Video surface image guidance for external beam partial breast irradiation

Radiation Therapy Skin Marking with Lancets Versus Electric Marking Pen (COMFORTATTOO)-6 Months Results on Cosmesis, Fading, and Patients' Satisfaction From a Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

Purpose

Most of radiation oncology centers rely on set-up skin markings for patient setup during treatment delivery. Permanent dark-ink tattooing is the most popular marking method. COMFORTATTOO is a unicentric, randomized trial testing 2 permanent methods: lancets against an electric marking pen (Comfort Marker 2.0, CM). One substudy was undertaken to test if using the CM translates into a cosmesis, fading, or satisfaction benefit compared with the lancets.

Methods and Materials

Patients aged 18 years or older referred to our department to receive RT were recruited. They were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive set-up markings using lancets or CM. This substudy aimed to recruit all the living participants included in the main study. The primary endpoints were tattoos cosmesis, tattoos fading, and patients' satisfaction 6 months after finishing the RT. Cosmetic and fading assessments were scored on a 5-point ascending scale and patients' satisfaction on a 10-point ascending scale. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT05371795).

Results

Between April and September 2022, 92 patients were enrolled (45 assigned to lancets and 47 to CM) and assessed for the outcomes. Patients receiving CM had significantly better cosmetic markings, with a median score of 4.4 (vs 3.7 for lancets, P<.001). On the fading assessment, the CM was associated with lower scores compared with the lancets (median score of 1.3 and 3.3, respectively; P<.001). No differences in patients' satisfaction were observed with either method (median score of 10 for both arms, P=.952).

Conclusions

Our substudy results demonstrated that, 6 months after the end of RT, the CM produces better cosmetic markings with less fading compared with the lancets. These differences didn't translate into patients' satisfaction superiority toward any method.

SurVolT: Surface to Volume conversion Tool. A proof of concept

PURPOSE

To develop SurVolT, a conversion tool able to apply volumetric changes to DICOM Computed Tomography (CT) data using daily surface (obj) data acquired with AlignRT® (VisionRT Ltd.), primarily designed and validated for breast treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SurVolT proceeds in 4 steps: 1. AlignRT .obj files extraction, 2. Contour deformation where the surface data points are matched to the initial external contour on a Region Of Interest, ROI_match, on which the anatomy is supposed to be unchanged. Then, external contour substitution is performed on the ROI_ttt covering the treated breast area. This is validated on a female torso phantom with a tissue-equivalent bolus mimicking an edema. The Planning Treatment Volume (PTV) contour from the initial CT is also deformed according to the new external contour in the ROI_ttt. 3. Volumetric data estimation according to the new external contour, validated on an anthropomorphic pelvis phantom. 4. Import of new DICOM data into the Treatment Planning System (TPS). Finally, the workflow is applied on a first patient presenting an anatomical change during the treatment.

RESULTS

The validation of step 2 and 3 shows a bolus thickness estimation of 5.8±1.2mm (expected 5 mm) and the non-rigid deformation of initial CT images follows the new external contour at the ROI_ttt bolus site while revealing negligible deformation elsewhere.

CONCLUSION

This first proof of concept introducing a Surface Guided Radiotherapy (SGRT) tool allowing daily surface data to volume conversion is a fundamental step toward SGRT-based adaptive radiotherapy.

Stability and reproducibility comparisons between deep inspiration breath-hold techniques for left-sided breast cancer patients: A prospective study

PURPOSE

Deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) is crucial in reducing the lung and cardiac dose for treatment of left-sided breast cancer. We compared the stability and reproducibility of two DIBH techniques: Active Breathing Coordinator (ABC) and VisionRT (VRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined intra- and inter-fraction positional variation of the left lung. Eight left-sided breast cancer patients were monitored with electronic portal imaging during breath-hold (BH) at every fraction. For each patient, half of the fractions were treated using ABC and the other half with VRT, with an equal amount starting with either ABC or VRT. The lung in each portal image was delineated, and the variation of its area was evaluated. Intrafraction stability was evaluated as the mean coefficient of variation (CV) of the lung area for the supraclavicular (SCV) and left lateral (LLat) field over the course of treatment. Reproducibility was the CV for the first image of each fraction. Daily session time and total imaging monitor units (MU) used in patient positioning were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean intrafraction stability across all patients for the LLat field was 1.3 ± 0.7% and 1.5 ± 0.9% for VRT and ABC, respectively. Similarly, this was 1.5 ± 0.7% and 1.6 ± 0.8% for VRT and ABC, respectively, for the SCV field. The mean interfraction reproducibility for the LLat field was 11.0 ± 3.4% and 14.9 ± 6.0% for VRT and ABC, respectively. Similarly, this was 13.0 ± 2.5% and 14.8 ± 9% for VRT and ABC, respectively, for the SCV. No difference was observed in the number of verification images required for either technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The stability and reproducibility were found to be comparable between ABC and VRT. ABC can have larger interfractional variation with less feedback to the treating therapist compared to VRT as shown in the increase in geometric misses at the matchline.

Radiotherapy skin marking with lancets versus electric marking pen - Comfort, satisfaction, effectiveness and cosmesis results from the randomized, double-blind COMFORTATTOO trial

INTRODUCTION

Set-up skin markings are performed, in several centers, for radiotherapy (RT) treatments. This study aimed to compare two permanent methods: lancets and an electric marking pen, the Comfort Marker 2.0® (CM).

METHODS

This was a prospective, unicentric, randomized study. Patients aged 18 years or older referred to our department to receive RT were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive set-up markings using lancets or CM. The markings arrangement followed our departmental protocols. The coprimary endpoints were patients' comfort and effectiveness. Secondary endpoints included radiation therapists (RTTs) satisfaction and cosmesis.

RESULTS

Between October 2021 and January 2022, 100 patients were enrolled (50 received lancets and 50 CM) and assessed for the comfort and satisfaction outcomes. CM was significantly less painful than the lancets, with 44% and 16% of the patients, respectively, considering the tattooing process painless (RR = 2.75; 95% IC: 1.36 - 5.58). On the RTT-reported satisfaction, CM had significantly easier processes than lancets (98.0% vs. 78.0%, respectively; RR = 1.26; 95% CI: 1.08 - 1.46). For effectiveness and cosmesis assessment, 98 patients were analyzed (48 received lancets and 50 CM). Patients receiving CM had a significantly higher proportion of markings graded as good and excellent compared to those receiving lancets (98.0% and 50.0%, respectively, had ≥75% of the tattoos assessed as good/excellent, RR = 1.96; 95% CI: 1.47 - 2.61). On the cosmetic evaluation, patients receiving CM had significantly better cosmetic markings, with a median score of 4.4 (vs. 3.5 for lancets, p <0.001).

CONCLUSION

The trial results demonstrated that tattooing with the CM is significantly less painful, more effective, easier to apply, and cosmetically superior to tattooing with lancets.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Tattooing with CM allows for better results regarding pain, quality, ease and cosmesis.

Tattoo-Free Setup for Patients With Breast Cancer Receiving Regional Nodal Irradiation

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing regional nodal irradiation (RNI) with either 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) planning or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) receive permanent tattoos to assist with daily setup alignment and verification. With the advent of surface imaging, tattoos may not be necessary to ensure setup accuracy. We compared the accuracy of conventional tattoo-based setups to those without reference to tattoos.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Forty-eight patients receiving RNI at our institution from July 2019 to December 2020 were identified. All patients received tattoos per standard of care. Twenty-four patients underwent setup using tattoos for initial positioning followed by surface and x-ray imaging. A subsequent 24 patients underwent positioning using surface imaging followed by x-ray imaging without reference to tattoos. Patient cohorts were balanced by treatment technique and use of deep inspiration breath hold. Treatment (including setup and delivery) time and x-ray-based shifts after surface imaging were recorded.

RESULTS

Among patients in the tattoo group receiving 3DCRT RNI, the average treatment time per fraction was 21.35 versus 19.75 minutes in the 3DCRT RNI no-tattoo cohort (P = .03). Mean 3D vector shifts for patients in the tattoo cohort were 5.6 versus 4.4 mm in the no-tattoo cohort. The average treatment time per fraction for the tattoo VMAT RNI cohort was 23.16 versus 20.82 minutes in the no-tattoo VMAT RNI cohort (P = .08). Mean 3D vector shifts for the patients in the tattoo VMAT cohort were 5.5 versus 7.1 mm in the no-tattoo VMAT cohort. Breath hold technique and body mass index did not affect accuracy in a consistent or clinically relevant way.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a combination of surface and x-ray imaging, without reference to tattoos, provides excellent accuracy in alignment and setup verification among patients receiving RNI for breast cancer, regardless of treatment technique and with reduced treatment time. Skin-based tattoos are no longer warranted for patients receiving supine RNI.

Surface guided radiation therapy: An international survey on current clinical practice

Introduction

Surface Guided Radiation Therapy (SGRT) is being increasingly implemented into clinical practice across a number of techniques and irradiation-sites. This technology, which is provided by different vendors, can be used with most simulation- and delivery-systems. However, limited guidelines and the complexity of clinical settings have led to diverse patterns of operation. With the aim to understand current clinical practice a survey was designed focusing on specifics of the clinical implementation and usage.

Materials and methods

A 32-question survey covered: type and number of systems, quality assurance (QA), clinical workflows, and identification of strengths/limitations. Respondents from different professional groups and countries were invited to participate. The survey was distributed internationally via ESTRO-membership, social media and vendors.

Results

Of the 278 institutions responding, 172 had at least one SGRT-system and 136 use SGRT clinically. Implementation and QA were primarily based on the vendors' recommendations and phantoms. SGRT was mainly implemented in breast RT (116/136), with strong but diverse representation of other sites. Many (58/135) reported at least partial elimination of skin-marks and a third (43/126) used open-masks. The most common imaging protocol reported included the combination of radiographic imaging with SGRT. Patient positioning (115/136), motion management (104/136) and DIBH (99/136) were the main applications.Main barriers to broader application were cost, system integration issues and lack of demonstrated clinical value. A lack of guidelines in terms of QA of the system was highlighted.

Conclusions

This overview of the SGRT status has the potential to support users, vendors and organisations in the development of practices, products and guidelines.

Feasibility of surface guided radiotherapy for patient positioning in breast radiotherapy versus conventional tattoo-based setups- a systematic review

Background

Traditionally tattoos are used for patient setup in radiotherapy. However they may pose challenges for the radiotherapists to achieve precise patient alignment, and serve as a permanent visual reminder of the patient’s diagnosis and often challenging cancer journey. The psychological impact of tattoos has been recognized in recent years. The increasing complexity of treatment techniques and the utilization of hypofractionated regimes, requires an enhanced level of accuracy and safety. Surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) enables improvements in the accuracy and reproducibility of patient isocentric and postural alignment, enhanced efficiency, and safety in breast radiotherapy.

Purpose

The aim of this review was to compare the accuracy and reproducibility of SGRT to conventional tattoo-based setups in free-breathing breast radiotherapy and to determine if SGRT can reduce the frequency of routine image guided radiotherapy (IGRT).

Materials and Methods

A systematic literature review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Papers identified through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar database searches between 2010 and 2021, were critically appraised. Systematic, random, mean residual errors and 3D vector shifts as determined by IGRT verification were analysed.

Results

A review of 13 full papers suggests SGRT improves the accuracy and reproducibility of patient setup in breast radiotherapy with consistent reductions in the residual errors. There appears to be a good correlation between SGRT setups and radiographic imaging. The frequency of IGRT and the corresponding dose could potentially be reduced. Additionally, SGRT improves treatment efficiency.

Conclusion

SGRT appears to have improved the accuracy and reproducibility of patient setup and treatment efficiency of breast radiotherapy compared to conventional tattoo/laser-based method, with the potential to reduce the frequency of routine IGRT. The reliance on tattoos in breast radiotherapy are likely to become obsolete with positive implications for both patients and clinical practice.

Detection of setup errors with a body-surface laser-scanning system for whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery

PURPOSE

We compared the setup errors determined by an optical imaging system (OSIS) in women who received breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT) with those from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) carried out routinely.

METHODS

We compared 130 setup errors in 10 patients undergoing WBRT following BCS by analyzing the translational and rotational couch shifts via CBCT and OSIS. Patients were treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The patient outline extracted from the planning reference Computed tomography (CT) was used as the reference for OSIS and CBCT alignment during treatment. We detected the setup uncertainty using CBCT and OSIS at the first five fractionations of RT and then twice a week.

RESULTS

The absolute translational setup error (mean ± Standard deviation (SD)) in x (lateral), y (longitudinal), and z (vertical) axes detected by the OSIS was 0.14 ± 0.18, 0.15 ± 0.14, and 0.13 ± 0.13 cm, respectively. The rotational setup error (mean ± SD) in Rx (pitch), Ry (roll), and Rz (yaw) axes was 0.77 ± 0.54, 0.76 ± 0.61, and 1.23 ± 0.95, respectively. Significant difference is observed only in one direction (Rx, p = 0.03) in the paired setup errors obtaining from OSIS and CBCT, without significant differences in five directions.

CONCLUSION

OSIS is a repeatable and reliable system that can be used to detect misalignments with accuracy, which is capable of supplementing CBCT for WBRT after BCS. We believe that an OSIS may be easier to use, quicker, and reduce overall dose as this method of patient alignment does not require ionizing radiation.

Benchmarking the AlignRT surface deformation module for the early detection and quantification of oedema in breast cancer radiotherapy

Purpose

To determine the accuracy of AlignRT surface deformation module in detecting and quantifying oedema in breast cancer radiotherapy.

Materials and Methods

A female torso phantom and water-equivalent boluses of different thicknesses (0.5–1.5 cm) were used. The variation of surface displacement and the percentage of surface within tolerance, as a function of bolus thickness and Region of Interest (ROI) size, were investigated. Additionally, a dynamic phantom was used to study the impact of patient breathing on the swelling estimation. Lastly, a flowchart was derived to alert physicians in the case of breast swelling.

Results

Average displacement value proved to be inversely correlated with ROI size (R² > 0.9). As such, for a ROI smaller than the bolus size (2.5x2.5 cm²), the average displacement (1.05 cm) provides an accurate estimate of the oedema thickness (within 5%). In opposition, with a clinical ROI, the 1 cm-thick bolus was largely underestimated with an average displacement value of 0.28 cm only. To limit the impact of patient breathing on surface deformation, dynamic surface captures and the use of the corrected patient position should be privileged. Using AlignRT, a clinical workflow for breast swelling follow-up was developed to help in the decision for repeat simulation and dosimetry.

Conclusion

The surface deformation module provides an accurate, simple, and radiation-free approach to detect and quantify breast oedema during the course of radiotherapy.

AAPM task group report 302: Surface guided radiotherapy

The clinical use of surface imaging has increased dramatically with demonstrated utility for initial patient positioning, real-time motion monitoring, and beam gating in a variety of anatomical sites. The Therapy Physics Subcommittee and the Imaging for Treatment Verification Working Group of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine commissioned Task Group 302 to review the current clinical uses of surface imaging and emerging clinical applications. The specific charge of this task group was to provide technical guidelines for clinical indications of use for general positioning, breast deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) treatment, and frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Additionally, the task group was charged with providing commissioning and on-going quality assurance (QA) requirements for surface guided radiation therapy (SGRT) as part of a comprehensive QA program including risk assessment. Workflow considerations for other anatomic sites and for computed tomography (CT) simulation, including motion management are also discussed. Finally, developing clinical applications such as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) or proton radiotherapy are presented. The recommendations made in this report, which are summarized at the end of the report, are applicable to all video-based SGRT systems available at the time of writing. Review current use of non-ionizing surface imaging functionality and commercially available systems. Summarize commissioning and on-going quality assurance (QA) requirements of surface image-guided systems, including implementation of risk or hazard assessment of surface guided radiotherapy as a part of a total quality management program (e.g., TG-100). Provide clinically relevant technical guidelines that include recommendations for the use of SGRT for general patient positioning, breast DIBH, and frameless brain SRS, including potential pitfalls to avoid when implementing this technology. Discuss emerging clinical applications of SGRT and associated QA implications based on evaluation of technology and risk assessment. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Comparison of the dosimetric accuracy of proton breast treatment plans delivered with SGRT and CBCT setups

PURPOSE

To compare the dosimetric accuracy of surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) setups in proton breast treatment plans.

METHODS

Data from 30 patients were retrospectively analyzed in this IRB-approved study. Patients were prescribed 4256-5040 cGy in 16-28 fractions. CBCT and AlignRT (SGRT; Vision RT Ltd.) were used for treatment setup during the first three fractions, then daily AlignRT and weekly CBCT thereafter. Each patient underwent a quality assurance CT (QA-CT) scan midway through the treatment course to assess anatomical and dosimetric changes. To emulate the SGRT and CBCT setups during treatment, the planning CT and QA-CT images were registered in two ways: (1) by registering the volume within the CTs covered by the CBCT field of view; and (2) by contouring and registering the surface surveyed by the AlignRT system. The original plan was copied onto these two datasets and the dose was recalculated. The clinical treatment volume (CTV): V_95% ; heart: V_25Gy , V_15Gy , and mean dose; and ipsilateral lung: V_20Gy , V_10Gy , and V_5Gy , were recorded. Multi and univariate analyses of variance were performed to assess the differences in dose metric values between the planning CT and the SGRT and CBCT setups.

RESULTS

The CTV V_95% and lung V_20Gy , V_10Gy , and V_5Gy dose metrics were all significantly (p < 0.01) lower on the QA-CT in both the CBCT and SGRT setup. The differences were not clinically significant and were, on average, 1.4-1.6% lower for CTV V_95% and 1.8%-6.0% lower for the lung dose metrics. When comparing the lung and CTV V_95% dose metrics between the CBCT and SGRT setups, no significant difference was observed. This indicates that the SGRT setup provides similar dosimetric accuracy as CBCT.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the daily use of SGRT systems for the accurate dose delivery of proton breast treatment plans.

Clinical paradigms and challenges in surface guided radiation therapy: Where do we go from here?

Surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) is becoming a routine tool for patient positioning for specific clinical sites in many clinics. However, it has not yet gained its full potential in terms of widespread adoption. This vision paper first examines some of the difficulties in transitioning to SGRT before exploring the current and future role of SGRT alongside and in concert with other imaging techniques. Finally, future horizons and innovative ideas that may shape and impact the direction of SGRT going forward are reviewed.

Recent advanced in Surface Guided Radiation Therapy

The growing acceptance and recognition of Surface Guided Radiation Therapy (SGRT) as a promising imaging technique has supported its recent spread in a large number of radiation oncology facilities. Although this technology is not new, many aspects of it have only recently been exploited. This review focuses on the latest SGRT developments, both in the field of general clinical applications and special techniques.SGRT has a wide range of applications, including patient positioning with real-time feedback, patient monitoring throughout the treatment fraction, and motion management (as beam-gating in free-breathing or deep-inspiration breath-hold). Special radiotherapy modalities such as accelerated partial breast irradiation, particle radiotherapy, and pediatrics are the most recent SGRT developments.The fact that SGRT is nowadays used at various body sites has resulted in the need to adapt SGRT workflows to each body site. Current SGRT applications range from traditional breast irradiation, to thoracic, abdominal, or pelvic tumor sites, and include intracranial localizations.Following the latest SGRT applications and their specifications/requirements, a stricter quality assurance program needs to be ensured. Recent publications highlight the need to adapt quality assurance to the radiotherapy equipment type, SGRT technology, anatomic treatment sites, and clinical workflows, which results in a complex and extensive set of tests.Moreover, this review gives an outlook on the leading research trends. In particular, the potential to use deformable surfaces as motion surrogates, to use SGRT to detect anatomical variations along the treatment course, and to help in the establishment of personalized patient treatment (optimized margins and motion management strategies) are increasingly important research topics. SGRT is also emerging in the field of patient safety and integrates measures to reduce common radiotherapeutic risk events (e.g. facial and treatment accessories recognition).This review covers the latest clinical practices of SGRT and provides an outlook on potential applications of this imaging technique. It is intended to provide guidance for new users during the implementation, while triggering experienced users to further explore SGRT applications.

Radiotherapy without tattoos: Could this work?

INTRODUCTION

An evaluation to compare the traditional tattoo based set up procedure with a surface guided method to assess the possibility of eliminating permanent tattoos in breast cancer patents who are undergoing radiotherapy to the breast/chest wall.

METHODS

Forty-three patients that were having radiotherapy to the breast or chest wall were included in this evaluation. The patients were divided into two groups and further divided into 2 sub-groups. The first group received standard dark ink tattoos and were positioned by aligning these tattoos with lasers. The second group had no tattoo's and were positioned using the Surface-Guided technology (SGRT). Within each group the patients were split into 2 sub-group; right and left sided treatment areas. The right side were treated using a Free-Breathing (FB) technique and the left sided were treated using a Deep-Inspiration Breath-Hold (DIBH) technique.

RESULTS

For the patients having right sided breast radiotherapy, the mean shift using the standard tattoos and laser set up was 0.52 cm, compared with using the SGRT method where the mean shift was 0.47 cm. (p-value 0.04) For patients having left sided breast radiotherapy with DIBH the mean shift using the standard tattoo's and laser set up was 0.76 cm, compared with a mean shift of 0.45 cm using SGRT alone (p-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The elimination of tattoos together with SGRT offers a comparable set-up for right sided breast treatments against the traditional tattoo method. A significant set-up improvement was observed for the left sided breast DIBH treatments.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

To set up patients having breast Radiotherapy, with no tattoo's.

Comparison of surface guidance and target matching for image-guided accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI)

PURPOSE

We investigate the feasibility of surface guided radiation therapy (SGRT) for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) by comparing it with in-room, fan beam kV computed tomography on rails (CTOR) imaging of the targeted region. The uniqueness of our study is that all patients have multiple daily CTOR scans to compare corresponding SGRT AlignRT (VisionRT, United Kingdom) images to.

METHODS/MATERIALS

Twelve patients receiving APBI were enrolled in this study. Before each treatment fraction, after patients were setup on tattoos, SGRT was performed using AlignRT, and then target matching was performance using CTOR. The average and maximum difference in shifts between SGRT and CTOR were calculated and analyzed for each patient, so as the correlation between surgical cavity size and shift difference.

RESULTS

Our study showed that SGRT agreed well with CTOR for patients with small surgical cavity volume changes (<10%). There were nine patients who had a ≥5 mm maximum shift difference between SGRT and CTOR along any direction, and in two patients the difference was more than 10 mm (one patient with surgical cavity change 44.3% and one patient with 27 cc cavity volume decrease). All patients, except one, had a mean shift difference < 5 mm along any direction.

CONCLUSION

For the patients studied here, SGRT appears to be a reasonable and potentially valuable image guidance approach for APBI for patients who experience small changes in surgical cavity volume (<10%) between CT simulation and treatment. However, there is potential for larger alignment errors (up to 11 mm) when using SGRT for patients who experience larger surgical cavity changes.

Surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) improves breast cancer patient setup accuracy

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to investigate if surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) can decrease setup deviations for tangential and locoregional breast cancer patients compared to conventional laser-based setup (LBS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Both tangential (63 patients) and locoregional (76 patients) breast cancer patients were enrolled in this study. For LBS, the patients were positioned by aligning skin markers to the room lasers. For the surface based setup (SBS), an optical surface scanning system was used for daily setup using both single and three camera systems. To compare the two setup methods, the patient position was evaluated using verification imaging (field images or orthogonal images).

RESULTS

For both tangential and locoregional treatments, SBS decreased the setup deviation significantly compared to LBS (P < 0.01). For patients receiving tangential treatment, 95% of the treatment sessions were within the clinical tolerance of ≤ 4 mm in any direction (lateral, longitudinal or vertical) using SBS, compared to 84% for LBS. Corresponding values for patients receiving locoregional treatment were 70% and 54% for SBS and LBS, respectively. No significant difference was observed comparing the setup result using a single camera system or a three camera system.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional laser-based setup can with advantage be replaced by surface based setup. Daily SGRT improves patient setup without additional imaging dose to breast cancer patients regardless if a single or three camera system was used.

Tattoo free setup for partial breast irradiation: A feasibility study

Purpose

Patients undergoing external beam accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) receive permanent tattoos to aid with daily setup alignment and verification. With the advent of three‐dimensional (3D) body surface imaging and two‐dimensional (2D) x‐ray imaging‐based matching to surgical clips, tattoos may not be necessary to ensure setup accuracy. We compared the accuracy of conventional tattoo‐based setups to a patient setup without tattoos.

Materials/methods

Twenty consecutive patients receiving APBI at our institution from July 10, 2017 to February 13, 2018 were identified. All patients received tattoos per standard of care. Ten patients underwent setup using tattoos for initial positioning followed by surface imaging and 2D matching of surgical clips. The other ten patients underwent positioning using surface imaging followed by 2D matching without reference to tattoos. Overall setup time and orthogonal x‐ray‐based shifts after surface imaging per fraction were recorded. Shift data were used to calculate systematic and random error.

Results

Among ten patients in the “no tattoo” group, the average setup time per fraction was 6.83 min vs 8.03 min in the tattoo cohort (P < 0.01). Mean 3D vector shifts for patients in the “no tattoo” group were 4.6 vs 5.9 mm in the “tattoo” cohort (P = NS). Mean systematic errors in the “no tattoo” group were: 1.2 mm (1.5 mm SD) superior/inferior, 0.5 mm (1.6 mm SD) right/left, and 2.3 mm (1.9 mm SD) anterior/posterior directions. Mean systematic errors in the “tattoo” group were: 0.8 mm (2.2 mm SD) superior/inferior, 0.3 mm (2.5 mm SD) right/left, and 1.4 mm (4.4 mm SD) anterior/posterior directions. The random errors in the “no tattoo” group ranged from 0.6 to 0.7 mm vs 1.2 to 1.7 mm in the “tattoo” group.

Conclusions

Using both surface imaging and 2D matching to surgical clips provides excellent accuracy in APBI patient alignment and setup verification with reduced setup time relative to the tattoo cohort. Skin‐based tattoos may no longer be warranted for patients receiving external beam APBI.

Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy

A surface imaging system, Catalyst (C-Rad), was compared with laser-based positioning and daily mega voltage computed tomography (MVCT) setup for breast patients with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy. Catalyst-based positioning performed better than laser-based positioning. The respective modalities resulted in a standard deviation (SD), 68% confidence interval (CI) of positioning of left-right, craniocaudal, anterior-posterior, roll: 2.4 mm, 2.7 mm, 2.4 mm, 0.9° for Catalyst positioning, and 6.1 mm, 3.8 mm, 4.9 mm, 1.1° for laser-based positioning, respectively. MVCT-based precision is a combination of the interoperator variability for MVCT fusion and the patient movement during the time it takes for MVCT and fusion. The MVCT fusion interoperator variability for breast patients was evaluated at one SD left-right, craniocaudal, ant-post, roll as: 1.4 mm, 1.8 mm, 1.3 mm, 1.0°. There was no statistically significant difference between the automatic MVCT registration result and the manual adjustment; the automatic fusion results were within the 95% CI of the mean result of 10 users, except for one specific case where the patient was positioned with large yaw. We found that users add variability to the roll correction as the automatic registration was more consistent. The patient position uncertainty confidence interval was evaluated as 1.9 mm, 2.2 mm, 1.6 mm, 0.9° after 4 min, and 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.2 mm, 1° after 10 min. The combination of this patient movement with MVCT fusion interoperator variability results in total standard deviations of patient posi-tion when treatment starts 4 or 10 min after initial positioning of, respectively: 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.0 mm, 1.3° and 2.7 mm, 3.3 mm, 2.6 mm, 1.4°. Surface based positioning arrives at the same precision when taking into account the time required for MVCT imaging and fusion. These results can be used on a patient-per-patient basis to decide which positioning system performs the best after the first 5 fractions and when daily MVCT can be omitted. Ideally, real-time monitoring is required to reduce important intrafraction movement.

Comparison of surface matching and target matching for image-guided pelvic radiation therapy for both supine and prone patient positions

We investigate the difference between surface matching and target matching for pelvic radiation image guidance. The uniqueness of our study is that all patients have multiple CT‐on‐rails (CTOR) scans to compare to corresponding AlignRT images. Ten patients receiving pelvic radiation were enrolled in this study. Two simulation CT scans were performed in supine and prone positions for each patient. Body surface contours were generated in treatment planning system and exported to AlignRT to serve as reference images. During treatment day, the patient was aligned to treatment isocenter with room lasers, and then scanned with both CTOR and AlignRT. Image‐guidance shifts were calculated for both modalities by comparison to the simulation CT and the differences between them were analyzed for both supine and prone positions, respectively. These procedures were performed for each patient once per week for five weeks. The difference of patient displacement between AlignRT and CTOR was analyzed. For supine position, five patients had an average difference of displacement between AlignRT and CTOR along any direction (vertical, longitudinal, and lateral) greater than 0.5 cm, and one patient greater than 1 cm. Four patients had a maximum difference greater than 1 cm. For prone position, seven patients had an average difference greater than 0.5 cm, and three patients greater than 1 cm. Nine patients had a maximum difference greater than 1 cm. The difference of displacement between AlignRT and CTOR was greater for the prone position than for the supine position. For the patients studied here, surface matching does not appear to be an advisable image‐guidance approach for pelvic radiation therapy for patients with either supine or prone position. There appears to be a potential for large alignment discrepancies (up to 2.25 cm) between surface matching and target matching.

PACS number(s): 87.55.‐x

Can surface imaging improve the patient setup for proton postmastectomy chest wall irradiation?

PURPOSES/OBJECTIVES

For postmastectomy radiation therapy by proton beams, the usual bony landmark based radiograph setup technique is indirect because the target volumes are generally superficial and far away from major bony structures. The surface imaging setup technique of matching chest wall surface directly to treatment planning computed tomography was evaluated and compared to the traditional radiograph-based technique.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifteen postmastectomy radiation therapy patients were included, with the first 5 patients positioned by standard radiograph-based technique; radiopaque makers, however, were added on the patient's skin surface to improve the relevance of the setup. AlignRT was used to capture patient surface images at different time points along the process, with the calculated position corrections recorded but not applied. For the remaining 10 patients, the orthogonal x-ray imaging was replaced by the AlignRT setup procedure followed by a beamline radiograph at the treatment gantry angle only as confirmation. The position corrections recorded during all fractions for all patients (28-31 each) were analyzed to evaluate the setup accuracy. The time spent on patient setup and treatment delivery was also analyzed.

RESULTS

The average position discrepancy over the treatment course relative to the planning computed tomography was significantly larger in the radiograph only group, particularly in translations (3.2 ± 2.0 mm in vertical, 3.1 ± 3.0 mm in longitudinal, 2.6 ± 2.5 mm in lateral), than AlignRT assisted group (1.3 ± 1.3 mm in vertical, 0.8 ± 1.2 mm in longitudinal, 1.5 ± 1.4 mm in lateral). The latter was well within the robustness limits (±3 mm) of the pencil beam scanning treatment established in our previous studies. The setup time decreased from an average of 11 minutes using orthogonal x-rays to an average of 6 minutes using AlignRT surface imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of surface imaging allows postmastectomy chest wall patients to be positioned more accurately and substantially more efficiently than radiograph only-based techniques.

Surface imaging-based analysis of intrafraction motion for breast radiotherapy patients

Breast treatments are becoming increasingly complex as the use of modulated and partial breast therapies becomes more prevalent. These methods are predicated on accurate and precise positioning for treatment. However, the ability to quantify intrafraction motion has been limited by the excessive dose that would result from continuous X‐ray imaging throughout treatment. Recently, surface imaging has offered the opportunity to obtain 3D measurements of patient position throughout breast treatments without radiation exposure. Thirty free‐breathing breast patients were monitored with surface imaging for 831 monitoring sessions. Mean translations and rotations were calculated over each minute, each session, and over all sessions combined. The percentage of each session that the root mean squares (RMS) of the linear translations were outside of defined tolerances was determined for each patient. Correlations between mean translations per minute and time, and between standard deviation per minute and time, were evaluated using Pearson's r value. The mean RMS translation averaged over all patients was 2.39mm±1.88mm. The patients spent an average of 34%, 17%, 9%, and 5% of the monitoring time outside of 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm, and 5 mm RMS tolerances, respectively. The RMS values averaged over all patients were 2.71mm±1.83mm, 2.76±2.27, and 2.98mm±2.30mm over the 5th, 10th, and 15th minutes of monitoring, respectively. The RMS values (r=0.73,p=0) and standard deviations (r=0.88,p=0) over all patients showed strong significant correlations with time. We see that the majority of patients' treatment time is spent within 5 mm of the isocenter and that patient position drifts with increasing treatment time. Treatment length should be considered in the planning process. An 8 mm margin on a target volume would account for 2 SDs of motion for a treatment up to 15 minutes in length.

PACS numbers: 87.53.Jw, 87.53.Kn, 87.56.Da, 87.63.L‐

Assessment of interfractional variation of the breast surface following conventional patient positioning for whole-breast radiotherapy

The purpose of this study was to quantify the variability of the breast surface position when aligning whole‐breast patients to bony landmarks based on MV portal films or skin marks alone. Surface imaging was used to assess the breast surface position of 11 whole‐breast radiotherapy patients, but was not used for patient positioning. On filmed fractions, AlignRT v5.0 was used to capture the patient's surface after initial positioning based on skin marks (28 “preshifts” surfaces), and after treatment couch shifts based on MV films (41 “postshifts” surfaces). Translations and rotations based on surface captures were recorded, as well as couch shifts based on MV films. For nonfilmed treatments, “daily” surface images were captured following positioning to skin marks alone. Group mean and systematic and random errors were calculated for all datasets. Pearson correlation coefficients, setup margins, and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated for preshifts translations and MV film shifts. LOA between postshifts surfaces and the filmed treatment positions were also computed. All the surface captures collected were retrospectively compared to both a DICOM reference surface created from the planning CT and to an AlignRT reference surface. All statistical analyses were performed using the DICOM reference surface dataset. AlignRT reference surface data was only used to calculate the LOA with the DICOM reference data. This helped assess any outcome differences between both reference surfaces. Setup margins for preshifts surfaces and MV films range between 8.3–12.0 mm and 5.4–13.4 mm, respectively. The largest margin is along the left–right (LR) direction for preshift surfaces, and along craniocaudal (CC) for films. LOA ranges between the preshifts surfaces and MV film shifts are large (12.6–21.9 mm); these decrease for postshifts surfaces (9.8–18.4 mm), but still show significant disagreements between the two modalities due to their focus on different anatomical landmarks (patient's topography versus bony anatomy). Pearson's correlation coefficients further support this by showing low to moderate correlations in the anterior–posterior (AP) and LR directions (0.47–0.69) and no correlation along CC(<0.15). The use of an AlignRT reference surface compared to the DICOM reference surface does not significantly affect the LOA. Alignment of breast patients based solely on bony alignment may lead to interfractional inconsistencies in the breast surface position. The use of surface imaging tools highlights these discrepancies, and allows the radiation oncology team to better assess the possible effects on treatment quality.

PACS number: 87

A voluntary breath-hold treatment technique for the left breast with unfavorable cardiac anatomy using surface imaging

PURPOSE

Breath-hold (BH) treatments can be used to reduce cardiac dose for patients with left-sided breast cancer and unfavorable cardiac anatomy. A surface imaging technique was developed for accurate patient setup and reproducible real-time BH positioning.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Three-dimensional surface images were obtained for 20 patients. Surface imaging was used to correct the daily setup for each patient. Initial setup data were recorded for 443 fractions and were analyzed to assess random and systematic errors. Real time monitoring was used to verify surface placement during BH. The radiation beam was not turned on if the BH position difference was greater than 5 mm. Real-time surface data were analyzed for 2398 BHs and 363 treatment fractions. The mean and maximum differences were calculated. The percentage of BHs greater than tolerance was calculated.

RESULTS

The mean shifts for initial patient setup were 2.0 mm, 1.2 mm, and 0.3 mm in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions, respectively. The mean 3-dimensional vector shift was 7.8 mm. Random and systematic errors were less than 4 mm. Real-time surface monitoring data indicated that 22% of the BHs were outside the 5-mm tolerance (range, 7%-41%), and there was a correlation with breast volume. The mean difference between the treated and reference BH positions was 2 mm in each direction. For out-of-tolerance BHs, the average difference in the BH position was 6.3 mm, and the average maximum difference was 8.8 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily real-time surface imaging ensures accurate and reproducible positioning for BH treatment of left-sided breast cancer patients with unfavorable cardiac anatomy.

Clinical evaluation of interfractional variations for whole breast radiotherapy using 3-dimensional surface imaging

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of 3-dimensional (3D) surface imaging on daily patient setup for breast radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients undergoing treatment for whole breast radiotherapy were setup daily using an AlignRT system (VisionRT, London, UK) for 3D surface-based alignment. Daily alignments were performed against a reference surface topogram and shifts from skin marks were recorded daily. This investigation evaluated the following: (1) the performance of the surface-based imaging system for daily breast alignment; (2) the absolute displacements between setup with skin marks and setup with the surface-based imaging system; and (3) the dosimetric effect of daily alignments with skin marks versus surface-based alignments.

RESULTS

Displacements from 1258 treatment fractions were analyzed. Sixty percent of those fractions (749) were reviewed against MV portal imaging in order to assess the performance of the AlignRT system. Daily setup errors were given as absolute displacements, comparing setup marks against shifts determined using the surface-based imaging system. Averaged over all patients, the mean displacements were 4.1 ± 2.6 mm, 2.7 ± 1.4 mm, and 2.6 ± 1.2 mm in the anteroposterior (AP), superoinferior (S/I), and left-right (L/R) directions, respectively. Furthermore, the standard deviation of the random error (σ) was 3.2 mm, 2.2 mm, and 2.2 mm in the A/P, S/I, and L/R directions, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily alignment with 3D surface imaging was found to be valuable for reducing setup errors when comparing with patient alignment from skin marks. The result of the surface-based alignments specifically showed that alignment with skin marks was noticeably poor in the anteroposterior directions. The overall dosimetric effect of the interfractional variations was small, but these variations showed a potential for increased dose deposition to both the heart and lung tissues. Although these interfractional variations would not negatively affect the quality of patient care for whole breast radiotherapy, it may require an increase in PTV margin, especially in cases of partial breast irradiation.