Intrafractional Errors Research Articles

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer: Improving treatment delivery efficiency and accuracy

PurposeIn stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer, intrafraction motion is an important source of treatment uncertainty as it could not be completely smoothed through fractionation. Herein, we compared different arrangements and beam qualities for extreme hypofractionated treatments to minimize beam delivery time and so intrafractional errors. MethodsA retrospective dataset of 11 patients was used. Three volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) beam arrangements were compared for a prescription dose of 40 Gy/5 fractions: two full arcs, 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF); one full arc, 6 MV FFF; one full arc, 10 MV FFF. A plan quality index was defined to compare achievement of the planning goals. Plan complexity was evaluated with the modulation factor. Dose delivery accuracy and efficiency were measured with patient-specific quality assurance plans. ResultsAll treatment plans fulfilled all dose objectives. No statistical differences were found both in plan quality and complexity. Very accurate dose delivery was achieved with the three arrangements, with mean γ passing rates >96.5 % (2 %/2 mm criteria). Slightly but significantly higher γ passing rates were observed with single-arc 6 MV FFF. Contrariwise, statistically significant reductions of the delivery time were obtained with single-arc geometries: the average delivery times were 1.6 min (−46.1 %) and 1.3 min (−56.2 %) for 6 and 10 MV FFF respectively. ConclusionsThe high-quality, very fast and accurate dose delivery of single-arc plans confirmed the suitability of this arrangement for prostate SBRT. In particular, the significant reduction of delivery time would improve treatment robustness against intrafraction prostate motion.

Development of Magnetic Resonance-Compatible Head Immobilization Device and Initial Experience of Magnetic Resonance-Guided Radiation Therapy for Central Nervous System Tumors

PurposeWe aimed to develop and investigate positional reproducibility using a fixation device (Unity Brain Tumor Immobilization Device, UBID) in brain tumor patients undergoing magnetic resonance (MR)-guided radiotherapy (RT) with a 1.5 Tesla (T) MR-linear accelerator (LINAC) to evaluate its feasibility in clinical practice and report representative cases of central nervous system (CNS) tumor patients. Materials and MethodsQuantitative analysis was performed by comparing images obtained by placing only the MR phantom on the couch with those obtained by placing UBID next to the MR phantom. Twenty patients who underwent RT for CNS tumors using 1.5T MR-LINAC between June 2022 and October 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, five did not use UBID, whereas 15 used UBID. The positional reproducibility of UBID was evaluated using the median interfractional and intrafractional errors in the first 10 fractions. ResultsEach MR quality factor of the MR phantom with UBID satisfied the criteria presented by Elekta. Median values of median shifts in the mediolateral, anteroposterior, and craniocaudal axes for interfractional errors were 2.98-mm, 2.35-mm, and 1.40-mm, respectively. For intrafractional errors, the median values were 0.05-mm, 0.03-mm, and 0.06-mm, respectively. The median values of the median rotations in pitch, roll, and yaw for both interfractional and intrafractional rotations were 0.00°. One patient diagnosed with an optic nerve sheath meningioma received RT with motion monitoring during irradiation. In two patients, changes in the tumor cavity and residual lesions were observed in the MR images obtained using 1.5T MR-LINAC on the day of the first treatment and immediately before the 21st fraction, respectively; therefore, offline/online adaptation was performed. ConclusionThe reproducible and immobile UBID is clinically feasible in patients with CNS tumors receiving RT with 1.5T MR-LINAC. Based on our initial experience, we developed a workflow for 1.5T MR-LINAC treatment of CNS tumors.

Setup margins based on the inter- and intrafractional setup error of left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy using deep inspiration breath-hold technique (DIBH) and surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT).

The use of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), and hypofractionated regimen requires adequate patient setup accuracy to achieve an optimal outcome. The purpose of this study was to assess the setup accuracy of patients receiving left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy using deep inspiration breath-hold technique (DIBH) and surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) and to calculate the corresponding setup margins. The patient setup accuracy between and within radiotherapy fractions was measured by comparing the 6DOF shifts made by the SGRT system AlignRT with the shifts made by kV-CBCT. Three hundred and three radiotherapy fractions of 23 left-sided breast cancer patients using DIBH and SGRT were used for the analysis. All patients received pre-treatment DIBH training and visual feedback during DIBH. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test patient setup differences for statistical significance. The corresponding setup margins were calculated using the van Herk's formula. The intrafractional patient setup accuracy was significantly better than the interfractional setup accuracy (p<0.001). The setup margin for the combined inter- and intrafractional setup error was 4, 6, and 4mm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions if based on SGRT alone. The intrafractional error contributed ≤1mm to the calculated setup margins. With SGRT, excellent intrafractional and acceptable interfractional patient setup accuracy can be achieved for the radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer using DIBH and modern radiation techniques. This allows for reducing the frequency of kV-CBCTs, thereby saving treatment time and radiation exposure.

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

The objective of this work is to estimate the patient positioning accuracy of asurface-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). Patient positioning data, both acquired with SGRT and IGRT systems at the same linacs, serve as abasis for determination of positioning accuracy. Atotal of 35patients 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. 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 ameasure 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 5mm cannot be ruled out. In contrast, MC simulations resulted in apositioning error of 1.6 mm (95th percentile) using the IGRT system. The cause of positioning errors in the SGRT system is mainly achange in the facial surface relative to adefined point in the brain. 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.

SGRT-based stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer setup accuracy and margin of the PTV.

Surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT, AlignRT) was used to analyze motion during stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in lung cancer patients and to explore the margin of the planning target volume (PTV). The residual errors of the AlignRT were evaluated based on grayscale cone-beam computed tomography registration results before each treatment. AlignRT log file was used to analyze the correlation between the frequency and longest duration of errors larger than 2mm and lasting longer than 2 s and maximum error with age and treatment duration. The displacement value at the end of treatment, the average displacement value, and the 95% probability density displacement interval were defined as intrafraction errors, and PTV1, PTV2, PTV3 were calculated by Van Herk formula or Z score analysis. Organ dosimetric differences were compared after the experience-based margin was replaced with PTV3. The interfraction residual errors were Vrt0 , 0.06±0.18cm; Lng0 , -0.03±0.19cm; Lat0 , 0.02±0.15cm; Pitch0 , 0.23±0.7°; Roll0 , 0.1±0.69°; Rtn0 , -0.02±0.79°. The frequency, longest duration and maximum error in vertical direction were correlated with treatment duration (r=0.404, 0.353, 0.283, p<0.05, respectively). In the longitudinal direction, the frequency was correlated with age and treatment duration (r=0.376, 0.283, p<0.05, respectively), maximum error was correlated with age (r=0.4, P<0.05). Vertical, longitudinal, lateral margins of PTV1, PTV2, PTV3 were 2mm, 4mm, 2mm; 2mm, 2mm, 2mm, 3mm, 5mm, 3mm, respectively. After replacing the original PTV, mean lung dose (MLD), 2-cm3 chest wall dose (CD), lung V20 decreased by 0.2Gy, 2.1Gy, 0.5%, respectively (p<0.05). AlignRT can be used for interfraction setup and monitoring intrafraction motion. It is more reasonable to use upper and lower limits of the 95% probability density interval as an intrafraction error.

Dosimetric Impact of Setup Errors in Single-Isocenter VMAT Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases

In stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) of brain metastases (BM) using single-isocenter VMAT, intra-fraction positioning errors may affect target coverage. This study aims to investigate geometric and dosimetric accuracy in single and multiple BM treatments. Seventy patients with single (n = 38) and multiple (n = 32) BM treated with 15-21 Gy in 1 (n = 59) or 27 Gy in 3 (n = 11) fractions using coplanar FFF-VMAT technique were analyzed. PTV was defined by a 2 mm isotropic GTV expansion. Pre-treatment setup errors were evaluated with CBCT and corrected with a robotic six degrees-of-freedom couch. For each fraction, intra-fractional errors were measured by post-treatment CBCT and applied to the planning CT. Plans involving translations and rotations (Fx-plan) were recalculated with Monte Carlo TPS. Original and Fx-plans were compared in terms of target and brain dose parameters, performing the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test (alpha = 0.05). The relationships of the BM volume, maximum dimension, distance-to-isocenter (for multiple BM cases only) and barycenter shift with the difference in target coverage between the two plans were investigated. The median post-treatment 3D error and maximum rotational error over all 129 BM were 0.5 mm [0.1-2.7] and 0.3° [0.0-1.3], respectively. The resulting median BM barycenter shift was 0.5 mm [0.1-2.7]. The percentage of fractions in which at least one BM barycenter shifted by more than 2 mm from the planned position was 4% and 1% for single and multiple BM cases, respectively. The median single GTV volume was 0.27 cc [0.01-10.48], while the PTV had a median volume of 1.05 cc [0.12-17.05]. The median BM maximum dimension was 10.7 mm [2.9-34.1] and for multiple BM the median distance-to-isocenter was 5.15 cm [0.89-7.52]. For single BM patients, the GTV D95% was never reduced by > 5%, while PTV D95% reductions > 1% occurred in only 11 (29%) PTV. For multiple BM patients, the target statistics were slightly worse, with dose deficits larger than 5% and 1% occurring respectively in 2 BM and 34 (37%) PTV. Anyway, the majority of single and multiple BM had a loss of coverage for both GTV and PTV below 1% in Fx-plans. Larger than 5% brain V12 Gy (SRS) and V20 Gy (fSRS) increases were observed for only one single BM patient. None of the two dosimetric comparisons resulted statistically significant (p>0.05). The differences in target coverage showed a moderate-to-strong correlation only with the BM barycenter shift in both cases (R2 = 0.70-0.73 for single and R2 = 0.44-0.50 for multiple BM). Due to the optimal patient setup, as well as the full six degrees-of-freedom corrections, the safety PTV margin, and the fast beam delivery, the dosimetric effects of residual setup and patient motion errors for both single and multiple BM cases were negligible. These findings warrant a potential reduction in the PTV margin with this treatment technique.

Single-Isocenter Linac-Based Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases with Coplanar Arcs: A Dosimetric and Clinical Analysis.

The efficacy of linac-based SRS/fSRS treatments using the single-isocenter coplanar FFF-VMAT technique for both single and multiple BM was investigated. Seventy patients (129 BM) treated with 15-21 Gy in 1 (n = 59) or 27 Gy in 3 (n = 11) fractions were analyzed. For each fraction, plans involving the intra-fractional errors measured by post-treatment CBCT were recalculated. The relationships of BM size, distance-to-isocenter, and barycenter shift with the difference in target coverage were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were assessed using logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis. The median delivery time was 3.78 min (range, 1.83-9.25). The median post-treatment 3D error was 0.5 mm (range, 0.1-2.7) and the maximum rotational error was 0.3° (range, 0.0-1.3). In single BM patients, the GTV D95% was never reduced by >5%, whereas PTV D95% reductions >1% occurred in only 11 cases (29%). In multiple BM patients, dose deficits >5% and >1% occurred in 2 GTV (2%) and 34 PTV (37%), respectively. The differences in target coverage showed a moderate-to-strong correlation only with barycenter shift. Local failure of at least one treated BM occurred in 13 (21%) patients and the 1-year and 2-year local control rates for all lesions were 94% and 90%, respectively. The implemented workflow ensured that the degradation of target and brain dose metrics in delivered treatments was negligible. Along with encouraging clinical outcomes, these findings warrant a reduction in the PTV margins at our institution.

Gantry triggered x-ray verification during single-isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery: Increased certainty for a no-margin strategy

BackgroundSingle-isocenter linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has emerged as a dedicated treatment option for multiple brain metastases. Consequently, image-guidance for patient positioning and motion management has become very important. The purpose of this study was to analyze intra-fraction errors measured with stereoscopic x-rays and their impact on the dose distribution. Materials and methodsTreatments were planned with non– coplanar dynamic conformal arcs for 33 patients corresponding to 127 brain lesions and 356 arcs. Intra-arc positioning errors were measuredusing stereoscopic x-rays (ExacTrac Dynamic, Brainlab), triggered during arc delivery. Couch corrections above 0.7 mm and 0.5° were always applied. Intra-arc positioning data was analyzed. The dose impact was evaluated by applying the measured errors to the dose given in each arc. ResultsMedian residual errors were 0.10 mm, 0.13 mm and 0.08 mm for the lateral, longitudinal and vertical directions and 0.10°, 0.08° and 0.13° for the pitch, roll and yaw angles respectively. 90% of the treatment arcs showed shifts of less than 0.4 mm and 0.4°in all directions. Dosimetric impact of motion showed the largest losses in coverage on small targets. All targets achieved at least 95% of the prescription dose to 95% of their volume, even when planned without margins. ConclusionsIntra-fractional errors measured during beam delivery were found to be notably low with a dose impact that showed acceptable target coverage when applying these intra-arc errors to the dose distributions of the individual treatment arcs. Using an adequate immobilization and intra-fraction imaging prior to and during irradiation, no margins need to be added to compensate for intra-fraction motion.

Preoperative single fraction breast radiotherapy: Intra-fraction geometric uncertainties and dosimetric implications

PurposeA preoperative breast robotic radiosurgery trial was concluded in our centre. Purposes of the present study were to evaluate retrospectively over the enrolled patients: i) respiratory patterns ii) tracking uncertainties iii) necessity of respiratory compensation iv) tracking errors dosimetric effects. Methods22 patients were treated in 21 Gy single fraction using CyberKnife (CK) respiratory modelling and tracking (SynchronyResp) and data extracted from log-files. Respiratory motion and baseline drifts (BD) were analyzed. SynchronyResp uncertainties were computed and compared with errors simulated for CK fiducial tracking without respiratory compensation. Plans were perturbed by tracking errors and perturbed doses calculated on the planning CT scan in order to simulate the dosimetric consequences of intra-fraction errors. ResultsAfter BD correction, respiratory amplitudes were below 5.5 mm except one value of 8 mm. 50% of patients showed BD above 3 mm. Standard deviations of SynchronyResp errors remained within 2.1 mm. Standard deviations of tracking errors without respiratory compensation were comparable and below 2.5 mm. Using a 3 mm PTV margin, perturbed CTV coverage was below 95% (93.7%) just for one patient. The latter case presented a large CTV-Skin interface. Perturbed OAR doses were always judged clinically acceptable. ConclusionIntra-fraction geometric uncertainties and their effects were quantified for breast neoadjuvant CK treatments. Data indicated that in the majority of cases respiratory compensation may be disabled without increasing uncertainties and reducing treatment time, provided that fiducial intra-fraction tracking is performed to account for BD. Dosimetric effects are mostly not clinically relevant.

Quantification of six-degree-of-freedom motion during beam delivery in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy using intra-irradiation cone-beam computed tomography imaging technique

PurposeQuantifying intra-fractional six-degree-of-freedom (6DoF) residual errors or motion from approved patient setups is necessary for accurate beam delivery in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy. However, previously reported errors were not acquired during beam delivery. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the 6DoF residual errors and motions during arc beam delivery using a concurrent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging technique, intra-irradiation CBCT. MethodsConsecutive 15 patients, 19 plans for various treatment sites, and 199 CBCT images were analyzed. Pre-irradiation CBCT was performed to verify shifts from the initial patient setup using the ExacTrac system. During beam delivery by two or three co-planar full-arc rotations, CBCT imaging was performed concurrently. Subsequently, an intra-irradiation CBCT image was reconstructed. Pre- and intra-irradiation CBCT images were rigidly registered to a planning CT image based on the bone to quantify 6DoF residual errors. Results6DoF residual errors quantified using pre- and intra-irradiation CBCTs were within 2.0 mm/2.0°, except for one measurement. The mean elapsed time (mean ± standard deviation [min:sec]) after pre-irradiation CBCT to the end of the last arc beam delivery was 6:08 ± 1:25 and 7:54 ± 2:14 for the 2- and 3-arc plans, respectively. Root mean squares of residual errors for several directions showed significant differences; however, they were within 1.0 mm/1.0°. Time-dependent analysis revealed that the residual errors tended to increase with elapsed time. ConclusionThe errors represent the optimal intra-fractional error compared with those acquired using the pre-, inter-beam, and post-6DoF image guidance and can be acquired within a standard treatment timeslot.

Frameless Gamma Knife Radiosurgery with Leksell ICON: Initial Experience.

Gamma knife radiosurgery saw the light of the day when the Swedish physician "Lars Leksell" postulated the salient first principles of stereotactic radiosurgery. Prior to being realized in its new 'avatar' "The ICON", Leksell Gamma Knife (LGK) "Perfexion" has been the most practiced model and is still in practice in most of the centers in India. The Gamma Knife ICON (the sixth generation model) utilizes the concept of the Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) module, thus allowing non-invasive immobilization of the skull employing frameless treatments without jeopardizing accuracy to sub-millimeters. The LGK ICON however has the same stereotactic delivery and patient positioning system as Perfexion and mesmerizes the care givers with the added technically sound feature of the CBCT imaging arm, that is, CBCT and an intra-fraction motion management system. The experience with ICON on both the sub-sets of patients has been intriguing and awe-inspiring. Despite its challenges of being detected with significant intra-fraction errors, we realized that the non-invasive thermoplastic mask fixation system has its own set of specific characteristics: fairly simple dosimetry; short radiation delivery times; and calm, composed, co-operative patients. We have been successful in conducting frameless gamma knife surgeries in ~25% of patients planned for gamma knife surgery. We look forward to witness this avant-garde pioneering scientific automation being practiced in a higher number of patients.

WASPE Sleep Deprivation, Paired with an Optical Surface Monitoring System, Can Provide Accurate Radiation Therapy to Pediatric Patients Without the Need for Sedation

This study aimed to explore the use of a protocol for sleep deprivation, combined with a surface optical monitoring system (OSMS)-guided radiation therapy (RT) to eliminate the need for pharmaceutical sedation of pediatric patients with cancer. The study subjects were 28 children aged 0 to 3 years undergoing intensity modulated RT. Parents used the WASPE method to keep the children awake from 6:00 am to 2:00 pm on each day of RT. To compare the potential effects of sleep deprivation versus sedation on treatment, the first 16 patients tested were alternately sleep deprived 1 day and given sedatives the next day for the duration of the RT. In all cases, RT was delivered under the real-time guidance of an OSMS. Twenty-seven of 28 children successfully completed 343 fractions of OSMS-guided RT. The 5-mm threshold for intrafractional motion was exceeded, and treatment was interrupted for patient repositioning during 13 sessions (sleep deprivation: 10 of 253 fractions; sedation: 3 of 90 fractions). Among the first 16 patients, no significant differences in inter- or intrafractional errors were noted on cone beam computed tomography scanning, except for an intrafractional error in the vertical direction for the 8th patient (P=.046). No significant difference in intrafractional errors measured by OSMS was found between the sleep-deprivation and sedation groups, except for 1 in the lateral direction for the 4th patient (P=.042) and 1 in the vertical direction for the 7th patient (P=.05). No differences were found in complete blood counts between the sleep-deprivation and sedation groups. In all, 36 of 52 parents surveyed (69%) preferred sleep deprivation, and only 3 parents (6%) preferred sedatives. The use of a sleep-deprivation protocol with OSMS guidance allows for accurate delivery of RT to children aged 0 to 3 years without the need for sedation and without jeopardizing target coverage. This approach may be useful for children who are resistant to or cannot tolerate sedatives.

Comparison of dosimetric impact of intra-fractional setup discrepancy between multiple- and single-isocenter approaches in linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy of multiple brain metastases.

IntroductionTreatment of multiple brain metastases by linac‐based stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) can employ either a multiple‐isocenter (MI) or single‐isocenter (SI) approach. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the dosimetric results of MI and SI approaches and compare the impacts of intra‐fractional setup discrepancies on the robustness of respective approaches using isocenter shifts, whether the same magnitude of translational and rotational effects could lead to a significant difference between the two approaches.MethodsTwenty‐two patients with multiple brain metastases treated by linac‐based SRT were recruited. Treatment plans were computed with both the MI and SI approaches. For the MI approach, the isocenter was located at the geometric center of each planning target volumes (PTVs), whereas the isocenter of the SI approach was located midway between the PTV centroids. To simulate the intra‐fractional errors, isocenter displacements including translational and rotational shifts were hypothetically applied. Apart from the dosimetric outcomes of the two approaches, the impact of the isocenter shifts on PTVs and organs at risk (OARs) were recorded in terms of the differences (δ) in dose parameters relative to the reference plan and was then compared between the MI and SI approaches.ResultsBoth MI and SI plans met the plan acceptance criteria. The mean Paddick conformity index (Paddick CI) and Dmax of most OARs between MI and SI plans did not show a significant difference, except that higher doses to the left optic nerve and optic chiasm were found in SI plans (p = 0.03). After the application of the isocenter shifts, δCI increased with an increase in the magnitude of the isocenter shift. When comparing between MI and SI plans, the δCIs were similar (p > 0.05) for all extents of translational shifts, but δCIs were significantly higher in SI plans after application of all rotations particularly ±1.5° and ±2.0° shifts. Despite the result that the majority of δDMax of OARs were higher in the SI plans, only the differences in the left optic nerve and chiasm showed generally consistent significance after both translational ≥±1 mm and rotational shifts of ≥±1∘.ConclusionBoth MI and SI approaches could produce clinically acceptable plans. However, isocenter shifts brought dosimetric impacts to both MI and SI approaches and the effects increased with the increase of the shift magnitude. Although similar impacts were shown in plans of both approaches after translational isocenter shift, SI plans were relatively more vulnerable than MI plans to rotational shifts.

PTV margin calculation for head and neck patients treated with VMAT: a systematic literature review

AbstractAim:The intent of the review was to identify different methodological approaches used to calculate the planning target volume (PTV) margin for head and neck patients treated with volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), and whether the necessary factors to calculate the margin size with the selected formula were used.Materials and Methods:A comprehensive, systematic search of related studies was done using the Hydi search engine and different databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, ProQuest (Nursing and Allied Health), Scopus, ScienceDirect and tipsRO. The literature search included studies published between January 2007 and December 2020. Eligibility screening was performed by two reviewers.Results:A total of seven studies were found. All the reviewed studies used the Van Herk formula to measure the PTV margin. None of the studies incorporated the systematic errors of target volume delineation in the PTV equation. Inter-fraction translational errors were assessed in all the studies, whilst intra-fraction errors were only included in the margin equation for two studies. The studies showed great heterogeneity in the key characteristics, aims and methods.Findings:Since systemic errors from target volume delineation were not considered and not all studies assess intra-fraction errors, PTV margins may be underestimated. The recommendations are that studies need to determine the effect of target volume variance on PTV margins. It is also recommended to compare PTV margin results using various formulas.

Evaluation on dosimetric plan quality and treatment delivery time of dynamic jaw mode in TomoTherapy® for left-side breast cancer patients

Abstract Background: Few studies claimed that dynamic jaw (DJ) mode in Helical TomoTherapy® (HT) could improve the cranio-caudal dose distribution without prolonging the treatment time in treating different types of cancer. Also, studies suggested that DJ with a wider 5 cm field width (FW) could replace fixed jaws (FJ) with 2.5 cm FW to reduce the delivery time with the sustainable plan quality. Yet, the study on breast cancer with supraclavicular fossa (SCF) nodal involvement using DJ mode in HT is limited. This study aims to evaluate the DJ mode retrospectively by comparing their dosimetric quality with normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of organs at risk and treatment delivery time with FJ mode on treating left-side breast with SCF nodal involvement. Materials and methods: All post-mastectomy patients, who had been irradiated for left-side breast with SCF nodal involvement were selected retrospectively in this study. With the same dose constraint and prescription as the treated DJ2.5 plan, two extra plans using DJ mode with 5 cm FW(DJ5.0) and FJ mode with 2.5 cm FW (FJ2.5) were computed for plan comparison. Results: No statistical significance was found in all the parameters of PTV and OARs, except for V20 of whole lung. DJ5.0 received V20 in ipsilateral left lung than FJ2.5 and DJ2.5. However, the average delivery time of DJ5.0 was significantly lower than that of DJ2.5 and FJ2.5 by almost 40%. Conclusions: No statistical significance was found in those dosimetric and radiobiological parameters among three modes while the delivery time has greatly reduced by using DJ5.0. A shorter treatment time can minimise intra-fractional error and better the patient’s experience during treatment.

Single-isocenter stereotactic non-coplanar arc treatment of 200\xa0patients with brain metastases: multileaf collimator size and setup uncertainties

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate our 2 years’ experience with single-isocenter, non-coplanar, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for brain metastasis (BM) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).MethodsA total of 202 patients treated with the VMAT SRS solution were analyzed retrospectively. Plan quality was assessed for 5 mm (120) and 2.5 mm (high-definition, HD) central leaf width multileaf collimators (MLCs). For BMs at varying distances from the plan isocenter, the geometric offset from the ideal position for two image-guided radiotherapy workflows was calculated. In the workflow with ExacTrac (BrainLAB, München, Germany; W‑ET), patient positioning errors were corrected at each couch rotation. In the workflow without ExacTrac (W-noET), only the initial patient setup correction was considered. The dose variation due to rotational errors was simulated for multiple-BM plans with the HD-MLC.ResultsPlan conformity and quality assurance were equivalent for plans delivered with the two MLCs while the HD-MLC plans provided better healthy brain tissue (BmP) sparing. 95% of the BMs had residual intrafractional setup errors ≤ 2 mm for W‑ET and 68% for W‑noET. For small BM (≤1 cc) situated >3 cm from the plan isocenter, the dose received by 95% of the BM decreased in median (interquartile range) by 6.3% (2.8–8.8%) for a 1-degree rotational error.ConclusionThis study indicates that the HD-MLC is advantageous compared to the 120-MLC for sparing healthy brain tissue. When a 2-mm margin is applied, W‑noET is sufficient to ensure coverage of BM situated ≤ 3 cm of the plan isocenter, while for BM further away, W‑ET is recommended.

PD-0942 Intrafraction error analysis of homemade mouth-bite masks in linac-based SRS for brain metastasis

Purpose or Objective To assess the intrafraction accuracy of a frameless stereotactic linac-based radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases (BM) using a homemade mouth-bite thermoplastic mask in combination with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and six-degrees of freedom (6-DOF) couchtop. Materials and Methods Covid-19 restrictions resulted in significant delays in the supply of the dedicated devices for BM SRS. A frameless approach using a homemade mouth-bite thermoplastic mask was implemented to offer BM SRS in a period of limited mobility (figure 1). All patients were immobilized and treated at the same institution with 6 MV FFF VMAT radiosurgery, with a 2 mm isotropic expansion from the GTV to the PTV. Before treatment delivery, patients underwent a low-dose CBCT to check position accuracy. Through image co-registration, translational (x, y, z) and rotational errors (roll, pitch, and yaw) were determined. The 6-DOF couchtop was used to automatically relocate the patient with sub-millimetric precision. Immediately after irradiation, patients underwent a second CBCT to verify any translational or rotational errors occurring during therapy (intrafraction motion). $Φg Results From February 2020 to January 2021 sixteen patients (29 lesions) received BM SRS (14-21 Gy). The whole procedure, from the first CBCT scan to the end of irradiation and subsequent CBCT, required a median time of 9 minutes [6-13]. Mean translational error was 0.0 ± 0.3 mm [-0.7;0.9] in lateral direction, and -0.1 ± 0.5 mm [-1.4;1.0] in longitudinal direction. A 2.2 mm maximum shift was recorded on the vertical axis, nevertheless the mean translation error was 0.1 ± 0.6 mm. Roll, pitch and yaw registered a mean value of -0.1 ± 0.3° [-0.8;0.2], 0.0 ± 0.2° [-0.8;0.2], and -0.1 ± 0.3° [-0.8;0.4], respectively. The results are summarized in figure 2. Conclusion This study demonstrated that homemade mouth-bite thermoplastic masks combined with CBCT, 6-DOF couchtop, and fast FFF treatment delivery allow minimal intra-fraction uncertainties in BM SRS, confirming the accuracy of PTV margin definition. The results are comparable to the declared specifics of SRS dedicated commercial frameless mask, while improving patient's comfort compared to the invasive fixed frame. However, the moulding procedure requires improved RTT skills and expertise. Our findings show that SRS can be safely delivered in radiotherapy units without dedicated expensive installations, such as CyberKnife and Gamma Knife, thus reducing patient mobility according to Covid-19 restrictions.

Organ motion in linac-based SBRT for glottic cancer

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to evaluate inter- and intra-fraction organ motion as well as to quantify clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margins to be adopted in the stereotactic treatment of early stage glottic cancer.Methods and materialsStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) to 36 Gy in 3 fractions was administered to 23 patients with early glottic cancer T1N0M0. Patients were irradiated with a volumetric intensity modulated arc technique delivered with 6 MV FFF energy. Each patient underwent a pre-treatment cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to correct the setup based on the thyroid cartilage position. Imaging was repeated if displacement exceeded 2 mm in any direction. CBCT imaging was also performed after each treatment arc as well as at the end of the delivery. Swallowing was allowed only during the beam-off time between arcs. CBCT images were reviewed to evaluate inter- and intra-fraction organ motion. The relationships between selected treatment characteristics, both beam-on and delivery times as well as organ motion were investigated.ResultsFor the population systematic (Ʃ) and random (σ) inter-fraction errors were 0.9, 1.3 and 0.6 mm and 1.1, 1.3 and 0.7 mm in the left-right (X), cranio-caudal (Y) and antero-posterior (Z) directions, respectively. From the analysis of CBCT images acquired after treatment, systematic (Ʃ) and random (σ) intra-fraction errors resulted 0.7, 1.6 and 0.7 mm and 1.0, 1.5 and 0.6 mm in the X, Y and Z directions, respectively. Margins calculated from the intra-fraction errors were 2.4, 5.1 and 2.2 mm in the X, Y and Z directions respectively. A statistically significant difference was found for the displacement in the Z direction between patients irradiated with > 2 arcs versus ≤ 2 arcs, (MW test, p = 0.038). When analyzing mean data from CBCT images for the whole treatment, a significant correlation was found between the time of delivery and the three dimensional displacement vector (r = 0.489, p = 0.055), the displacement in the Y direction (r = 0.553, p = 0.026) and the subsequent margins to be adopted (r = 0.626, p = 0.009). Finally, displacements and the subsequent margins to be adopted in Y direction were significantly greater for treatments with more than 2 arcs (MW test p = 0.037 and p = 0.019, respectively).ConclusionsIn the setting of controlled swallowing during treatment delivery, intra-fraction motion still needs to be taken into account when planning with estimated CTV to PTV margins of 3, 5 and 3 mm in the X, Y and Z directions, respectively. Selected treatments may require additional margins.

Practical aspects of the application of helical tomotherapy for craniospinal irradiation

We investigated the practical aspects of the application of craniospinal irradiation using helical tomotherapy (HT-CSI) by evaluating interfractional setup errors and intrafractional movement during each treatment in 83 patients undergoing HT-CSI between January 2014 and December 2018. Interfractional setup errors in each axis (mediolateral; ML, craniocaudal; CC, and anteroposterior; AP) were assessed as differences between pre-treatment megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) images scanned (zygomatic arch to the C4 spine) and planning CT images. Intrafractional movements were evaluated as the difference between pre-treatment and post-treatment MVCT (T12–L4 spine) images at each fraction. Median interfractional setup error was acceptable in every axis (ML: 1.6 mm, CC: 1.9 mm, AP: 3.1 mm). Seven patients (8.4%) experienced significant intrafractional displacement from 1 to 10 fractions (0.34% for ML, 0.74% for CC, 1.21% for AP). Weight loss grade 1+ during treatment (p = 0.016) was an independent risk factor for significant intrafractional displacement. The risk factor for significant intrafractional movement in pediatric patients was weight loss grade 1+ (p = 0.020), while there was no factor in adults. HT-CSI could be a feasible treatment modality with acceptable setup verification. Inter- and intrafractional errors were acceptable; paying attention to weight loss during treatment is necessary, especially in pediatric patients.

PO-1603: Residual intra-fraction error in tracked spinal SBRT: effect of site, fractionation and patient pain

PO-1603: Residual intra-fraction error in tracked spinal SBRT: effect of site, fractionation and patient pain