A computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system. II: Sequence processor

Impact of complexity and computer control on errors in radiation therapy

A number of recent publications in both the lay and scientific press have described major errors in patient radiation treatments, and this publicity has galvanised much work to address and mitigate potential safety issues throughout the radiation therapy planning and delivery process. The complexity of modern radiotherapy techniques and equipment, including computer-controlled treatment machines and treatment management systems, as well as sophisticated treatment techniques that involve intensity-modulated radiation therapy, image-guided radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, respiratory gating, and others, leads to concern about safety issues related to that complexity. This article illustrates the relationship between complexity and computer control, and various safety problems and errors that have been reported, and describes studies that address the issue of these modern techniques and whether their complexity does, in fact, result in more errors or safety-related problems. Clinical implications of these results are discussed, as are some of the ways in which the field should respond to the ongoing concerns about errors and complexity in radiation therapy.

QA issues for computer-controlled treatment delivery: this is not your old R/V system any more!

State-of-the-art radiotherapy treatment delivery has changed dramatically during the past decade, moving from manual individual field setup and treatment to automated computer-controlled delivery of complex treatments, including intensity-modulated radiotherapy and other similarly complex delivery strategies. However, the quality assurance methods typically used to ensure treatment is performed precisely and correctly have not evolved in a similarly dramatic way. This paper reviews the old manual treatment process and use of record-and-verify systems, and describes differences with modern computer-controlled treatment delivery. The process and technology used for computer-controlled treatment delivery are analyzed in terms of potential (and actual) problems, as well as relevant published guidance on quality assurance. The potential for improved quality assurance for computer-controlled delivery is discussed.

Daily prostate targeting using implanted radiopaque markers

PURPOSE

A system has been implemented for daily localization of the prostate through radiographic localization of implanted markers. This report summarizes an initial trial to establish the accuracy of patient setup via this system.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Before radiotherapy, three radiopaque markers are implanted in the prostate periphery. Reference positions are established from CT data. Before treatment, orthogonal radiographs are acquired. Projected marker positions are extracted semiautomatically from the radiographs and aligned to the reference positions. Computer-controlled couch adjustment is performed, followed by acquisition of a second pair of radiographs to verify prostate position. Ten patients (6 prone, 4 supine) participated in a trial of daily positioning.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-four fractions were treated using this system. Treatment times were on the order of 30 minutes. Initial prostate position errors (sigma) ranged from 3.1 to 5.8 mm left-right, 4.0 to 10.1 mm anterior-posterior, and 2.6 to 9.0 mm inferior-superior in prone patients. Initial position was more reproducible in supine patients, with errors of 2.8 to 5.0 mm left-right, 1.9 to 3.0 mm anterior-posterior, and 2.6 to 5.3 mm inferior-superior. After prostate localization and adjustment, the position errors were reduced to 1.3 to 3.5 mm left-right, 1.7 to 4.2 mm anterior-posterior, and 1.6 to 4.0 mm inferior-superior in prone patients, and 1.2 to 1.8 mm left-right, 0.9 to 1.8 mm anterior-posterior, and 0.8 to 1.5 mm inferior-superior in supine patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily targeting of the prostate has been shown to be technically feasible. The implemented system provides the ability to significantly reduce treatment margins for most patients with cancer confined to the prostate. The differences in final position accuracy between prone and supine patients suggest variations in intratreatment prostate movement related to mechanisms of patient positioning.

Monte Carlo verification of IMRT dose distributions from a commercial treatment planning optimization system

The purpose of this work was to use Monte Carlo simulations to verify the accuracy of the dose distributions from a commercial treatment planning optimization system (Corvus, Nomos Corp., Sewickley, PA) for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). A Monte Carlo treatment planning system has been implemented clinically to improve and verify the accuracy of radiotherapy dose calculations. Further modifications to the system were made to compute the dose in a patient for multiple fixed-gantry IMRT fields. The dose distributions in the experimental phantoms and in the patients were calculated and used to verify the optimized treatment plans generated by the Corvus system. The Monte Carlo calculated IMRT dose distributions agreed with the measurements to within 2% of the maximum dose for all the beam energies and field sizes for both the homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. The dose distributions predicted by the Corvus system, which employs a finite-size pencil beam (FSPB) algorithm, agreed with the Monte Carlo simulations and measurements to within 4% in a cylindrical water phantom with various hypothetical target shapes. Discrepancies of more than 5% (relative to the prescribed target dose) in the target region and over 20% in the critical structures were found in some IMRT patient calculations. The FSPB algorithm as implemented in the Corvus system is adequate for homogeneous phantoms (such as prostate) but may result in significant under or over-estimation of the dose in some cases involving heterogeneities such as the air-tissue, lung-tissue and tissue-bone interfaces.

Energy- and intensity-modulated electron beams for radiotherapy

This work investigates the feasibility of optimizing energy- and intensity-modulated electron beams for radiation therapy. A multileaf collimator (MLC) specially designed for modulated electron radiotherapy (MERT) was investigated both experimentally and by Monte Carlo simulations. An inverse-planning system based on Monte Carlo dose calculations was developed to optimize electron beam energy and intensity to achieve dose conformity for target volumes near the surface. The results showed that an MLC with 5 mm leaf widths could produce complex field shapes for MERT. Electron intra- and inter-leaf leakage had negligible effects on the dose distributions delivered with the MLC, even at shallow depths. Focused leaf ends reduced the electron scattering contributions to the dose compared with straight leaf ends. As anticipated, moving the MLC position toward the patient surface reduced the penumbra significantly. There were significant differences in the beamlet distributions calculated by an analytic 3-D pencil beam algorithm and the Monte Carlo method. The Monte Carlo calculated beamlet distributions were essential to the accuracy of the MERT dose distribution in cases involving large air gaps, oblique incidence and heterogeneous treatment targets (at the tissue-bone and bone-lung interfaces). To demonstrate the potential of MERT for target dose coverage and normal tissue sparing for treatment of superficial targets, treatment plans for a hypothetical treatment were compared using photon beams and MERT.

Guide to clinical use of electronic portal imaging

The Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) provides localization quality images and computer-aided analysis, which should in principal, replace portal film imaging. Modern EPIDs deliver superior image quality and an array of analysis tools that improve clinical decision making. It has been demonstrated that the EPID can be a powerful tool in the reduction of treatment setup errors and the quality assurance and verification of complex treatments. However, in many radiation therapy clinics EPID technology is not in routine clinical use. This low utilization suggests that the capability and potential of the technology alone do not guarantee its full adoption. This paper addresses basic considerations required to facilitate clinical implementation of the EPID technology and gives specific examples of successful implementations.

Optimization and clinical use of multisegment intensity-modulated radiation therapy for high-dose conformal therapy

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) may be performed with many different treatment delivery techniques. This article summarizes the clinical use and optimization of multisegment IMRT plans that have been used to treat more than 350 patients with IMRT over the last 4.5 years. More than 475 separate clinical IMRT plans are reviewed, including treatments of brain, head and neck, thorax, breast and chest wall, abdomen, pelvis, prostate, and other sites. Clinical planning, plan optimization, and treatment delivery are summarized, including efforts to minimize the number of additional intensity-modulated segments needed for particular planning protocols. Interactive and automated optimization of segmental and full IMRT approaches are illustrated, and automation of the segmental IMRT planning process is discussed.

American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning

In recent years, the sophistication and complexity of clinical treatment planning and treatment planning systems has increased significantly, particularly including three-dimensional (3D) treatment planning systems, and the use of conformal treatment planning and delivery techniques. This has led to the need for a comprehensive set of quality assurance (QA) guidelines that can be applied to clinical treatment planning. This document is the report of Task Group 53 of the Radiation Therapy Committee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. The purpose of this report is to guide and assist the clinical medical physicist in developing and implementing a comprehensive but viable program of quality assurance for modern radiotherapy treatment planning. The scope of the QA needs for treatment planning is quite broad, encompassing image-based definition of patient anatomy, 3D beam descriptions for complex beams including multileaf collimator apertures, 3D dose calculation algorithms, and complex plan evaluation tools including dose volume histograms. The Task Group recommends an organizational framework for the task of creating a QA program which is individualized to the needs of each institution and addresses the issues of acceptance testing, commissioning the planning system and planning process, routine quality assurance, and ongoing QA of the planning process. This report, while not prescribing specific QA tests, provides the framework and guidance to allow radiation oncology physicists to design comprehensive and practical treatment planning QA programs for their clinics.

The impact of treatment complexity and computer-control delivery technology on treatment delivery errors

PURPOSE

To analyze treatment delivery errors for three-dimensional (3D) conformal therapy performed at various levels of treatment delivery automation and complexity, ranging from manual field setup to virtually complete computer-controlled treatment delivery using a computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system (CCRS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

All treatment delivery errors which occurred in our department during a 15-month period were analyzed. Approximately 34,000 treatment sessions (114,000 individual treatment segments [ports]) on four treatment machines were studied. All treatment delivery errors logged by treatment therapists or quality assurance reviews (152 in all) were analyzed. Machines "M1" and "M2" were operated in a standard manual setup mode, with no record and verify system (R/V). MLC machines "M3" and "M4" treated patients under the control of the CCRS system, which (1) downloads the treatment delivery plan from the planning system; (2) performs some (or all) of the machine set up and treatment delivery for each field; (3) monitors treatment delivery; (4) records all treatment parameters; and (5) notes exceptions to the electronically-prescribed plan. Complete external computer control is not available on M3; therefore, it uses as many CCRS features as possible, while M4 operates completely under CCRS control and performs semi-automated and automated multi-segment intensity modulated treatments. Analysis of treatment complexity was based on numbers of fields, individual segments, nonaxial and noncoplanar plans, multisegment intensity modulation, and pseudoisocentric treatments studied for a 6-month period (505 patients) concurrent with the period in which the delivery errors were obtained. Treatment delivery time was obtained from the computerized scheduling system (for manual treatments) or from CCRS system logs. Treatment therapists rotate among the machines; therefore, this analysis does not depend on fixed therapist staff on particular machines.

RESULTS

The overall reported error rate (all treatments, machines) was 0.13% per segment, or 0.44% per treatment session. The rate (per machine) depended on automation and plan complexity. The error rates per segment for machines M1 through M4 were 0.16%, 0.27%, 0.12%, 0.05%, respectively, while plan complexity increased from M1 up to machine M4. Machine M4 (the most complex plans and automation) had the lowest error rate. The error rate decreased with increasing automation in spite of increasing plan complexity, while for the manual machines, the error rate increased with complexity. Note that the real error rates on the two manual machines are likely to be higher than shown here (due to unnoticed and/or unreported errors), while (particularly on M4) virtually all random treatment delivery errors were noted by the CCRS system and related QA checks (including routine checks of machine and table readouts for each treatment). Treatment delivery times averaged from 14 min to 23 min per plan, and depended on the number of segments/plan, although this analysis is complicated by other factors.

CONCLUSION

Use of a sophisticated computer-controlled delivery system for routine patient treatments with complex 3D conformal plans has led to a decrease in treatment delivery errors, while at the same time allowing delivery of increasingly complex and sophisticated conformal plans with little increase in treatment time. With renewed vigilance for the possibility of systematic problems, it is clear that use of complete and integrated computer-controlled delivery systems can provide improvements in treatment delivery, since more complex plans can be delivered with fewer errors, and without increasing treatment time.

Comprehensive irradiation of head and neck cancer using conformal multisegmental fields: assessment of target coverage and noninvolved tissue sparing

PURPOSE

Conformal treatment using static multisegmental intensity modulation was developed for patients requiring comprehensive irradiation for head and neck cancer. The major aim is sparing major salivary gland function while adequately treating the targets. To assess the adequacy of the conformal plans regarding target coverage and dose homogeneity, they were compared with standard irradiation plans.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifteen patients with stage III/IV head and neck cancer requiring comprehensive, bilateral neck irradiation participated in this study. CT-based treatment plans included five to six nonopposed fields, each having two to four in-field segments. Fields and segments were devised using beam's eye views of the planning target volumes (PTVs), noninvolved organs, and isodose surfaces, to achieve homogeneous dose distribution that encompassed the targets and spared major salivary gland tissue. For comparison, standard three-field radiation plans were devised retrospectively for each patient, with the same CT-derived targets used for the clinical (conformal) plans. Saliva flow rates from each major salivary gland were measured before and periodically after treatment.

RESULTS

On average, the minimal dose to the primary PTVs in the conformal plans [95.2% of the prescribed dose, standard deviation (SD) 4%] was higher than in the standard plans (91%, SD 7%; p = 0.02), and target volumes receiving <95% or <90% of the prescribed dose were smaller in the conformal plans (p = 0.004 and 0.02, respectively). Similar advantages of the conformal plans compared to standard plans were found in ipsilateral jugular nodes PTV coverage. The reason for underdosing in the standard treatment plans was primarily failure of electron beams to fully encompass targets. No significant differences were found in contralateral jugular or posterior neck nodes coverage. The minimal dose to the retropharyngeal nodes was higher in the standard plans. However, all conformal plans achieved the planning goal of delivering 50 Gy to these nodes. In the conformal plans, the magnitude and volumes of high doses in noninvolved tissue were significantly reduced. The main reasons for hot spots in the standard plans (whose dose calculations included missing tissue compensators) were photon/electron match line inhomogeneities, which were avoided in the conformal plans. The mean doses to all the major salivary glands, notably the contralateral parotid (receiving on average 32% of the prescribed dose, SD 7%) were significantly lower in the conformal plans compared with standard radiation plans. The mean dose to the noninvolved oral cavity tended to be lower in the conformal plans (p = 0.07). One to 3 months after radiation, on average 60% (SD 49%) of the preradiation saliva flow rate was retained in the contralateral parotid glands and 10% (SD 16%) was retained in the submandibular/sublingual glands.

CONCLUSIONS

Planning and delivery of comprehensive irradiation for head and neck cancer using static, multisegmental intensity modulation are feasible. Target coverage has not been compromised and dose distributions in noninvolved tissue are favorable compared with standard radiation. Substantial major salivary gland function can be retained.

A computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system. IV: Electronic chart

PURPOSE

The design and implementation of a system for electronically tracking relevant plan, prescription, and treatment data for computer-controlled conformal radiation therapy is described.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The electronic charting system is implemented on a computer cluster coupled by high-speed networks to computer-controlled therapy machines. A methodical approach to the specification and design of an integrated solution has been used in developing the system. The electronic chart system is designed to allow identification and access of patient-specific data including treatment-planning data, treatment prescription information, and charting of doses. An in-house developed database system is used to provide an integrated approach to the database requirements of the design. A hierarchy of databases is used for both centralization and distribution of the treatment data for specific treatment machines.

RESULTS

The basic electronic database system has been implemented and has been in use since July 1993. The system has been used to download and manage treatment data on all patients treated on our first fully computer-controlled treatment machine. To date, electronic dose charting functions have not been fully implemented clinically, requiring the continued use of paper charting for dose tracking.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine clinical application of complex computer-controlled conformal treatment procedures requires the management of large quantities of information for describing and tracking treatments. An integrated and comprehensive approach to this problem has led to a full electronic chart for conformal radiation therapy treatments.

A computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system. III: Graphical simulation and monitoring of treatment delivery

PURPOSE

Safe and efficient delivery of radiotherapy using computer-controlled machines requires new procedures to design and verify the actual delivery of these treatments. Graphical simulation and monitoring techniques for treatment delivery have been developed for this purpose.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A graphics-based simulator of the treatment machine and a set of procedures for creating and manipulating treatment delivery scripts are used to simulate machine motions, detect collisions, and monitor machine positions during treatment. The treatment delivery simulator is composed of four components: a three-dimensional dynamic model of the treatment machine; a motion simulation and collision detection algorithm, user-interface widgets that mimic the treatment machine's control and readout devices; and an icon-based interface for creating and manipulating treatment delivery scripts. These components are used in a stand-alone fashion for interactive treatment delivery planning and integrated with a machine control system for treatment implementation and monitoring.

RESULTS

A graphics-based treatment delivery simulator and a set of procedures for planning and monitoring computer-controlled treatment delivery have been developed and implemented as part of a comprehensive computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system. To date, these techniques have been used to design and help monitor computer-controlled treatments on a radiotherapy machine for more than 200 patients. Examples using these techniques for treatment delivery planning and on-line monitoring of machine motions during therapy are described.

CONCLUSION

A system that provides interactive graphics-based tools for defining the sequence of machine motions, simulating treatment delivery including collision detection, and presenting the therapists with continual visual feedback from the treatment machine has been successfully implemented for routine clinical use as part of an overall system for computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy treatment, and is considered a necessary part of the routine treatment methodology.

A computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system. I: Overview

PURPOSE

Equipment developed for use with computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy (CCRT) treatment techniques, including multileaf collimators and/or computer-control systems for treatment machines, are now available. The purpose of this work is to develop a system that will allow the safe, efficient, and accurate delivery of CCRT treatments as routine clinical treatments, and permit modifications of the system so that the delivery process can be optimized.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The needs and requirements for a system that can fully support modern computer-controlled treatment machines equipped with multileaf collimators and segmental or dynamic conformal therapy capabilities have been analyzed and evaluated. This analysis has been used to design and then implement a complete approach to the delivery of CCRT treatments.

RESULTS

The computer-controlled conformal radiotherapy system (CCRS) described here consists of a process for the delivery of CCRT treatments, and a complex software system that implements the treatment process. The CCRS system described here includes systems for plan transfer, treatment delivery planning, sequencing of the actual treatment delivery process, graphical simulation and verification tools, as well as an electronic chart that is an integral part of the system. The CCRS system has been implemented for use with a number of different treatment machines. The system has been used clinically for more than 2 years to perform CCRT treatments for more than 200 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive system for the implementation and delivery of computer-controlled conformal radiation therapy (CCRT) plans has been designed and implemented for routine clinical use with multisegment, computer-controlled, multileaf-collimated conformal therapy. The CCRS system has been successfully implemented to perform these complex treatments, and is considered quite important to the clinical use of modern computer-controlled treatment techniques.