1
|
Shimomura A, Wu T, Rusu I, Kishan AU, Tree AC, Solanki AA, Liauw SL. Monitoring Intrafraction Motion of the Prostate During Radiation Therapy: Suggested Practice Points From a Focused Review. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:146-153. [PMID: 37875222 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.08.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 08/30/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE External beam radiation therapy to the prostate is typically delivered after verification of prostatic position with image guidance. Prostate motion can occur during the delivery of each radiation treatment between the time of localization imaging and completion of treatment. The objective of this work is to review the literature on intrafraction motion (IFM) of the prostate during radiation therapy and offer clinical recommendations on management. METHODS AND MATERIALS A comprehensive literature review was conducted on prostate motion during prostate cancer radiation therapy. Information was organized around 3 key clinical questions, followed by an evidence-based recommendation. RESULTS IFM of the prostate during radiation therapy is typically ≤3 mm and is unlikely to compromise prostate dosimetry to a clinically meaningful degree for men treated in a relatively short treatment duration with planning target volume (PTV) margins of ≥3 to 5 mm. IFM of 5 mm or more has been observed in up to ∼10% of treatment fractions, with limited dosimetric effect related to the infrequency of occurrence and longer fractionation of therapy. IFM can be monitored in continuous or discontinuous fashion with a variety of imaging platforms. Correction of IFM may have the greatest value when tighter PTV margins are desired (such as with stereotactic body radiation therapy or intraprostatic nodule boosting), ultrahypofractionated courses, or when treatment time exceeds several minutes. CONCLUSIONS This focused review summarizes literature and provides practical recommendations regarding IFM in the treatment of prostate cancer with external beam radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aoi Shimomura
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Tianming Wu
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Iris Rusu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, Illinois
| | - Amar U Kishan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Alison C Tree
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, United Kingdom; Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom
| | - Abhishek A Solanki
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, Illinois
| | - Stanley L Liauw
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
De Bari B, Guibert G, Slimani S, Bashar Y, Risse T, Guisolan N, Trouillot J, Abel J, Weber P. Electromagnetic Transmitter-Based Prostate Gating for Dose-Escalated Linac-Based Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: An Evaluation of Intrafraction Motion. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:962-974. [PMID: 38392066 PMCID: PMC10887766 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31020072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2023] [Revised: 01/18/2024] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is as a standard treatment for prostate cancer (PCa). Tight margins and high dose gradients are needed, and the precise localization of the target is mandatory. Our retrospective study reports our experience regarding the evaluation of intrafraction prostate motion during LINAC-based SBRT evaluated with a novel electromagnetic (EM) tracking device. This device consists of an integrated Foley catheter with a transmitter connected to a receiver placed on the treatment table. METHODS We analyzed 31 patients who received LINAC-based SBRT using flattening filter-free (FFF) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The patients were scheduled to be treated for primary (n = 27) or an intraprostatic recurrent PCa (n = 4). A simulation CT scan was conducted while the patients had a filled bladder (100-150 cc) and an empty rectum, and an EM tracking device was used. The same rectal and bladder conditions were employed during the treatment. The patients received 36.25 Gy delivered over five consecutive fractions on the whole prostate and 40 Gy on the nodule(s) visible via MRI, both delivered with a Simultaneous Integrated Boost approach. The CTV-to-PTV margin was 2 mm for both the identified treatment volumes. Patient positioning was verified with XVI ConeBeam-CT (CBCT) matching before each fraction. When the signals exceeded a 2 mm threshold in any of the three spatial directions, the treatment was manually interrupted. A new XVI CBCT was performed if this offset lasted >20 s. RESULTS We analyzed data about 155 fractions. The median and mean treatment times, calculated per fraction, were 10 m31 s and 12 m44 s (range: 6 m36 s-65 m28 s), and 95% of the fractions were delivered with a maximum time of 27 m48 s. During treatment delivery, the mean and median number of XVI CBCT operations realized during the treatment were 2 and 1 (range: 0-11). During the treatment, the prostate was outside the CTV-to-PTV margin (2 mm), thus necessitating the stoppage of the delivery +/- a reacquisition of the XVI CBCT for 11.2%, 8.9%, and 3.9% of the delivery time in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral direction, respectively. CONCLUSIONS We easily integrated an EM-transmitter-based gating for prostate LINAC-based SBRT into our normal daily workflow. Using this system, a 2 mm CTV-to-PTV margin could be safely applied. A small number of fractions showed a motion exceeding the predefined 2 mm threshold, which would have otherwise gone undetected without intrafraction motion management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Berardino De Bari
- Radiation Oncology Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland (N.G.)
| | - Geoffroy Guibert
- Medical Physics Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland
| | - Sabrine Slimani
- Radiation Oncology Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland (N.G.)
| | - Yanes Bashar
- Radiation Oncology Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland (N.G.)
| | - Terence Risse
- Medical Physics Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland
| | - Nicole Guisolan
- Radiation Oncology Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland (N.G.)
| | - Juliane Trouillot
- Radiation Oncology Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland (N.G.)
| | - Jonathan Abel
- Radiation Oncology Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland (N.G.)
| | - Patrick Weber
- Medical Physics Department, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, CH-2300 La Chaux-de-Fond, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Panizza D, Faccenda V, Lucchini R, Daniotti MC, Trivellato S, Caricato P, Pisoni V, De Ponti E, Arcangeli S. Intrafraction Prostate Motion Management During Dose-Escalated Linac-Based Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy. Front Oncol 2022; 12:883725. [PMID: 35463373 PMCID: PMC9021501 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.883725] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2022] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Extreme hypofractionation requires tight planning margins, high dose gradients, and strict adherence to planning criteria in terms of patient positioning and organ motion mitigation. This study reports the first clinical experience worldwide using a novel electromagnetic (EM) tracking device for intrafraction prostate motion management during dose-escalated linac-based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Methods Thirteen patients with organ-confined prostate cancer underwent dose-escalated SBRT using flattening filter-free (FFF) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The EM tracking device consisted of an integrated Foley catheter with a transmitter. Patients were simulated and treated with a filled bladder and an empty rectum. Setup accuracy was achieved by ConeBeam-CT (CBCT) matching, and motion was tracked during all the procedure. Treatment was interrupted when the signals exceeded a 2 mm threshold in any of the three spatial directions and, unless the offset was transient, target position was re-defined by repeating CBCT. Moreover, the displacements that would have occurred without any intrafraction organ motion management (i.e. no interruptions and repositionings) were simulated. Results In 31 out of 56 monitored fractions (55%), no intervention was required to correct the target position. In 25 (45%) a correction was mandated, but only in 10 (18%), the beam delivery was interrupted. Total treatment time lasted on average 10.2 minutes, 6.7 minutes for setup, and 3.5 minutes for beam delivery. Without any intrafraction motion management, the overall mean treatment time and the mean delivery time would have been 6.9 minutes and 3.2 minutes, respectively. The prostate would have been found outside the tolerance in 8% of the total session time, in 4% of the time during the setup, and in 14% during the beam-on phase. Predominant motion pattern was posterior and its probability increased with time, with a mean motion ≤ 2 mm occurring within 10 minutes. Conclusions EM real-time tracking was successfully implemented for intrafraction motion management during dose-escalated prostate SBRT. Results showed that most of the observed displacements were < 2 mm in any direction; however, there were a non-insignificant number of fractions with motion exceeding the predefined threshold, which would have otherwise gone undetected without intrafraction motion management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Denis Panizza
- Medical Physics Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy.,School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Valeria Faccenda
- Medical Physics Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy.,Department of Physics, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Raffaella Lucchini
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, Milan, Italy.,Radiation Oncology Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy
| | - Martina Camilla Daniotti
- Medical Physics Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy.,Department of Physics, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Paolo Caricato
- Medical Physics Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy.,Department of Physics, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Elena De Ponti
- Medical Physics Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy.,School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Arcangeli
- School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milan Bicocca, Milan, Italy.,Radiation Oncology Department, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Koo J, Nardella L, Degnan M, Andreozzi J, Yu HHM, Penagaricano J, Johnstone PAS, Oliver D, Ahmed K, Rosenberg SA, Wuthrick E, Diaz R, Feygelman V, Latifi K, Moros EG, Redler G. Triggered kV Imaging During Spine SBRT for Intrafraction Motion Management. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2021; 20:15330338211063033. [PMID: 34855577 PMCID: PMC8649431 DOI: 10.1177/15330338211063033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: To monitor intrafraction motion during spine stereotactic body radiotherapy(SBRT) treatment delivery with readily available technology, we implemented triggered kV imaging using the on-board imager(OBI) of a modern medical linear accelerator with an advanced imaging package. Methods: Triggered kV imaging for intrafraction motion management was tested with an anthropomorphic phantom and simulated spine SBRT treatments to the thoracic and lumbar spine. The vertebral bodies and spinous processes were contoured as the image guided radiotherapy(IGRT) structures specific to this technique. Upon each triggered kV image acquisition, 2D projections of the IGRT structures were automatically calculated and updated at arbitrary angles for display on the kV images. Various shifts/rotations were introduced in x, y, z, pitch, and yaw. Gantry-angle-based triggering was set to acquire kV images every 45°. A group of physicists/physicians(n = 10) participated in a survey to evaluate clinical efficiency and accuracy of clinical decisions on images containing various phantom shifts. This method was implemented clinically for treatment of 42 patients(94 fractions) with 15 second time-based triggering. Result: Phantom images revealed that IGRT structure accuracy and therefore utility of projected contours during triggered imaging improved with smaller CT slice thickness. Contouring vertebra superior and inferior to the treatment site was necessary to detect clinically relevant phantom rotation. From the survey, detectability was proportional to the shift size in all shift directions and inversely related to the CT slice thickness. Clinical implementation helped evaluate robustness of patient immobilization. Based on visual inspection of projected IGRT contours on planar kV images, appreciable intrafraction motion was detected in eleven fractions(11.7%). Discussion: Feasibility of triggered imaging for spine SBRT intrafraction motion management has been demonstrated in phantom experiments and implementation for patient treatments. This technique allows efficient, non-invasive monitoring of patient position using the OBI and patient anatomy as a direct visual guide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jihye Koo
- 7831University of South Florida, 33620, USA.,25301H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, 33612, USA
| | | | - Michael Degnan
- 549472The Ohio State University, 43210, Columbus, OH, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Gage Redler
- 25301H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, 33612, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Target motion management in breast cancer radiation therapy. Radiol Oncol 2021; 55:393-408. [PMID: 34626533 PMCID: PMC8647788 DOI: 10.2478/raon-2021-0040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2021] [Accepted: 08/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Over the last two decades, breast cancer remains the main cause of cancer deaths in women. To treat this type of cancer, radiation therapy (RT) has proved to be efficient. RT for breast cancer is, however, challenged by intrafractional motion caused by respiration. The problem is more severe for the left-sided breast cancer due to the proximity to the heart as an organ-at-risk. While particle therapy results in superior dose characteristics than conventional RT, due to the physics of particle interactions in the body, particle therapy is more sensitive to target motion. Conclusions This review highlights current and emerging strategies for the management of intrafractional target motion in breast cancer treatment with an emphasis on particle therapy, as a modern RT technique. There are major challenges associated with transferring real-time motion monitoring technologies from photon to particles beams. Surface imaging would be the dominant imaging modality for real-time intrafractional motion monitoring for breast cancer. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance and ultra high dose rate (FLASH)-RT seem to be state-of-the-art approaches to deal with 4D RT for breast cancer.
Collapse
|
6
|
Webster A, Appelt A, Eminowicz G. Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Pelvic Cancers: A Review of Current Evidence and Clinical Utilisation. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:805-816. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.09.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2020] [Revised: 09/18/2020] [Accepted: 09/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
7
|
Vanhanen A, Poulsen P, Kapanen M. Dosimetric effect of intrafraction motion and different localization strategies in prostate SBRT. Phys Med 2020; 75:58-68. [PMID: 32540647 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2019] [Revised: 05/04/2020] [Accepted: 06/06/2020] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric effect of continuous motion monitoring based localization (Calypso, Varian Medical Systems), gating and intrafraction motion correction in prostate SBRT. Delivered doses were modelled by reconstructing motion inclusive dose distributions for different localization strategies. Actually delivered dose (strategy A) utilized initial Calypso localization, CBCT and additional pre-treatment motion correction by kV-imaging and Calypso, and gating during the irradiation. The effect of gating was investigated by simulating non-gated treatments (strategy B). Additionally, non-gated and single image-guided (CBCT) localization was simulated (strategy C). A total of 308 fractions from 22 patients were reconstructed. The dosimetric effect was evaluated by comparing motion inclusive target and risk organ dose-volume parameters to planned values. Motion induced dose deficits were seen mainly in PTV and CTV to PTV margin regions, whereas CTV dose deficits were small in all strategies: mean ± SD difference in CTVD99% was -0.3 ± 0.4%, -0.4 ± 0.6% and -0.7 ± 1.2% in strategies A, B and C, respectively. Largest dose deficits were seen in individual fractions for strategy C (maximum dose reductions were -29.0% and -7.1% for PTVD95% and CTVD99%, respectively). The benefit of gating was minor, if additional motion correction was applied immediately prior to irradiation. Continuous motion monitoring based localization and motion correction ensured the target coverage and minimized the OAR exposure for every fraction and is recommended to use in prostate SBRT. The study is part of clinical trial NCT02319239.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Vanhanen
- Department of Oncology, Unit of Radiotherapy, Tampere University Hospital, POB-2000, 33521 Tampere, Finland; Department of Medical Physics, Medical Imaging Center, Tampere University Hospital, POB-2000, 33521 Tampere, Finland.
| | - P Poulsen
- Department of Oncology and Danish Center for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 25, Entrance B3, 8200 Aarhus N, Denmark
| | - M Kapanen
- Department of Oncology, Unit of Radiotherapy, Tampere University Hospital, POB-2000, 33521 Tampere, Finland; Department of Medical Physics, Medical Imaging Center, Tampere University Hospital, POB-2000, 33521 Tampere, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Korpics MC, Rokni M, Degnan M, Aydogan B, Liauw SL, Redler G. Utilizing the TrueBeam Advanced Imaging Package to monitor intrafraction motion with periodic kV imaging and automatic marker detection during VMAT prostate treatments. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2020; 21:184-191. [PMID: 31981305 PMCID: PMC7075383 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2019] [Revised: 12/18/2019] [Accepted: 12/27/2019] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Fiducial markers are frequently used before treatment for image‐guided patient setup in radiation therapy (RT), but can also be used during treatment for image‐guided intrafraction motion detection. This report describes our implementation of automatic marker detection with periodic kV imaging (TrueBeam v2.5) to monitor and correct intrafraction motion during prostate RT. Methods We evaluated the reproducibility and accuracy of software fiducial detection using a phantom with 3 implanted fiducial markers. Clinical implementation for patients with intraprostatic fiducials receiving volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) utilized periodic on‐board kV imaging with 10 s intervals during treatment delivery. For each image, the software automatically identified fiducial locations and determined whether their distance relative to planned locations were within a 3 mm tolerance. Motion was corrected if either ≥2 fiducials in a single image or ≥1 fiducial in sequential images were out of tolerance. Results Phantom studies demonstrated poorer performance of linear fiducials compared to collapsible fiducials, and wide variability to accurately detect fiducials across eight software settings. For any given setting, results were relatively reproducible and precise to ~0.5 mm. Across 17 patients treated with a median of 20 fractions, the software recommended a shift in 44% of fractions, and a shift was actually implemented after visual confirmation of movement greater than the 3 mm threshold in 20% of fractions. Adjustment of our approach led to improved accuracy for the latter (n = 7) patient subset. On average, table repositioning added 3.0 ± 0.3 min to patient time on table. Periodic kV imaging increased skin dose by an estimated 1 cGy per treatment arc. Conclusions Periodic kV imaging with automatic detection of motion during VMAT prostate treatments is commercially available, and can be successfully implemented to mitigate effects of intrafraction motion with careful attention to software settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark C Korpics
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Michelle Rokni
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Michael Degnan
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Bulent Aydogan
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Stanley L Liauw
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Gage Redler
- Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bertholet J, Knopf A, Eiben B, McClelland J, Grimwood A, Harris E, Menten M, Poulsen P, Nguyen DT, Keall P, Oelfke U. Real-time intrafraction motion monitoring in external beam radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 2019; 64:15TR01. [PMID: 31226704 PMCID: PMC7655120 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab2ba8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 111] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2019] [Revised: 05/10/2019] [Accepted: 06/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) aims to deliver a spatially conformal dose of radiation to tumours while maximizing the dose sparing to healthy tissues. However, the internal patient anatomy is constantly moving due to respiratory, cardiac, gastrointestinal and urinary activity. The long term goal of the RT community to 'see what we treat, as we treat' and to act on this information instantaneously has resulted in rapid technological innovation. Specialized treatment machines, such as robotic or gimbal-steered linear accelerators (linac) with in-room imaging suites, have been developed specifically for real-time treatment adaptation. Additional equipment, such as stereoscopic kilovoltage (kV) imaging, ultrasound transducers and electromagnetic transponders, has been developed for intrafraction motion monitoring on conventional linacs. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been integrated with cobalt treatment units and more recently with linacs. In addition to hardware innovation, software development has played a substantial role in the development of motion monitoring methods based on respiratory motion surrogates and planar kV or Megavoltage (MV) imaging that is available on standard equipped linacs. In this paper, we review and compare the different intrafraction motion monitoring methods proposed in the literature and demonstrated in real-time on clinical data as well as their possible future developments. We then discuss general considerations on validation and quality assurance for clinical implementation. Besides photon RT, particle therapy is increasingly used to treat moving targets. However, transferring motion monitoring technologies from linacs to particle beam lines presents substantial challenges. Lessons learned from the implementation of real-time intrafraction monitoring for photon RT will be used as a basis to discuss the implementation of these methods for particle RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenny Bertholet
- Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS
Foundation Trust, London, United
Kingdom
- Author to whom any correspondence should be
addressed
| | - Antje Knopf
- Department of Radiation Oncology,
University Medical Center
Groningen, University of Groningen, The
Netherlands
| | - Björn Eiben
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical
Engineering, Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London,
United Kingdom
| | - Jamie McClelland
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical
Engineering, Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London,
United Kingdom
| | - Alexander Grimwood
- Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS
Foundation Trust, London, United
Kingdom
| | - Emma Harris
- Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS
Foundation Trust, London, United
Kingdom
| | - Martin Menten
- Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS
Foundation Trust, London, United
Kingdom
| | - Per Poulsen
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus,
Denmark
| | - Doan Trang Nguyen
- ACRF Image X Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia
- School of Biomedical Engineering,
University of Technology
Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Paul Keall
- ACRF Image X Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia
| | - Uwe Oelfke
- Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS
Foundation Trust, London, United
Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|