic cancer

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively assess target localization accuracy across different soft-tissue matching protocols using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in a large sample of patients with pancreatic cancer and to estimate the optimal margin size for each protocol. Fifty-four consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent 15-fraction volumetric modulated arc therapy under the end-exhalation breath-hold condition were enrolled. Two soft-tissue matching protocols were used according to the resectability classification, including gross tumor volume (GTV) matching for potentially resectable tumors and planning target volume (PTV) matching for borderline resectable or unresectable tumors. The tolerance of the target localization error in both matching protocols was set to 5 mm in any direction. The optimal margin size for each soft-tissue matching protocol was calculated from the systematic and random errors of the inter- and intrafraction positional variations using the van Herk formula. The inter- and intrafraction positional variations of PTV matching were smaller than those of GTV matching. The percentage of target localization errors exceeding 5 mm in the first CBCT scan of each fraction in the superior-inferior direction was 12.6 and 4.8% for GTV and PTV matching, respectively. The optimal margin sizes for GTV and PTV matching were 3.7 and 2.7, 5.4 and 4.1 and 3.9 and 3.0 mm in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right directions, respectively. Target localization accuracy in PTV matching was higher than that in GTV matching. By setting the tolerance of the target localization error, treatment can be successful within the planned margin size.

Dosimetric Uncertainties Resulting From Interfractional Anatomic Variations for Patients Receiving Pancreas Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Cone Beam Computed Tomography Image Guidance

PURPOSE

To estimate the effects of interfractional anatomic changes on dose to organs at risk (OARs) and tumors, as measured with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image guidance for pancreatic stereotactic body radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We evaluated 11 patients with pancreatic cancer whom were treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (33-40 Gy in 5 fractions) using daily CT-on-rails (CTOR) image guidance immediately before treatment with breath-hold motion management. CBCT alignment was simulated in the treatment planning software by aligning the original planning CT to each fractional CTOR image set via fiducial markers. CTOR data sets were used to calculate fractional doses after alignment by applying the rigid shift of the planning CT and CTOR image sets to the planning treatment isocenter and recalculating the fractional dose. Accumulated dose to the gross tumor volume (GTV), tumor vessel interface, duodenum, small bowel, and stomach were calculated by summing the 5 fractional absolute dose-volume histograms into a single dose-volume histogram for comparison with the original planned dose.

RESULTS

Four patients had a GTV D100% of at least 1.5 Gy less than the fractional planned value in several fractions; 4 patients had fractional underestimation of duodenum dose by 1.0 Gy per fraction. The D1.0 cm³ <35 Gy constraint was violated for at least 1 OAR in 3 patients, with either the duodenum (n = 2) or small bowel (n = 1) D1.0 cm³ being higher on the accumulated dose distribution (P = .01). D100% was significantly lower according to accumulated dose GTV (P = .01) and tumor vessel interface (P = .02), with 4 and 2 patients having accumulated D100%  ≥4 Gy lower than the planned value for the GTV and tumor vessel interface, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For some patients, CBCT image guidance based on fiducial alignment may cause large dosimetric uncertainties for OARs and target structures, according to accumulated dose.

Robustness of daily dose for each beam angle and accumulated dose for inter-fractional anatomical changes in passive carbon-ion radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer: Bone matching versus tumor matching

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess the robustness of accumulated dose distributions for inter-fractional changes in passive carbon-ion radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Ninety-five daily CT image sets acquired after the treatment of eight patients with pancreatic cancer were used in this prospective study. Dose distributions with treatment beam fields were recalculated for bone matching (BM) and tumor matching (TM) positions on all daily CT images, the accumulated doses being calculated using deformable image registration methods. The prescribed dose was 55.2 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 12 fractions. Dose volume parameters of V95 (%) for CTV and GTV, and D2cc (Gy(RBE)) for the stomach and duodenum were evaluated.

RESULTS

The medians (range) of CTV V95 (%) were 91.9 (86.1-100.0), 80.5 (56.1-90.6), and 86.4 (72.5-96.5) for the Plan, accumulated with BM and TM, respectively; GTV values (%) were 98.0 (85.7-100.0), 93.3 (65.7-99.9), and 96.2 (84.8-100.0), respectively. There were significant differences between all combinations apart from the Plan and TM for both targets. The values of stomach D2cc (Gy(RBE)) were 36.0 (16.9-43.4), 36.7 (17.9-45.0), and 35.2 (16.8-43.5), respectively; duodenum values (Gy(RBE)) were 25.2 (21.3-40.3), 30.1 (23.3-48.6), and 28.3 (20.4-50.6), respectively. There was a significant difference between the Plan and BM for duodenum only.

CONCLUSIONS

TM is recommended over BM because it can achieve higher target dose coverage than BM. Nevertheless, it is not enough in some cases. Further technical improvements are necessary to improve the target dose coverage.

Determination of reproducibility of end-exhaled breath-holding in stereotactic body radiation therapy

Methods to evaluate the positional reproducibility of breath-hold irradiation mostly require manual operation. The purpose of this study is to propose a method to determine the reproducibility of breath-hold irradiation of lung tumors between fractions using non-artificial methods. This study included 13 patients who underwent terminal exhaled breath-hold irradiation for primary and metastatic lung cancer. All subjects received a prescribed dose of 60 Gy/8 fractions. The contours of the gross tumor volume (GTV) were extracted by threshold processing using treatment-planning computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam CT (CBCT), which was done just before the beginning of the treatment. The method proposed in this study evaluates the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD) by comparing two volumes, the GTVCTS (GTV obtained from treatment-planning CT) and GTVCBCT (GTV obtained from CBCT). The reference contours for DSC and HD are represented by GTVCTS. The results demonstrated good visual agreement for cases with a DSC of ~0.7. However, apparent misalignment occurred when the DSC was <0.5. HD was >2 mm in 3 out of 13 cases, and when the DSC was ~0.7, the HD was ~1 mm. In addition, cases with greater HD also demonstrated more significant variability. It was found that the DSC and HD evaluation methods for the positional reproducibility of breath-hold irradiation proposed in this study are straightforward and can be performed without the involvement of humans. Our study is of extreme significance in the field of radiation studies.

Positional repeatability and variation in internal and external markers during volumetric-modulated arc therapy under end-exhalation breath-hold conditions for pancreatic cancer patients

The purpose of this study was to assess the positional repeatability of internal and external markers among multiple breath-hold (BH) sessions and evaluate the positional variation of these markers within BH sessions for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for pancreatic cancer patients. A total of 13 consecutive pancreatic cancer patients with an internal marker were enrolled. Single full-arc coplanar VMAT was delivered under end-exhalation BH conditions while monitoring the internal marker with kilovoltage (kV) X-ray fluoroscopy. Positional repeatability of the internal and external markers was determined by the difference between the reference and zero position in all BH sessions, and positional variation was defined by the displacement from the reference position in each BH session during megavolt beam delivery. The overall positional repeatability was 0.6 ± 1.5 mm in the X-axis for the centroid of the internal marker (CoIM), -0.1 ± 2.2 mm in the Y-axis for the CoIM, and 0.8 ± 2.2 mm for the external marker. The frequency of an internal marker position appearing > 2 mm from the reference position in the Y-axis, despite the external marker position being ≤2 mm from the reference position, ranged from 0.0 to 39.9% for each patient. Meanwhile, the proportion of sessions with positional variation ≤2 mm was 93.2 and 98.7% for the CoIM and external marker, respectively. External marker motion can be used as a surrogate for pancreatic tumor motion during BH-VMAT delivery; however, margins of ~5 mm were required to ensure positional repeatability.

Impact of interfractional anatomical variation and setup correction methods on interfractional dose variation in IMPT and VMAT plans for pancreatic cancer patients: A planning study

Purpose

To investigate the impact of interfractional anatomical changes and setup correction methods on dose distributions in pancreatic cancer patients under breath‐hold conditions.

Methods

Three intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans with different beam arrangements and one volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan prescribing 54 Gy in 30 fractions were created for 10 patients who underwent three additional CT scans performed at an interval of 1–2 weeks. The additional CT sets were rigidly registered to the simulation CT set using both bone‐matching (BM) and organ‐matching (OM) methods in each patient. Recalculated dose distributions and dose–volume indices on the additional CT sets using either the BM or the OM method were compared with the simulation values.

Results

Differences in the gross tumor volume D_98% value from the simulation sets ranged from −0.8 to −5.9% on average. In addition, the variations were larger with OM compared with BM for two IMPT plans. Meanwhile, differences in the D_98% value in the region isotropically enlarged by 5 mm from the gross tumor volume were significantly improved with OM on two IMPT plans and the VMAT plan. Among the organs at risk, the dose–volume indices were significantly improved with OM only in the duodenum on all plans.

Conclusion

Organ‐matching may be a better setup correction technique than BM for both photon therapy and IMPT plans. However, in some beam arrangements of IMPT, the dose distribution may be somewhat worse using OM, due to interfractional anatomical variation. Therefore, it is important to choose beam angles that are less likely to be influenced by changes in the gastrointestinal gas volume, especially in IMPT plans.

Quantification of the kV X-ray imaging dose during real-time tumor tracking and from three- and four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography in lung cancer patients using a Monte Carlo simulation

Knowledge of the imaging doses delivered to patients and accurate dosimetry of the radiation to organs from various imaging procedures is becoming increasingly important for clinicians. The purposes of this study were to calculate imaging doses delivered to the organs of lung cancer patients during real-time tumor tracking (RTTT) with three-dimensional (3D), and four-dimensional (4D) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), using Monte Carlo techniques to simulate kV X-ray dose distributions delivered using the Vero4DRT. Imaging doses from RTTT, 3D-CBCT and 4D-CBCT were calculated with the planning CT images for nine lung cancer patients who underwent stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with RTTT. With RTTT, imaging doses from correlation modeling and from monitoring of imaging during beam delivery were calculated. With CBCT, doses from 3D-CBCT and 4D-CBCT were also simulated. The doses covering 2-cc volumes (D2cc) in correlation modeling were up to 9.3 cGy for soft tissues and 48.4 cGy for bone. The values from correlation modeling and monitoring were up to 11.0 cGy for soft tissues and 59.8 cGy for bone. Imaging doses in correlation modeling were larger with RTTT. On a single 4D-CBCT, the skin and bone D2cc values were in the ranges of 7.4-10.5 cGy and 33.5-58.1 cGy, respectively. The D2cc from 4D-CBCT was approximately double that from 3D-CBCT. Clinicians should Figure that the imaging dose increases the cumulative doses to organs.

Dosimetric effects of anatomical changes during fractionated photon radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer patients

Pancreatic tumors show large interfractional position variation. In addition, changes in gastrointestinal gas volumes and body contour take place over the course of radiation therapy. We aimed to quantify the effect of these anatomical changes on target dose coverage, for the clinically used fiducial marker‐based patient position verification and, for comparison, also for simulated bony anatomy‐based position verification. Nine consecutive patients were included in this retrospective study. To enable fraction dose calculations on cone‐beam CT (CBCT), the planning CT was deformably registered to each CBCT (13–15 per patient); gas volumes visible on CBCT were copied to the deformed CT. Fraction doses were calculated for the clinically used 10 MV VMAT treatment plan (with for the planning target volume (PTV): D_98% = 95%), according to fiducial marker‐based and bony anatomy‐based image registrations. Dose distributions were rigidly summed to yield the accumulated dose. To evaluate target dose coverage, we defined an iCTV_{+5 mm} volume, i.e., the internal clinical target volume (iCTV) expanded with a 5 mm margin to account for remaining uncertainties including delineation uncertainties. We analyzed D_98%, D_mean, and D_2% for iCTV_{+5 mm} and PTV (i.e., iCTV plus 10 mm margin). We found that for fiducial marker‐based registration, differences between fraction doses and planned dose were minimal. For bony anatomy‐based registration, fraction doses differed considerably, resulting in large differences between planned and accumulated dose for some patients, up to a decrease in D_98% of the iCTV_{+5 mm} from 95.9% to 85.8%. Our study shows that fractionated photon irradiation of pancreatic tumors is robust against variations in body contour and gastrointestinal gas, with dose coverage only mildly affected. However, as a result of interfractional tumor position variations, target dose coverage can severely decline when using bony anatomy for patient position verification. Therefore, the use of intratumoral fiducial marker‐based daily position verification is essential in pancreatic cancer patients.

Audiovisual biofeedback guided breath-hold improves lung tumor position reproducibility and volume consistency

Purpose

Respiratory variation can increase the variability of tumor position and volume, accounting for larger treatment margins and longer treatment times. Audiovisual biofeedback as a breath-hold technique could be used to improve the reproducibility of lung tumor positions at inhalation and exhalation for the radiation therapy of mobile lung tumors. This study aimed to assess the impact of audiovisual biofeedback breath-hold (AVBH) on interfraction lung tumor position reproducibility and volume consistency for respiratory-gated lung cancer radiation therapy.

Methods

Lung tumor position and volume were investigated in 9 patients with lung cancer who underwent a breath-hold training session with AVBH before 2 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sessions. During the first MRI session (before treatment), inhalation and exhalation breath-hold 3-dimensional MRI scans with conventional breath-hold (CBH) using audio instructions alone and AVBH were acquired. The second MRI session (midtreatment) was repeated within 6 weeks after the first session. Gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were contoured on each dataset. CBH and AVBH were compared in terms of tumor position reproducibility as assessed by GTV centroid position and position range (defined as the distance of GTV centroid position between inhalation and exhalation) and tumor volume consistency as assessed by GTV between inhalation and exhalation.

Results

Compared with CBH, AVBH improved the reproducibility of interfraction GTV centroid position by 46% (P = .009) from 8.8 mm to 4.8 mm and GTV position range by 69% (P = .052) from 7.4 mm to 2.3 mm. Compared with CBH, AVBH also improved the consistency of intrafraction GTVs by 70% (P = .023) from 7.8 cm³ to 2.5 cm³.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that audiovisual biofeedback can be used to improve the reproducibility and consistency of breath-hold lung tumor position and volume, respectively. These results may provide a pathway to achieve more accurate lung cancer radiation treatment in addition to improving various medical imaging and treatments by using breath-hold procedures.

Considerable pancreatic tumor motion during breath-holding

BACKGROUND

Breath-holding (BH) is often used to reduce abdominal organ motion during radiotherapy. However, for inhale BH, abdominal tumor motion during BH has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to quantify tumor motion during inhale BH and tumor position variations between consecutive inhale BHs in pancreatic cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twelve patients with intratumoral fiducials were included and asked to perform three consecutive 30-second inhale BHs on each of three measurement days. During BH, lateral fluoroscopic movies were obtained and a two-dimensional (2D) image correlation algorithm was used to track the fiducials and the diaphragm, yielding the tumor and diaphragm motion during each BH. The tumor position variation between consecutive BHs was obtained from the difference in initial tumor position between consecutive BHs on a single measurement day.

RESULTS

We observed tumor motion during BH with a mean absolute maximum displacement over all BHs of 4.2 mm (range 1.0-11.0 mm) in inferior-superior (IS) direction and 2.7 mm (range 0.5-8.0 mm) in anterior-posterior (AP) direction. We found only a moderate correlation between tumor and diaphragm motion in the IS direction (Pearson's correlation coefficient |r|>0.6 in 45 of 76 BHs). The mean tumor position variation between consecutive BHs was 0.2 [standard deviation (SD) 1.7] mm in the inferior direction and 0.5 (SD 0.8) mm in the anterior direction.

CONCLUSION

We observed substantial pancreatic tumor motion during BH as well as considerable position variation between consecutive BHs on a single day. We recommend further quantifying these uncertainties before introducing breath-hold during radiation treatment of pancreatic cancer patients. Also, the diaphragm cannot be used as a surrogate for pancreatic tumor motion.