Set-up error and dosimetric analysis of HexaPOD evo RT 6D couch combined with cone beam CT image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy for primary malignant tumor of the cervical spine

A novel evaluation model of image registration for cone-beam computed tomography guided lung cancer radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to establish a weighted comprehensive evaluation model (WCEM) of image registration for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) guided lung cancer radiotherapy that considers the geometric accuracy of gross target volume (GTV) and organs at risk (OARs), and assess the registration accuracy of different image registration methods to provide clinical references.

METHODS

The planning CT and CBCT images of 20 lung cancer patients were registered using diverse algorithms (bony and grayscale) and regions of interest (target, ipsilateral, and body). We compared the coverage ratio (CR) of the planning target volume (PTVCT) to GTVCBCT, as well as the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of the GTV and OARs, considering the treatment position across various registration methods. Furthermore, we developed a mathematical model to assess registration results comprehensively. This model was evaluated and validated using CRFs across four automatic registration methods.

RESULTS

The grayscale registration method, coupled with the registration of the ipsilateral structure, exhibited the highest level of automatic registration accuracy, the DSC were 0.87 ± 0.09 (GTV), 0.71 ± 0.09 (esophagus), 0.74 ± 0.09 (spinal cord), and 0.91 ± 0.05 (heart), respectively. Our proposed WCEM proved to be both practical and effective. The results clearly indicated that the grayscale registration method, when applied to the ipsilateral structure, achieved the highest CRF score. The average CRF scores, excellent rates, good rate and qualification rates were 58 ± 26, 40%, 75%, and 85%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study successfully developed a clinically relevant weighted evaluation model for CBCT-guided lung cancer radiotherapy. Validation confirmed the grayscale method's optimal performance in ipsilateral structure registration.

Assessment of dosimetric impact of interfractional 6D setup error in tongue cancer treated with IMRT and VMAT using daily kV-CBCT

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the dosimetric influence of 6-dimensional (6D) interfractional setup error in tongue cancer treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using daily kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT).

Materials and methods

This retrospective study included 20 tongue cancer patients treated with IMRT (10), VMAT (10), and daily kV-CBCT image guidance. Interfraction 6D setup errors along the lateral, longitudinal, vertical, pitch, roll, and yaw axes were evaluated for 600 CBCTs. Structures in the planning CT were deformed to the CBCT using deformable registration. For each fraction, a reference CBCT structure set with no rotation error was created. The treatment plan was recalculated on the CBCTs with the rotation error (R_Error), translation error (T_Error), and translation plus rotation error (T+R_Error). For targets and organs at risk (OARs), the dosimetric impacts of R_Error, T_Error, and T+R_Error were evaluated without and with moderate correction of setup errors.

Results

The maximum dose variation ΔD (%) for D_98% in clinical target volumes (CTV): CTV-60, CTV-54, planning target volumes (PTV): PTV-60, and PTV-54 was -1.2%, -1.9%, -12.0%, and -12.3%, respectively, in the T+R_Error without setup error correction. The maximum ΔD (%) for D_98% in CTV-60, CTV-54, PTV-60, and PTV-54 was -1.0%, -1.7%, -9.2%, and -9.5%, respectively, in the T+R_Error with moderate setup error correction. The dosimetric impact of interfractional 6D setup errors was statistically significant (p < 0.05) for D_98% in CTV-60, CTV-54, PTV-60, and PTV-54.

Conclusions

The uncorrected interfractional 6D setup errors could significantly impact the delivered dose to targets and OARs in tongue cancer. That emphasized the importance of daily 6D setup error correction in IMRT and VMAT.

Reducing ExacTrac intrafraction imaging uncertainty for prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy using a pre-treatment CBCT

This study evaluated the intrafractional auto-matching uncertainties of prostate-implanted fiducial markers when using the ExacTrac v6.5 (Brainlab, Feldkirchen, Germany) X-ray stereoscopic system. A customised phantom with 3 implanted gold seeds was initially positioned at the isocentre using a cone beam CT (CBCT) prior to intrafractional imaging. Progressive offsets were applied to the phantom in all six directions (3 translational, 3 rotational) of 0 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, 0°, 1° and 2°. Subsequently, the ability of the ExacTrac image-matching functions to detect and correct these offsets was tested. For comparison, this procedure was repeated, but without a CBCT for pre-treatment positioning. The auto-matching uncertainties when a CBCT was introduced into the workflow were significantly reduced, and overall, the auto-matching statistics using the implanted marker (seeds) matching function was found to be more precise than the bony anatomy function in-phantom. The total standard deviations for the translational shifts using the implanted marker and bony anatomy functions respectively were 0.1 mm and 0.3 mm vertically, 0.1 mm and 0.3 mm longitudinally, and 0.1 mm and 0.4 mm laterally. The standard deviations for the rotational shifts using the implanted marker and bony anatomy matching functions respectively were 0.2° and 1.2° for the yaw (angle vert), 0.3° and 1.1° for the pitch (angle long), and 0.2° and 1.2° for the roll (angle lat) directions. The reduced uncertainties from introducing a CBCT for initial localisation resulted in decreased probability of inhibits due to false positives during treatment.

Dosimetric impact of rotational setup errors in volumetric modulated arc therapy for postoperative cervical cancer

We aimed to evaluate the impact of rotational setup errors on the doses received during postoperative volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for cervical cancer. Overall, 121 cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) sets from 20 patients were rigidly registered to reference computed tomography (CT) sets based on bony landmarks. The rotational setup errors (pitch, yaw and roll) were calculated. Then, 121 CT sets involving rotational setup errors were created, and the dose distribution in these CT sets were recalculated. The recalculated dosimetric parameters for the clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OAR) were compared to the reference values, and the correlation coefficients between the dosimetric parameter differences and rotational setup errors were calculated. Only the pitch setup error was moderately correlated with CTV coverage (r ≥ 0.40) and strongly correlated with V45 for the bladder (r ≥ 0.91) and V40 for the rectum, small bowel and bone marrow (r ≥ 0.91). The maximum dosimetric difference in a single fraction and overall fractions was -1.59% and -0.69% in D98 for the CTV, 11.72% and 5.17% in V45 for the bladder and -8.03% and -4.68% in V40 for the rectum, respectively. In conclusion, rotational setup errors only slightly impact dose coverage during postoperative cervical cancer VMAT. However, the pitch setup error occasionally affected the doses received by the bladder or the rectum in the overall fraction when the error was systematic. Thus, rotational setup errors should be corrected by adjusting six-degree-of-freedom (DOF) couches to reduce dosimetric differences in the OARs.