Repositioning accuracy of two different mask systems—3D revisited: Comparison using true 3D/3D matching with cone-beam CT

Quality assessment of frameless fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy using cone beam computed tomography

PURPOSE

A quality assessment of intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy was performed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Setup errors were analyzed for two groups of patients: (1) those who were positioned using a frameless SonArray (FSA) system and immobilized with a bite plate and thermoplastic (TP) mask (the bFSA group); and (2) those who were positioned by room laser and immobilized using a TP mask (the mLAS group).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A quality assurance phantom was used to study the system differences between FSA and CBCT. The quality assessment was performed using an Elekta Synergy imager (XVI) (Elekta Oncology Systems, Norcross, GA) and an On-Board Imager (OBI) (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) for 25 patients. For the first three fractions, and weekly thereafter, the FSA system was used for patient positioning, after which CBCT was performed to obtain setup errors.

RESULTS

(1) Phantom tests: The mean differences in the isocenter displacements for the two systems was 1.2 ± 0.7 mm. No significant variances were seen between the XVI and OBI units (p~0.208). (2)Patient tests: The mean of the displacements between FSA and CBCT were independent of the CBCT system used; mean setup errors for the bFSA group were smaller (1.2 mm) than those of the mLAS group (3.2 mm) (p < 0.005). For the mLAS patients, the 90th percentile and the maximum rotational displacements were 3° and 5°, respectively. A 4-mm drift in setup accuracy occurred over the treatment course for 1 bFSA patient.

CONCLUSIONS

System differences of less than 1 mm between CBCT and FSA were seen. Error regression was observed for the bFSA patients, using CBCT (up to 4 mm) during the treatment course. For the mLAS group, daily CBCT imaging was needed to obtain acceptable setup accuracies.

Semi-robotic 6 degree of freedom positioning for intracranial high precision radiotherapy; first phantom and clinical results

Background

To introduce a novel method of patient positioning for high precision intracranial radiotherapy.

Methods

An infrared(IR)-array, reproducibly attached to the patient via a vacuum-mouthpiece(vMP) and connected to the table via a 6 degree-of-freedom(DoF) mechanical arm serves as positioning and fixation system. After IR-based manual prepositioning to rough treatment position and fixation of the mechanical arm, a cone-beam CT(CBCT) is performed. A robotic 6 DoF treatment couch (HexaPOD™) then automatically corrects all remaining translations and rotations. This absolute position of infrared markers at the first fraction acts as reference for the following fractions where patients are manually prepositioned to within ± 2 mm and ± 2° of this IR reference position prior to final HexaPOD-based correction; consequently CBCT imaging is only required once at the first treatment fraction.

The preclinical feasibility and attainable repositioning accuracy of this method was evaluated on a phantom and human volunteers as was the clinical efficacy on 7 pilot study patients.

Results

Phantom and volunteer manual IR-based prepositioning to within ± 2 mm and ± 2° in 6DoF was possible within a mean(± SD) of 90 ± 31 and 56 ± 22 seconds respectively. Mean phantom translational and rotational precision after 6 DoF corrections by the HexaPOD was 0.2 ± 0.2 mm and 0.7 ± 0.8° respectively. For the actual patient collective, the mean 3D vector for inter-treatment repositioning accuracy (n = 102) was 1.6 ± 0.8 mm while intra-fraction movement (n = 110) was 0.6 ± 0.4 mm.

Conclusions

This novel semi-automatic 6DoF IR-based system has been shown to compare favourably with existing non-invasive intracranial repeat fixation systems with respect to handling, reproducibility and, more importantly, intra-fraction rigidity. Some advantages are full cranial positioning flexibility for single and fractionated IGRT treatments and possibly increased patient comfort.

Method comparison of automated matching software-assisted cone-beam CT and stereoscopic kilovoltage x-ray positional verification image-guided radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: a prospective analysis

We sought to characterize interchangeability and agreement between cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and digital stereoscopic kV x-ray (KVX) acquisition, two methods of isocenter positional verification currently used for IGRT of head and neck cancers (HNC). A cohort of 33 patients were near-simultaneously imaged by in-room KVX and CBCT. KVX and CBCT shifts were suggested using manufacturer software for the lateral (X), vertical (Y) and longitudinal (Z) dimensions. Intra-method repeatability, systematic and random error components were calculated for each imaging modality, as were recipe-based PTV expansion margins. Inter-method agreement in each axis was compared using limits of agreement (LOA) methodology, concordance analysis and orthogonal regression. 100 daily positional assessments were performed before daily therapy in 33 patients with head and neck cancer. Systematic error was greater for CBCT in all axes, with larger random error components in the Y- and Z-axis. Repeatability ranged from 9 to 14 mm for all axes, with CBCT showing greater repeatability in 2/3 axes. LOA showed paired shifts to agree 95% of the time within +/-11.3 mm in the X-axis, +/-9.4 mm in the Y-axis and +/-5.5 mm in the Z-axis. Concordance ranged from 'mediocre' to 'satisfactory'. Proportional bias was noted between paired X- and Z-axis measures, with a constant bias component in the Z-axis. Our data suggest non-negligible differences in software-derived CBCT and KVX image-guided directional shifts using formal method comparison statistics.

ExacTrac X-ray 6 degree-of-freedom image-guidance for intracranial non-invasive stereotactic radiotherapy: comparison with kilo-voltage cone-beam CT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To compare the residual setup errors measured with ExacTrac X-ray 6 degree-of-freedom (6D) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for a head phantom and patients receiving intracranial non-invasive fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Setup data were collected on a Novalis Tx treatment unit for an anthropomorphic head phantom and 18 patients with intracranial tumors. Initial corrections were determined and corrected with the ExacTrac system only, and then the residual setup error was determined by means of three different procedures. These procedures included registrations of ExacTrac X-ray images with the corresponding digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) using the ExacTrac 6D fusion, and registrations of CBCT images with the planning CT using both online 3D fusion and offline 6D fusion. The difference in residual setup errors between ExacTrac system and CBCT was computed. The impact of rotations on the difference was evaluated.

RESULTS

A modest difference in residual setup errors was found between ExacTrac system and CBCT. The root-mean-square (RMS) of the differences observed for translations was typically <0.5mm for phantom, and <1.5mm for patients, respectively. The RMS of the differences for rotation(s) was however <0.2 degree for phantom, and <1.0 degree for patients, respectively. The impact of rotation on the setup difference was minor but not negligible.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that there is a general agreement between ExacTrac system and CBCT.

Recent advances in image-guided radiotherapy for head and neck carcinoma

Radiotherapy has a well-established role in the management of head and neck cancers. Over the past decade, a variety of new imaging modalities have been incorporated into the radiotherapy planning and delivery process. These technologies are collectively referred to as image-guided radiotherapy and may lead to significant gains in tumor control and radiation side effect profiles. In the following review, these techniques as they are applied to head and neck cancer patients are described, and clinical studies analyzing their use in target delineation, patient positioning, and adaptive radiotherapy are highlighted. Finally, we conclude with a brief discussion of potential areas of further radiotherapy advancement.

Accuracy of ultrasound-based image guidance for daily positioning of the upper abdomen: an online comparison with cone beam CT

PURPOSE

Image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy can improve protection of organs at risk when large abdominal target volumes are irradiated. We estimated the daily positioning accuracy of ultrasound-based image guidance for abdominal target volumes by a direct comparison of daily imaging obtained with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Daily positioning (n = 83 positionings) of 15 patients was completed by using ultrasound guidance after an initial CBCT was obtained. Residual error after ultrasound was estimated by comparison with a second CBCT. Ultrasound image quality was visually rated using a scale of 1 to 4.

RESULTS

Of 15 patients, 7 patients had good sonographic imaging quality, 5 patients had satisfactory sonographic quality, and 3 patients were excluded because of unsatisfactory sonographic quality. When image quality was good, residual errors after ultrasound were -0.1 +/- 3.11 mm in the x direction (left-right; group systematic error M = -0.09 mm; standard deviation [SD] of systematic error, Sigma = 1.37 mm; SD of the random error, sigma = 2.99 mm), 0.93 +/- 4.31 mm in the y direction (superior-inferior, M = 1.12 mm; Sigma = 2.96 mm; sigma = 3.39 mm), and 0.71 +/- 3.15 mm in the z direction (anteroposterior; M = 1.01 mm; Sigma = 2.46 mm; sigma = 2.24 mm). For patients with satisfactory image quality, residual error after ultrasound was -0.6 +/- 5.26 mm in the x (M = 0.07 mm; Sigma = 5.67 mm; sigma = 4.86 mm), 1.76 +/- 4.92 mm in the y (M = 3.54 mm; Sigma = 4.1 mm; sigma = 5.29 mm), and 1.19 +/- 4.75 mm in the z (M = 0.82 mm; Sigma = 2.86 mm; sigma = 3.05 mm) directions.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients from whom good sonographic image quality could be obtained, ultrasound improved daily positioning accuracy. In the case of satisfactory image quality, ultrasound guidance improved accuracy compared to that of skin marks only minimally. If sonographic image quality was unsatisfactory, daily CBCT scanning improved treatment accuracy distinctly over that of ultrasound. Use of daily ultrasound or CBCT imaging can help to reduce PTV margins and protect organs at risk compared to the use of skin mark-based positioning.

Setup uncertainties of anatomical sub-regions in head-and-neck cancer patients after offline CBCT guidance

PURPOSE

To quantify local geometrical uncertainties in anatomical sub-regions during radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Local setup accuracy was analyzed for 38 patients, who had received intensity-modulated radiotherapy and were regularly scanned during treatment with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for offline patient setup correction. In addition to the clinically used large region of interest (ROI), we defined eight ROIs in the planning CT that contained rigid bony structures: the mandible, larynx, jugular notch, occiput bone, vertebrae C1-C3, C3-C5, and C5-C7, and the vertebrae caudal of C7. By local rigid registration to successive CBCT scans, the local setup accuracy of each ROI was determined and compared with the overall setup error assessed with the large ROI. Deformations were distinguished from rigid body movements by expressing movement relative to a reference ROI (vertebrae C1-C3).

RESULTS

The offline patient setup correction protocol using the large ROI resulted in residual systematic errors (1 SD) within 1.2 mm and random errors within 1.5 mm for each direction. Local setup errors were larger, ranging from 1.1 to 3.4 mm (systematic) and 1.3 to 2.5 mm (random). Systematic deformations ranged from 0.4 mm near the reference C1-C3 to 3.8 mm for the larynx. Random deformations ranged from 0.5 to 3.6 mm.

CONCLUSION

Head-and-neck cancer patients show considerable local setup variations, exceeding residual global patient setup uncertainty in an offline correction protocol. Current planning target volume margins may be inadequate to account for these uncertainties. We propose registration of multiple ROIs to drive correction protocols and adaptive radiotherapy to reduce the impact of local setup variations.

Report on a randomized trial comparing two forms of immobilization of the head for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy

Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) requires accurate and reproducible immobilization of the patient's head. This randomized study compared the efficacy of two commonly used forms of immobilization used for SRT. Two routinely used methods of immobilization, which differ in their approach to reproduce the head position from day to day, are the Gill-Thomas-Cosman (GTC) frame and the BrainLab thermoplastic mask. The GTC frame fixates on the patient's upper dentition and thus is in direct mechanical contact with the cranium. The BrainLab mask is a two-part masking system custom fitted to the front and back of the patient's head. After patients signed an IRB-approved informed consent form, eligible patients were randomized to either GTC frame or mask for their course of SRT. Patients were treated as per standard procedure; however, prior to each treatment a set of digital kilovolt images (ExacTrac, BrainLabAB, Germany) was taken. These images were fused with reference digitally reconstructed radiographs obtained from treatment planning CT to yield lateral, longitudinal, and vertical deviations of isocenter and head rotations about respective axes. The primary end point of the study was to compare the two systems with respect to mean and standard deviations using the distance to isocenter measure. A total of 84 patients were enrolled (69 patients evaluable with detailed positioning data). A mixed-effect linear regression and two-tiled t test were used to compare the distance measure for both the systems. There was a statistically significant (p < 0.001) difference between mean distances for these systems, suggesting that the GTC frame was more accurate. The mean 3D displacement and standard deviations were 3.17+1.95 mm for mask and 2.00+1.04 mm for frame. Both immobilization techniques were highly effective, but the GTC frame was more accurate. To optimize the accuracy of SRT, daily kilovolt image guidance is recommended with either immobilization system.

Phantom measurements to quantify the accuracy of a commercially available cone-beam CT gray-value matching algorithm using multiple Fiducials

PURPOSE

: To assess the accuracy of the gray-value matching algorithm (XVI, Elekta) when multiple iodine-125 ((125)I) seeds are used as fiducials.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

: A phantom, consisting of a plastic box filled with water-dense material containing about 50 dummy seeds, developed primarily as a manual-skill trainer for (125)I seed implantation was used (Figure 1). The phantom was scanned first with a planning CT (PCT) at a slice thickness of 1 mm, 3 mm and 5 mm and with cone-beam CT (CBCT) to be associated with each reference PCT. Matching was performed with the XVI gray-value algorithm. The isocenter was marked with external markers at PCT. After matching, residual error was determined as the difference between planned isocenter and the isocenter that would have been treated based on the matching process. The procedure was performed twice, once without any manipulation (Figure 2) and once with deformation of the seed-bearing dummy prostate by inserting a plug into the phantom aperture that mimics the rectum (Figure 3).

RESULTS

: For the undeformed phantom the maximal residual error regarding the isocenter after gray-value matching around the seed-bearing region was 0.0 mm in x, y and z directions in case of the PCT with 1 mm thickness. The range of residual error was 0-0.4 mm in case of the PCT with 3 mm and 0-0.8 mm in x, y and z directions in case of 5 mm slice thickness, respectively (Figure 4). For the deformed phantom similar results were obtained (maximum error: 1.1 mm).

CONCLUSION

: The residual error after seed-based matching regarding the phantom isocenter was < 1.1 mm in all cases and for the clinical situation (3 mm slice thickness) always < 0.4 mm. The algorithm is therefore appropriate for precision radiotherapy.

Simulation of intrafraction motion and overall geometrical accuracy of a frameless intracranial radiosurgery process

We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the clinical accuracy of an image-guided frameless intracranial radiosurgery system. All links in the process chain were tested. Using healthy volunteers, we evaluated a novel method to prospectively quantify the range of target motion for optimal determination of the planning target volume (PTV) margin. The overall system isocentric accuracy was tested using a rigid anthropomorphic phantom containing a hidden target. Intrafraction motion was simulated in 5 healthy volunteers. Reinforced head-and-shoulders thermoplastic masks were used for immobilization. The subjects were placed in a treatment position for 15 minutes (the maximum expected time between repeated isocenter localizations) and the six-degrees-of-freedom target displacements were recorded with high frequency by tracking infrared markers. The markers were placed on a customized piece of thermoplastic secured to the head independently of the immobilization mask. Additional data were collected with the subjects holding their breath, talking, and deliberately moving. As compared with fiducial matching, the automatic registration algorithm did not introduce clinically significant errors (<0.3 mm difference). The hidden target test confirmed overall system isocentric accuracy of < or =1 mm (total three-dimensional displacement). The subjects exhibited various patterns and ranges of head motion during the mock treatment. The total displacement vector encompassing 95% of the positional points varied from 0.4 mm to 2.9 mm. Pre-planning motion simulation with optical tracking was tested on volunteers and appears promising for determination of patient-specific PTV margins. Further patient study is necessary and is planned. In the meantime, system accuracy is sufficient for confident clinical use with 3 mm PTV margins.

Cone beam CT image guidance for intracranial stereotactic treatments: comparison with a frame guided set-up

PURPOSE

An analysis is performed of the setup errors measured by a kV cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) patients immobilized by a thermoplastic mask and a bite-block and positioned using stereotactic coordinates. We evaluated the overall positioning precision and accuracy of the immobilizing and localizing systems. The potential of image-guided radiotherapy to replace stereotactic methods is discussed.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-seven patients received brain SRT. After a frame-guided setup, before each fraction (131 fractions), a CBCT was acquired and the detected displacements corrected online. Translational and rotational errors were analyzed calculating overall mean and standard deviation. A separate analysis was performed for bite-block (in conjunction with mask) and for simple thermoplastic mask. Interobserver variability for CBCT three-dimensional registration was assessed. The residual error after correction and intrafractional motion were calculated.

RESULTS

The mean module of the three-dimensional displacement vector was 3.0 +/- 1.4 mm. Setup errors for bite block and mask were smaller (2.9 +/- 1.3 mm) than those for thermoplastic mask alone (3.2 +/- 1.5 mm), but statistical significance was not reached (p = 0.15). Interobserver variability was negligible. The maximum margin calculated for residual errors and intra fraction motion was small but not negligible (1.57 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the detected setup errors, daily image guidance is essential for the efficacy of SRT treatments when mask immobilization is used, and even when a bite-block is used in conjunction. The frame setup is still used as a starting point for the opportunity of rotational corrections. Residual margins after on-line corrections must be evaluated.

Unresectable carcinoma of the paranasal sinuses: outcomes and toxicities

PURPOSE

To evaluate long-term outcomes and toxicity in patients with unresectable paranasal sinus carcinoma treated with radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between January 1990 and December 2006, 39 patients with unresectable Stage IVB paranasal sinus carcinoma were treated definitively with chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (n = 35, 90%) or with radiotherapy alone (n = 4, 10%). Patients were treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (n = 18, 46%), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (n = 12, 31%), or conventional radiotherapy (n = 9, 23%) to a median treatment dose of 70 Gy. Most patients received concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy (n = 32, 82%) and/or concomitant boost radiotherapy (n = 29, 74%).

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 90 months, the 5-year local progression-free survival, regional progression-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival were 21%, 61%, 51%, 14%, and 15%, respectively. Patients primarily experienced local relapse (n = 25, 64%), mostly within the irradiated field (n = 22). Nine patients developed neck relapses; however none of the 4 patients receiving elective neck irradiation had a nodal relapse. In 13 patients acute Grade 3 mucositis developed. Severe late toxicities occurred in 2 patients with radionecrosis and 1 patient with unilateral blindness 7 years after intensity-modulated radiation therapy (77 Gy to the optic nerve). The only significant factor for improved local progression-free survival and overall survival was a biologically equivalent dose of radiation >/=65 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment outcomes for unresectable paranasal sinus carcinoma are poor, and combined-modality treatment is needed that is both more effective and associated with less morbidity. The addition of elective neck irradiation may improve regional control.

Reliability of the Bony Anatomy in Image-Guided Stereotactic Radiotherapy of Brain Metastases

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether the position of brain metastases remains stable between planning and treatment in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Eighteen patients with 20 brain metastases were treated with single-fraction (17 lesions) or hypofractionated (3 lesions) image-guided SRT. Median time interval between planning and treatment was 8 days. Before treatment a cone-beam CT (CBCT) and a conventional CT after application of i.v. contrast were acquired. Setup errors using automatic bone registration (CBCT) and manual soft-tissue registration of the brain metastases (conventional CT) were compared.

RESULTS

Tumor size was not significantly different between planning and treatment. The three-dimensional setup error (mean +/- SD) was 4.0 +/- 2.1 mm and 3.5 +/- 2.2 mm according to the bony anatomy and the lesion itself, respectively. A highly significant correlation between automatic bone match and soft-tissue registration was seen in all three directions (r >/= 0.88). The three-dimensional distance between the isocenter according to bone match and soft-tissue registration was 1.7 +/- 0.7 mm, maximum 2.8 mm. Treatment of intracranial pressure with steroids did not influence the position of the lesion relative to the bony anatomy.

CONCLUSION

With a time interval of approximately 1 week between planning and treatment, the bony anatomy of the skull proved to be an excellent surrogate for the target position in image-guided SRT.

Spatial and Dosimetric Variability of Organs at Risk in Head-and-Neck Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The accuracy of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) delivery may be compromised by random spatial error and systematic anatomic changes during the treatment course. We present quantitative measurements of the spatial variability of head-and-neck organs-at-risk and demonstrate the resultant dosimetric effects.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifteen consecutive patients were imaged weekly using computed tomography during the treatment course. Three-dimensional displacements were calculated for the superior and inferior brainstem; C1, C6, and T2 spinal cord; as well as the lateral and medial aspects of the parotid glands. The data were analyzed to show distributions of spatial error and to track temporal changes. The treatment plan was recalculated on all computed tomography sets, and the dosimetric error was quantified in terms of the maximal dose difference (brainstem and spinal cord) or the mean dose difference and the volume receiving 26 Gy (parotid glands).

RESULTS

The mean three-dimensional displacement was 2.9 mm for the superior brainstem, 3.4 mm for the inferior brainstem, 3.5 mm for the C1 spine, 5.6 mm for the C6 spine and 6.0 mm for the T2 spine. The lateral aspects of both parotid glands showed a medial translation of 0.85 mm/wk, and glands shrank by 4.9%/wk. The variability of the maximal dose difference was described by standard deviations ranging from 5.6% (upper cord) to 8.0% (lower cord.) The translation of the left parotid resulted in an increase of the mean dose and the volume receiving 26 Gy.

CONCLUSION

Random spatial and dosimetric variability is predominant for the brainstem and spinal cord and increases at more inferior locations. In contrast, the parotid glands demonstrated a systematic medial translation during the treatment course and thus sparing may be compromised.