Interfractional Position Research Articles

Inter-fractional error and intra-fractional motion of prostate and dosimetry comparisons of patient position registrations with versus without fiducial markers during treatment with carbon-ion radiotherapy.

A few reports have discussed the influence of inter-fractional position error and intra-fractional motion on dose distribution, particularly regarding a spread-out Bragg peak. We investigated inter-fractional and intra-fractional prostate position error by monitoring fiducial marker positions. In 2020, data from 15 patients with prostate cancer who received carbon-ion beam radiotherapy (CIRT) with gold markers were investigated. We checked marker positions before and during irradiation to calculate the inter-fractional positioning and intra-fractional movement and evaluated the CIRT dose distribution by adjusting the planning beam isocenter and clinical target volume (CTV) position. We compared the CTV dose coverages (CTV receiving 95% [V95%] or 98% [V98%] of the prescribed dose) between skeletal and fiducial matching irradiation on the treatment planning system. For inter-fractional error, the mean distance between the marker position in the planning images and that in a patient starting irradiation with skeletal matching was 1.49 ± 1.11mm (95th percentile = 1.85mm). The 95th percentile (maximum) values of the intra-fractional movement were 0.79mm (2.31mm), 1.17mm (2.48mm), 1.88mm (4.01mm), 1.23mm (3.00mm), and 2.09mm (8.46mm) along the lateral, inferior, superior, dorsal, and ventral axes, respectively. The mean V95% and V98% were 98.2% and 96.2% for the skeletal matching plan and 99.5% and 96.8% for the fiducial matching plan, respectively. Fiducial matching irradiation improved the CTV dose coverage compared with skeletal matching irradiation for CIRT for prostate cancer.

Novel tongue-positioning device to reduce tongue motions during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: Geometric and dosimetric evaluation.

This study aimed to assess the performance of a tongue-positioning device in interfractional tongue position reproducibility by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Fifty-two patients treated with radiation therapy (RT) while using a tongue positioning device were included in the study. All patients were treated with 28 or 30 fractions using the volumetric modulated arc therapy technique. CBCT images were acquired at the 1st, 7th, 11th, 15th, 19th, 23th, and 27th fractions. Tongues on planning computed tomography (pCT) and CBCT images were contoured in the treatment planning system. Geometric differences in the tongue between pCT and CBCT were assessed by the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and averaged Hausdorff distance (AHD). Two-dimensional in vivo measurements using radiochromic films were performed in 13 patients once a week during sessions. The planned dose distributions were compared with the measured dose distributions using gamma analysis with criteria of 3%/3 mm. In all patients, the mean DSC at the 1st fraction (pCT versus 1st CBCT) was 0.80 while the mean DSC at the 27th fraction (pCT versus 27th CBCT) was 0.77 with statistical significance (p-value = 0.015). There was no statistically significant difference in DSC between the 1st fraction and any other fraction, except for the 27th fraction. There was statistically significant difference in AHD between the 1st fraction and the 19th, 23th, and 27th fractions (p-value < 0.05). In vivo measurements showed an average gamma passing rate of 90.54%. There was no significant difference between measurements at the 1st week and those at other weeks. The tongue geometry during RT was compared between pCT and CBCT. In conclusion, the novel tongue-positioning device was found to minimize interfractional variations in position and shape of the tongue.

Diaphragm and abdominal organ motion during radiotherapy: a comprehensive multicenter study in 189 children

BackgroundFor accurate thoracic and abdominal radiotherapy, inter- and intrafractional geometrical uncertainties need to be considered to enable accurate margin sizes. We aim to quantify interfractional diaphragm and abdominal organ position variations, and intrafractional diaphragm motion in a large multicenter cohort of pediatric cancer patients (< 18 years). We investigated the correlation of interfractional position variations and intrafractional motion with age, and with general anesthesia (GA).MethodsIn 189 children (mean age 8.1; range 0.4–17.9 years) from six institutes, interfractional position variation of both hemidiaphragms, spleen, liver, left and right kidneys was quantified using a two-step registration. CBCTs were registered to the reference CT relative to the bony anatomy, followed by organ registration. We calculated the group mean, systematic and random errors (standard deviations Σ and σ, respectively) in cranial-caudal (CC), left-right and anterior-posterior directions. Intrafractional right hemidiaphragm motion was quantified using CBCTs on which the breathing amplitude, defined as the difference between end-inspiration and end-expiration peaks, was assessed (N = 79). We investigated correlations with age (Spearman’s ρ), and differences in motion between patients treated with and without GA (N = 75; all < 5.5 years).ResultsInterfractional group means were largest in CC direction and varied widely between patients, with largest variations in the right hemidiaphragm (range -13.0–17.5 mm). Interfractional group mean of the left kidney showed a borderline significant correlation with age (p = 0.047; ρ = 0.17). Intrafractional right hemidiaphragm motion in patients ≥ 5.5 years (mean 10.3 mm) was significantly larger compared to patients < 5.5 years treated without GA (mean 8.3 mm) (p = 0.02), with smaller Σ and σ values. We found a significant correlation between breathing amplitude and age (p < 0.001; ρ = 0.43). Interfractional right hemidiaphragm position variations were significantly smaller in patients < 5.5 years treated with GA than without GA (p = 0.004), but intrafractional motion showed no significant difference.ConclusionIn this large multicenter cohort of children undergoing thoracic and abdominal radiotherapy, we found that interfractional position variation does not depend on age, but the use of GA in patients < 5.5 years showed smaller systematic and random errors. Furthermore, our results showed that breathing amplitude increases with age. Moreover, variations between patients advocate the need for a patient-specific margin approach.

Deformed dose restoration to account for tumor deformation and position changes for adaptive proton therapy.

Online adaptation during intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) can minimize the effect of inter-fractional anatomical changes, but remains challenging because of the complex workflow. One approach for fast and automated online IMPT adaptation is dose restoration, which restores the initial dose distribution on the updated anatomy. However, this method may fail in cases where tumor deformation or position changes occur. To develop a fast and robust IMPT online adaptation method named "deformed dose restoration (DDR)" that can adjust for inter-fractional tumor deformation and position changes. THE DDR METHOD COMPRISES TWO STEPS: : (1) calculation of the deformed dose distribution, and (2) restoration of the deformed dose distribution. First, the deformable image registration (DIR) between the initial clinical target volume (CTV) and the new CTV were performed to calculate the vector field. To ensure robustness for setup and range uncertainty and the ability to restore the deformed dose distribution, an expanded CTV-based registration to maintain the dose gradient outside the CTV was developed. The deformed dose distribution was obtained by applying the vector field to the initial dose distribution. Then, the voxel-by-voxel dose difference optimization was performed to calculate beam parameters that restore the deformed dose distribution on the updated anatomy. The optimization function was the sum of total dose differences and dose differences of each field to restore the initial dose overlap of each field. This method only requires target contouring, which eliminates the need for organs at risk (OARs) contouring. Six clinical cases wherein the tumor deformation and/or position changed on repeated CTs were selected. DDR feasibility was evaluated by comparing the results with those from three other strategies, namely, not adapted (continuing the initial plan), adapted by previous dose restoration, and fully optimized. In all cases, continuing the initial plan was largely distorted on the repeated CTs and the dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics for the target were reduced due to the tumor deformation or position changes. On the other hand, DDR improved DVH metrics for the target to the same level as the initial dose distribution. Dose increase was seen for some OARs because tumor growth had reduced the relative distance between CTVs and OARs. Robustness evaluation for setup and range uncertainty (3 mm/3.5%) showed that deviation in DVH-bandwidth for CTV D95% from the initial plan was 0.4 ± 0.5% (Mean ± S.D.) for DDR. The calculation time was 8.1 ± 6.4 min. An online adaptation algorithm was developed that improved the treatment quality for inter-fractional anatomical changes and retained robustness for intra-fractional setup and range uncertainty. The main advantage of this method is that it only requires target contouring alone and saves the time for OARs contouring. The fast and robust adaptation method for tumor deformation and position changes described here can reduce the need for offline adaptation and improve treatment efficiency. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Impact on liver position under breath-hold by computed tomography contrast agents in stereotactic body radiotherapy of liver cancer.

BackgroundWe investigated variations in liver position relative to the vertebral bone for liver cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy under expiratory phase breath-hold (BH) for treatment with contrast-enhanced-computed tomography (CECT), non-CECT, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).Materials and methodsSeventeen consecutive patients using a contrast enhancement (CE) agent for the CT simulation session for this retrospective study were selected. The first computed tomography (CT) scan without the use of CE agent in the expiratory phase was used for treatment planning (pCT). The remaining three CT scans without a CE agent under expiratory phase BH were acquired successively without repositioning to evaluate the intra-fraction variation in liver position. Furthermore, a three-phase CT scan (arterial, portal, and late phases) accompanied by a CE agent under expiratory phase BH was acquired for target delineation. CBCT scans without the use of a CE agent under expiratory phase BH were acquired for treatment. Inter-fractional variations (non-CECT or CECT) in liver position were measured using the difference between CBCT and pCT or each 3 phase CECT images, respectively.ResultsThe average ± standard deviations for intrafractional, non-CECT interfractional variations, and CECT interfractional variations were 1.0 ± 1.3, 2.5 ± 2.6, and 6.4 ± 6.4 mm, respectively, in the craniocaudal (CC) direction. Intra- and inter-fractional variations in liver position were relatively small for non-CECT. However, significant inter-fractional liver position variations in CECT were observed in the expiratory phase BH. The position of the liver should be carefully considered when applying CECT images for image-guided radiotherapy.

Interfractional diaphragmatic position variation according to stomach volume change during respiratory-gated radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.

We evaluated the correlation between stomach volume change and interfractional baseline shifts of the diaphragm in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Twenty-four patients with HCC underwent ten fractions of IGRT, and a total of 240 cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and on-board imager (OBI) kV image sets were acquired. These image sets were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline shifts of the diaphragm relative to bone and stomach volume change ratios were evaluated using four-dimensional simulation CT, kV image, and CBCT images. Associations between baseline shifts and patient physiologic factors were investigated. The average baseline shift of the diaphragm in the superior-inferior (SI) direction was 1.5mm (standard deviation 4.6mm), which was higher than the shift in other directions (0.7, 2.0mm and 0.9, 2.6mm in right-left (RL) and anterior-posterior (AP) directions, respectively). Interfractional baseline shifts of the diaphragm in the SI and AP directions were positively correlated with the stomach volume change ratio (Pearson's r: 0.416 and 0.302, p-value: <0.001 and <0.001, respectively). The interfractional baseline shifts of the diaphragm in the SI and AP directions correlated well with stomach volume changes. Efforts to maintain a constant stomach volume before the simulation and each treatment, such as fasting, may reduce interfractional baseline shifts of liver tumors.

AlignRT® and Catalyst™ in whole-breast radiotherapy with DIBH: Is IGRT still needed?

PurposeSurface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) is reported as a feasible setup technique for whole‐breast radiotherapy in deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH), but position errors of bony structures related to deeper parts of the target are not fully known. The aim of this study was to estimate patient setup accuracy and margins obtained with two different SGRT workflows with and without daily kV‐ and/or MV‐based image guidance (IGRT).MethodsA total of 50 breast cancer patients were treated in DIBH, using SGRT for the patient setup, and IGRT for isocenter corrections. The patients were treated at two different departments, one using AlignRT® (25 patients) and the other using Catalyst™ (25 patients). Inter‐fractional position errors were analyzed retrospectively in orthogonal and tangential setup images, and analyzed with and without IGRT.ResultsIn the orthogonal kV‐kV images, the systematic residual errors of the bony structures were ≤ 3 mm in both groups with SGRT‐only. When fine‐adjusted by daily IGRT, the errors decreased to ≤ 2 mm; except for the shoulder joint. The residual errors of the ribs in tangential images were between 1 and 2 mm with both workflows. The heart planning margins were between 3 and 7 mm.ConclusionsThe frequency of IGRT may be considerably reduced with a well‐planned SGRT‐workflow for whole‐breast DIBH with residual errors ≤ 3 mm. This accuracy can be further improved with an IGRT scheme.

Abdominal organ position variation in children during image-guided radiotherapy

BackgroundInterfractional organ position variation might differ for abdominal organs and this could have consequences for defining safety margins. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to quantify interfractional position variations of abdominal organs in children in order to investigate possible correlations between abdominal organs and determine whether position variation is location-dependent.MethodsFor 20 children (2.2–17.8 years), we retrospectively analyzed 113 CBCTs acquired during the treatment course, which were registered to the reference CT to assess interfractional position variation of the liver, spleen, kidneys, and both diaphragm domes. Organ position variation was assessed in three orthogonal directions and relative to the bony anatomy. Diaphragm dome position variation was assessed in the cranial-caudal (CC) direction only. We investigated possible correlations between position variations of the organs (Spearman’s correlation test, ρ), and tested if organ position variations in the CC direction are related to the diaphragm dome position variations (linear regression analysis, R2) (both tests: significance level p < 0.05). Differences of variations of systematic (∑) and random errors (σ) between organs were tested (Bonferroni significance level p < 0.004).ResultsIn all directions, correlations between liver and spleen position variations, and between right and left kidney position variations were weak (ρ ≤ 0.43). In the CC direction, the position variations of the right and left diaphragm domes were significantly, and stronger, correlated with position variations of the liver (R2 = 0.55) and spleen (R2 = 0.63), respectively, compared to the right (R2 = 0.00) and left kidney (R2 = 0.25). Differences in ∑ and σ between all organs were small and insignificant.ConclusionsNo (strong) correlations between interfractional position variations of abdominal organs in children were observed. From present results, we concluded that diaphragm dome position variations could be more representative for superiorly located abdominal (liver, spleen) organ position variations than for inferiorly located (kidneys) organ position variations. Differences of systematic and random errors between abdominal organs were small, suggesting that for margin definitions, there was insufficient evidence of a dependence of organ position variation on anatomical location.

Interfractional diaphragm changes during breath-holding in stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver cancer.

IGRT based on bone matching may produce a large target positioning error in terms of the reproducibility of expiration breath-holding on SBRT for liver cancer. We evaluated the intrafractional and interfractional errors using the diaphragm position at the end of expiration by utilising Abches and analysed the factor of the interfractional error. Intrafractional and interfractional errors were measured using a couple of frontal kV images, planning computed tomography (pCT) and daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Moreover, max-min diaphragm position within daily CBCT image sets with respect to pCT and the maximum value of diaphragm position difference between CBCT and pCT were calculated. The mean±SD (standard deviation) of the intra-fraction diaphragm position variation in the frontal kV images was 1.0±0.7mm in the C-C direction. The inter-fractional diaphragm changes were 0.4±4.6mm in the C-C direction, 1.4±2.2mm in the A-P direction, and -0.6±1.8mm in the L-R direction. There were no significant differences between the maximum value of the max-min diaphragm position within daily CBCT image sets with respect to pCT and the maximum value of diaphragm position difference between CBCT and pCT. Residual intrafractional variability of diaphragm position is minimal, but large interfractional diaphragm changes were observed. There was a small effect in the patient condition difference between pCT and CBCT. The impact of the difference in daily breath-holds on the interfractional diaphragm position was large or the difference in daily breath-holding heavily influenced the interfractional diaphragm change.

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): D98% = 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 D98%, Dmean, and D2% 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 D98% 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.

Interfractional renal and diaphragmatic position variation during radiotherapy in children and adults: is there a difference?

Background: Pediatric safety margins are generally based on data from adult studies; however, adult-based margins might be too large for children. The aim of this study was to quantify and compare interfractional organ position variation in children and adults.Material and methods: For 35 children and 35 adults treated with thoracic/abdominal irradiation, 850 (range 5–30 per patient) retrospectively collected cone beam CT images were registered to the reference CT that was used for radiation treatment planning purposes. Renal position variation was assessed in three orthogonal directions and summarized as 3D vector lengths. Diaphragmatic position variation was assessed in the cranio-caudal (CC) direction only. We calculated means and SDs to estimate group systematic (Σ) and random errors (σ) of organ position variation. Finally, we investigated possible correlations between organ position variation and patients’ height.Results: Interfractional organ position variation was different in children and adults. Median 3D right and left kidney vector lengths were significantly smaller in children than in adults (2.8, 2.9 mm vs. 5.6, 5.2 mm, respectively; p < .05). Generally, the pediatric Σ and σ were significantly smaller than in adults (p < .007). Overall and within both subgroups, organ position variation and patients’ height were only negligibly correlated.Conclusions: Interfractional renal and diaphragmatic position variation in children is smaller than in adults indicating that pediatric margins should be defined differently from adult margins. Underlying mechanisms and other components of geometrical uncertainties need further investigation to explain differences and to appropriately define pediatric safety margins.

Assessment with cone-beam computed tomography of intrafractional motion and interfractional position changes of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic tumours with implanted fiducial marker.

The volume of targets to which a high radiation dose can be delivered is limited for pancreatic radiotherapy. We assessed changes in movements of pancreatic tumours between simulation and treatment and determined compensatory margins. For 23 patients, differences in implanted fiducial marker motion magnitude (MMM) and mean marker position (MMP) between four-dimensional CT and cone-beam CT were measured. Subsequently, residual uncertainty was simulated after no action level (NAL) and extended no action level (eNAL) protocols were adopted. With no correction, respective 95th percentile of MMM were 4.5 mm, 6.2 mm and 16.0 mm and systematic (random) errors of MMP were 2.8 mm (3.3 mm), 3.2 mm (2.0 mm) and 5.9 mm (4.0 mm) in the left-right (L-R), anteroposterior (A-P) and superoinferior (S-I) directions, so that large margins were required (L-R, 10.5 mm; A-P, 11.7 mm; and S-I, 24.8 mm). NAL reduced systematic errors of MMP, but resultant margins remained large (L-R, 8.0 mm; A-P, 9.6 mm; and S-I, 18.1 mm). eNAL compensated for time trends and obtained minimal margins (L-R, 6.7 mm; A-P, 6.7 mm; and S-I, 15.2 mm). Motion magnitude and position of pancreatic tumours during simulation are frequently not representative of that during treatment. eNAL compensated for systematic interfractional position change and would be a practical approach for improving targeting accuracy. Advances in knowledge: Considerably large margins, especially in the S-I direction, were required to compensate for intrafractional motion and interfractional position changes of the pancreatic tumour. An application of eNAL was an effective strategy to diminish these margins.

Variations of target volume definition and daily target volume localization in stereotactic body radiotherapy for early-stage non–small cell lung cancer patients under abdominal compression

We aimed to compare gross tumor volumes (GTV) in 3-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) simulation and daily cone beam CT (CBCT) with the internal target volume (ITV) in 4-dimensional CT (4DCT) simulation in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment of patients with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) under abdominal compression. We retrospectively selected 10 patients with NSCLC who received image-guided SBRT treatments under abdominal compression with daily CBCT imaging. GTVs were contoured as visible gross tumor on the planning 3DCT and daily CBCT, and ITVs were contoured using maximum intensity projection (MIP) images of the planning 4DCT. Daily CBCTs were registered with 3DCT and MIP images by matching of bony landmarks in the thoracic region to evaluate interfractional GTV position variations. Relative to MIP-based ITVs, the average 3DCT-based GTV volume was 66.3 ± 17.1% (range: 37.5% to 92.0%) (p < 0.01 in paired t-test), and the average CBCT-based GTV volume was 90.0 ± 6.7% (daily range: 75.7% to 107.1%) (p = 0.02). Based on bony anatomy matching, the center-of-mass coordinates for CBCT-based GTVs had maximum absolute shift of 2.4 mm (left-right), 7.0 mm (anterior-posterior [AP]), and 5.2 mm (superior-inferior [SI]) relative to the MIP-based ITV. CBCT-based GTVs had average overlapping ratio of 81.3 ± 11.2% (range: 45.1% to 98.9%) with the MIP-based ITV, and 57.7 ± 13.7% (range: 35.1% to 83.2%) with the 3DCT-based GTV. Even with abdominal compression, both 3DCT simulations and daily CBCT scans significantly underestimated the full range of tumor motion. In daily image-guided patient setup corrections, automatic bony anatomy-based image registration could lead to target misalignment. Soft tissue-based image registration should be performed for accurate treatment delivery.

Marker-based quantification of interfractional tumor position variation and the use of markers for setup verification in radiation therapy for esophageal cancer

PurposeThe aim of this study was to quantify interfractional esophageal tumor position variation using markers and investigate the use of markers for setup verification. Materials and methodsSixty-five markers placed in the tumor volumes of 24 esophageal cancer patients were identified in computed tomography (CT) and follow-up cone-beam CT. For each patient we calculated pairwise distances between markers over time to evaluate geometric tumor volume variation. We then quantified marker displacements relative to bony anatomy and estimated the variation of systematic (Σ) and random errors (σ). During bony anatomy-based setup verification, we visually inspected whether the markers were inside the planning target volume (PTV) and attempted marker-based registration. ResultsMinor time trends with substantial fluctuations in pairwise distances implied tissue deformation. Overall, Σ(σ) in the left–right/cranial–caudal/anterior–posterior direction was 2.9(2.4)/4.1(2.4)/2.2(1.8)mm; for the proximal stomach, it was 5.4(4.3)/4.9(3.2)/1.9(2.4)mm. After bony anatomy-based setup correction, all markers were inside the PTV. However, due to large tissue deformation, marker-based registration was not feasible. ConclusionsGenerally, the interfractional position variation of esophageal tumors is more pronounced in the cranial–caudal direction and in the proximal stomach. Currently, marker-based setup verification is not feasible for clinical routine use, but markers can facilitate the setup verification by inspecting whether the PTV covers the tumor volume adequately.

SU-C-210-05: Evaluation of Robustness: Dosimetric Effects of Anatomical Changes During Fractionated Radiation Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer Patients

Purpose: Pancreatic tumors show large interfractional position variations. In addition, changes in gastrointestinal air volume and body contour take place during treatment. We aim to investigate the robustness of the clinical treatment plans by quantifying the dosimetric effects of these anatomical changes. Methods: Calculations were performed for up to now 3 pancreatic cancer patients who had intratumoral fiducials for daily CBCT-based positioning during their 3-week treatment. For each patient, deformable image registration of the planning CT was used to assign Hounsfield Units to each of the 13—15 CBCTs; air volumes and body contour were copied from CBCT. The clinical treatment plan was used (CTV-PTV margin = 10 mm; 36Gy; 10MV; 1 arc VMAT). Fraction dose distributions were calculated and accumulated. The V95% of the clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV) were analyzed, as well as the dose to stomach, duodenum and liver. Dose accumulation was done for patient positioning based on the fiducials (as clinically used) as well as for positioning based on bony anatomy. Results: For all three patients, the V95% of the CTV remained 100%, for both fiducial- and bony anatomy-based positioning. For fiducial-based positioning, dose to duodenum en stomach showed no discernable differences withmore » planned dose. For bony anatomy-based positioning, the PTV V95% of the patient with the largest systematic difference in tumor position (patient 1) decreased to 85%; the liver Dmax increased from 33.5Gy (planned) to 35.5Gy. Conclusion: When using intratumoral fiducials, CTV dose coverage was only mildly affected by the daily anatomical changes. When using bony anatomy for patient positioning, we found a decline in PTV dose coverage due to the interfractional tumor position variations. Photon irradiation treatment plans for pancreatic tumors are robust to variations in body contour and gastrointestinal gas, but the use of fiducial-based daily position verification is imperative. This work was supported by the foundation Bergh in het Zadel through the Dutch Cancer Society (KWF Kankerbestrijding) project No. UVA 2011-5271.« less

Limited Role for Biliary Stent as Surrogate Fiducial Marker in Pancreatic Cancer: Stent and Intratumoral Fiducials Compared

Because of low soft-tissue contrast of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), fiducial markers are often used for radiation therapy patient setup verification. For pancreatic cancer patients, biliary stents have been suggested as surrogate fiducials. Using intratumoral fiducials as standard for tumor position, this study aims to quantify the suitability of biliary stents for measuring interfractional and respiratory-induced position variations of pancreatic tumors. Eleven pancreatic cancer patients with intratumoral fiducials and a biliary stent were included in this study. Daily CBCT scans (243 in total) were registered with a reference CT scan, based on bony anatomy, on fiducial markers, and on the biliary stent, respectively. We analyzed the differences in tumor position (ie, markers center-of-mass position) among these 3 registrations. In addition, we measured for 9 patients the magnitude of respiratory-induced motion (MM) of the markers and of the stent on 4-dimensional CT (4DCT) and determined the difference between these 2 magnitudes (ΔMM). The stent indicated tumor position better than bony anatomy in 67% of fractions; the absolute difference between the markers and stent registration was >5 mm in 46% of fractions and >10 mm in 20% of fractions. Large PTV margins (superior-inferior direction, >19 mm) would be needed to account for this interfractional position variability. On 4DCT, we found in superior-inferior direction a mean ΔMM of 0.5 mm (range, -2.6 to 4.2 mm). For respiratory-induced motion, the mean ΔMM is small, but for individual patients the absolute difference can be >4 mm. For interfractional position variations, a stent is, on average, a better surrogate fiducial than bony anatomy, but large PTV margins would still be required. Therefore, intratumoral fiducials are recommended for online setup verification for all pancreatic patients scheduled for radiation therapy, including patients with a biliary stent.

Geometric and dosimetric uncertainties in intracranial stereotatctic treatments for multiple nonisocentric lesions.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of geometric uncertainties of patient position on treatments of multiple nonisocentric intracranial lesions. The average distance between lesions in patients with multiple targets was determined by a retrospective survey of patients with multiple lesions. Retrospective patient imaging data from fractionated stereotactic patients were used to calculate interfractional and intrafractional patient position uncertainty. Three different immobilization devices were included in the positioning study. The interfractional and intrafractional patient positioning error data were used to calculate the geometric offset of a lesion located at varying distances from the mechanical isocenter for treatments of multiple lesions with a single arc, assuming that no intrafractional position correction is employed during an arc rotation. Dosimetric effects were studied using two representative lesions of two sizes, 6 mm and 13 mm maximum dimensions, and prescribed to 20 Gy and 18 Gy, respectively. Distances between lesions ranged from < 10 mm to 150 mm, which would correspond to a range of isocenter to lesion separations of < 10 mm to 75 mm, assuming an isocenter located at the geometric mean. In the presence of a full six degree of freedom patient correction system, the effects of the intrafractional patient positioning uncertainties were less than 1.8 mm (3.6 mm) for 1σ (2σ) deviations for lesion spacing up to 75 mm assuming a quadratic summation of 1σ and 2σ. Without the benefit of a six DOF correction device, only correcting for three translations, the effects of the intrafractional patient positioning uncertainties were within 3.1 mm (7.2 mm) for 1σ (2σ) deviations for distances up to 75 mm. 1σ and 2σ deviations along all six axes were observed in 3.6% and 0.3%, respectively, of 974 fractions analyzed. Dosimetric effects for 2 mm and 4 mm offsets were most significant for the small lesion with minimum dose (Dmin) decreasing from 20 Gy to 13.6 Gy and 5.7 Gy and volume receiving the prescription (V20Gy) reducing from 100% to 57% and 16%, respectively. The dosimetric effects on the larger lesion were less pronounced with Dmin reducing from 18 Gy to 17.5 Gy and 14.2 Gy, and V18Gy reducing from 100% to 98.3% and 85.4%, for 2 mm and 4 mm offsets, respectively. In the 1σ scenario (3.6% of patients) angular uncertainties in patient positioning can introduce 1.0 mm shifts in the location of the lesion position at distances of 75 mm, compared to an isocentric treatment even with a full six DOF correction. Without the ability to correct angular positioning errors, a lesion positioned 75 mm away from the mechanical isocenter can be located in 3.6% of patients > 3.0 mm distant from the planned position. Dosimetric results depend upon the distance from isocenter and the size of the target. Single isocenter treatments for multiple lesions should be considered only when full six DOF corrections can be applied, the intrafractional immobilization precision is well quantified, and a PTV expansion is included for more distant lesions to account for unavoidable residual patient positioning uncertainties.PACS number: 87.55.Qr, 87.53.Ly, 87.55.D‐

Interfractional Position Variation of Pancreatic Tumors Quantified Using Intratumoral Fiducial Markers and Daily Cone Beam Computed Tomography

The aim of this study was to quantify interfractional pancreatic position variation using fiducial markers visible on daily cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. In addition, we analyzed possible migration of the markers to investigate their suitability for tumor localization. For 13 pancreatic cancer patients with implanted Visicoil markers, CBCT scans were obtained before 17 to 25 fractions (300 CBCTs in total). Image registration with the reference CT was used to determine the displacement of the 2 to 3 markers relative to bony anatomy and to each other. We analyzed the distance between marker pairs as a function of time to identify marker registration error (SD of linear fit residuals) and possible marker migration. For each patient, we determined the mean displacement of markers relative to the reference CT (systematic position error) and the spread in displacements (random position error). From this, we calculated the group systematic error, Σ, and group random error, σ. Marker pair distances showed slight trends with time (range, -0.14 to 0.14 mm/day), possibly due to tissue deformation, but no shifts that would indicate marker migration. The mean SD of the fit residuals was 0.8 mm. We found large interfractional position variations, with for 116 of 300 (39%) fractions a 3-dimensional vector displacement of >10 mm. The spread in displacement varied significantly (P<.01) between patients, from a vector range of 9.1 mm to one of 24.6 mm. For the patient group, Σ was 3.8, 6.6, and 3.5 mm; and σ was 3.6, 4.7 and 2.5 mm, in left-right, superior-inferior, and anterior-posterior directions, respectively. We found large systematic displacements of the fiducial markers relative to bony anatomy, in addition to wide distributions of displacement. These results for interfractional position variation confirm the potential benefit of using fiducial markers rather than bony anatomy for daily online position verification for pancreatic cancer patients.

Study of inter-fractional variations and adaptive radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer

Objective To quantitatively characterize the inter-fractional anatomy variations and advantages of dosimetry for the adaptive radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer.Methods A total of 226 daily CT images acquired from 10 patients with pancreatic cancer treated with image-guided radiotherapy were analyzed retrospectively.Targets and organs at risk (OARs) were delineated by the atlas-based automatic segmentation and modified by the skilled physician.Various parameters,including the center of mass (COM) distance,the maximal overlap ratio (MOR) and the Dice coefficient (DC),were used to quantify the inter-fractional organ displacement and deformation.The adaptive radiation therapy (ART) was applied to handle the daily GT images.The dose distributions parameters from the ART plan were compared with those from the repositioning plan.Results The inter-fractional anatomy variations of pancreas head were obvious in the pancreatic cancer irradiation.The mean COM distance,MOR and DC of pancreas head after the bony or soft tissue alignment and registration was ( 7.8 ± 1.3 ) mm,( 87.2 ± 8.4 )％ and ( 77.2 ±7.9)％ respectively.Compared with the repositioning plan,the ART plan had better target coverage and OARs sparing.For example,the mean V100 of PTV was improved from (93.32 ± 2.89) ％ for repositioning plan to ( 96.03 ± 1.42) ％ for ART plan with t =2.79,P =0.008 and the mean V50.4 for duodenum was reduced from (43.4 ± 12.71 )％ for the repositioning plan to (15.6 ± 6.25)％ for the ART plan with t =3.52,P=0.000.Conclusions The ART can effectively account for the obvious inter-fractional anatomy variations in pancreatic cancer irradiation and be used to escalate the radiotherapy dose for the pancreatic cancer,which will lead to a promising higher local control rate. Key words: Pancreatic neoplasms/radiotherapy; Radiotherapy,image-guided; Radiotherapy,adaptive; Inter-fractional position variations

SU‐E‐J‐163: Tracking Interfractional Patient Positioning Consistency When a Robotic Couch Is in Use

Purpose: To track interfractional patient positioning consistency during a course of stereotactic radiotherapy using BrainLAB frameless immobilization and localization system, with ExacTRAC IGRT and Robotic couch. Methods: One relationship between the BrainLAN iPLAN coordinates and the Varian couch parameters was developed so that three translational couch positions were incorporated into Aria R&amp;V system as part of the plan parameters. Therapists use these positions to verify patientˈs initial set‐up. After ExacTRAC calculates 3 shifts and 3 rotations of a patientˈs current position to the expected position based on the registration of a pair of x‐ray images with DRR, the robotic couch can be driven to place the target at Linac isocenter. However, since the rotational axes for pitch and roll of the robotic couch are not coincident with the Linac isocenteral axes, the couch positions will be changed to allow for pitch and roll corrections. Current R&amp;V system only records 3 translational and 1 couch angle (no pitch and roll), and the interfractional couch position difference can be &gt; 8 cm vertically. A second relationship was developed between the recorded translational parameters and the actual target position, taking into account the pitch and roll from the ExacTRAC system, so that the interfractional patient position can be tracked. Results: The differences between the estimated and actual translational couch positions are &lt; 2 mm on average for 28 patients. The interfractional couch position variance is &lt; 1.5 mm for 3 patients (10 fractions per patient). Discussions: If the EaxcTRAC IGRT system is mis‐calibrated to a wrong position other than Linac isocenter, the x‐ray image registration system cannot in itself detect the error. Therefore, this patient position tracking methodology can be a very important safety tool for preventing errors, so that the treatment team can deliver stereotactic radiation at a higher confidence level.