Required target margins for image-guided lung SBRT: Assessment of target position intrafraction and correction residuals

Assessing the impact of intrafraction motion correction on PTV margins and target and OAR dosimetry for single-fraction free-breathing lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

The objective of this research is to investigate intrafraction motion correction on planning target volume (PTV) margin requirements and target and organ-at-risk (OAR) dosimetry in single-fraction lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Sixteen patients (15 with upper lobe lesions, 1 with a middle lobe lesion) were treated with single-fraction lung SBRT. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were acquired before the treatment, between the arcs, and after the delivery of the treatment fraction. Shifts from the reference images were recorded in anterior-posterior (AP), superior-inferior (SI), and lateral (LAT) dimensions. The deviations from the reference image were calculated for 3 clinical scenarios: not applying intratreatment couch shifts and not correcting for pretreatment deviations < 3 mm ( scenario 1), not applying intratreatment couch shifts and correcting for pretreatment deviations < 3 mm ( scenario 2), and applying all pre- and intratreatment couch shifts (scenario 3). PTV margins were determined using the van Herk formalism for each scenario and maximum and average deviations were assessed. The clinical scenarios were modelled in the treatment planning system based on each patient dataset to assess target and OAR dosimetry. Calculated lower-bound PTV margins in the AP, SI, and LAT dimensions were [4.6, 3.5, 2.3] mm in scenario 1, [4.6, 2.4, 2.2] mm in scenario 2, and [1.7, 1.2, 1.0] mm in scenario 3. The margins are lower bounds because they do not include contributions from nonmotion related errors. Average and maximum intrafraction deviations were larger in the AP dimension compared to the SI and LAT dimensions for all scenarios. A unidimensional movement (several mm) in the negative AP dimension was observed in clinical scenarios 1 and 2 but not scenario 3. Average intrafraction deviation vectors were 1.2, 1.1, and 0.3 mm for scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Modelled clinical scenarios revealed that using scenario 3 yields significantly fewer treatment plan objective failures compared to scenarios 1 and 2 using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Intratreatment motion correction between each arc may enable reductions PTV margin requirements. It may also compensate for unidimensional negative AP movement, and improve target and OAR dosimetry.

Using previously registered cone beam computerized tomography images to facilitate online computerized tomography to cone beam computerized tomography image registration in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

Purpose

In our conventional image registration workflow, the four‐dimensional (4D) CBCT was directly registered to the reference helical CT (HCT) using a dual registration approach within the Elekta XVI software. In this study, we proposed a new HCT–CBCT auto‐registration strategy using a previously registered CBCT (CBCTpre) as the reference image and tested its clinical feasibility.

Methods

From a previous CBCT session, the registered average 4D CBCT was selected as CBCTpre and the HCT–CBCTpre registration vector from the clinician's manual registration result was recorded. In the new CBCT session, auto‐registration was performed between the new average 4D CBCT (CBCTtx) and CBCTpre (CBCTpre‐CBCTtx). The overall HCT–CBCTtx registration result was then derived by combing the results from two registrations (i.e., HCT–CBCTpre + CBCTpre–CBCTtx). The results from the proposed method were compared with clinician's manually adjusted HCT–CBCTtx registration results (“ground truth”) to evaluate its accuracy using a test dataset consisting of 32 challenging registration cases.

Results

The uncertainty of the proposed auto‐registration method was −0.1 ± 0.5, 0.1 ± 1.0, and −0.1 ± 0.7 mm in three translational directions (lateral, longitudinal, and vertical) and 0.0° ± 0.9°, 0.3° ± 0.9°, and 0.4° ± 0.7° in three rotation directions, respectively. Two patients (6.3%) had translational uncertainty > 2 mm (max = 3.1 mm) and both occurred in the longitudinal direction. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of the conventional direct HCT–CBCTtx auto‐registration was −0.4 ± 2.6, −0.2 ± 7.4, −1.4 ± 3.6 mm for translations and −0.3° ± 1.2°, 0.0° ± 1.6°, and 0.1 ± 1.1° for rotations. Eleven patients (34.4%) had translation uncertainty > 2 mm (max = 26.2 mm) in at least one direction. Accuracy in translation was improved with the new method, while rotation accuracy stayed in the same order.

Conclusion

We demonstrated the feasibility of incorporating prior clinical registration knowledge into the online HCT–CBCT registration process. The proposed auto‐registration method provides a quick and reliable starting solution for online HCT–CBCT registration.

Estimation of delivered dose to lung tumours considering setup uncertainties and breathing motion in a cohort of patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy

INTRODUCTION

Dose-response relationships for local control of lung tumours treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) have proved ambiguous, however, these have been based on the prescribed or planned dose. Delivered dose to the target may be a better predictor for local control. In this study, the probability of the delivered minimum dose to the clinical target volume (CTV) in relation to the prescribed dose was estimated for a cohort of patients, considering geometrical uncertainties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Delivered doses were retrospectively simulated for 50 patients treated with SBRT for lung tumours, comparing two image-guidance techniques: pre-treatment verification computed tomography (IG1) and online cone-beam computed tomography (IG2). The prescribed dose was typically to the 67% isodose line of the treatment plan. Simulations used in-house software that shifted the static planned dose according to a breathing motion and sampled setup/matching errors. Each treatment was repeatedly simulated, generating a multiplicity of dose-volume histograms (DVH). From these, tumour-specific and population-averaged statistics were derived.

RESULTS

For IG1, the probability that the minimum CTV dose (D_98%) exceeded 100% of the prescribed dose was 90%. With IG2, this probability increased to 99%.

CONCLUSIONS

Doses below the prescribed dose were delivered to a considerably larger part of the population prior to the introduction of online soft-tissue image-guidance. However, there is no clear evidence that this impacts local control, when compared to previous published data.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy using the forward-planned static-port tomotherapy for lung cancer: a novel planning technique with the newly-developed mode

With the newly-developed static-port forward-planning (FP) mode of tomotherapy, the ratio of the dose of the planning target volume (PTV) periphery to the maximum dose can be easily adjusted by modifying leaf margins when planning stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of FP plans compared to helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and helical 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) plans of SBRT for lung tumors. The three plans were created for 14 tumors in 11 patients. For 13 tumors, 60 Gy in 7.5-Gy fractions was prescribed for a minimum coverage dose of 95% of the PTV (D95). The prescribed isodose line (PIL) was intended to be 60-80% of the maximum dose. Nine angles were used for the FP plans. The median D98 and D50 of the internal target volume for FP, helical-IMRT and helical-3DCRT plans were 70.4, 71.4 and 60.5 Gy, respectively (P < 0.001), and 77.7, 75.7 and 62.3 Gy, respectively (P < 0.0001). The median PIL and the lung volume receiving ≥20 Gy (V20) were 73.4, 73.4 and 94.3%, respectively (P < 0.0001), and 4.7, 4.0 and 5.7%, respectively (P < 0.0001). These parameters were not significantly different between the FP and helical-IMRT plans. The median beam-on times were 238.6, 418.9 and 197.1 s, respectively (P < 0.0001). The FP plans reduced the beam-on time by 43% compared to the helical-IMRT plans. The dose distribution of the FP plans was comparable to that of the helical-IMRT plans. The helical-3DCRT plans could not adjust PIL to be 60-80%.

First clinical retrospective investigation of limited projection CBCT for lung tumor localization in patients receiving SBRT treatment

To clinically investigate the limited-projection CBCT (LP-CBCT) technology for daily positioning of patients receiving breath-hold lung SBRT radiation treatment and to investigate the feasibility of reconstructing fast 4D-CBCT from 1 min 3D-CBCT scan. Eleven patients who underwent breath-hold lung SBRT radiation treatment were scanned daily with on-board full-projection CBCT (CBCT) using half-fan scan. A subset of the CBCT projections and the prior planning CT were used to estimate the LP-CBCT images using the weighted free-form deformation method. The limited projections are clusteringly sampled within fifteen sub-angles in 360° in order to simulate the fast 1 min scan for 4D-CBCT. The estimated LP-CBCTs were rigidly registered to the planning CT to determine the clinical shifts needed for patient setup corrections, which were compared with shifts determined by the CBCT for evaluation. Both manual and automatic registrations were performed in order to compare the systematic registration errors. Fifty CBCT volumes were obtained from the eleven patients in fifty fractions for this pilot clinical study. For the CBCT images, the mean (±standard deviation) shifts between CBCT and planning CT from manual registration in left-right (LR), anterior-posterior (AP), and superior-inferior (SI) directions are 1.1  ±  1.2 mm, 2.1  ±  1.9 mm, 5.2  ±  3.6 mm, respectively. The mean deviation difference between shifts determined by CBCT and LP-CBCT images are 0.3  ±  0.5 mm, 0.5  ±  0.8 mm, 0.4  ±  0.3 mm, in LR, AP, and SI directions, respectively. The mean vector length of CBCT shift for all fractions is 6.1  ±  3.6 mm, and the mean vector length difference between CBCT and LP-CBCT for all fractions studied is 1.0  ±  0.9 mm. The automatic registrations yield similar results as manual registrations. The pilot clinical study shows that LP-CBCT localization offers comparable accuracy to CBCT localization for daily tumor positioning while reducing the projection number to 1/10 for patients receiving breath hold lung radiation treatment. The cluster projection sampling in this study also shows the feasibility of reconstructing fast 4D-CBCT from 1 min 3D-CBCT scan.

A feasibility study of intrafractional tumor motion estimation based on 4D-CBCT using diaphragm as surrogate

Purpose

To investigate the intrafractional stability of the motion relationship between the diaphragm and tumor, as well as the feasibility of using diaphragm motion to estimate lung tumor motion.

Methods

Eighty‐five paired (pre and posttreatment) daily 4D‐CBCT images were obtained from 20 lung cancer patients who underwent SBRT. Bony registration was performed between the pre‐ and post‐CBCT images to exclude patient body movement. The end‐exhalation phase image of the pre‐CBCT image was selected as the reference image. Tumor positions were obtained for each phase image using contour‐based translational alignments. Diaphragm positions were obtained by translational alignment of its apex position. A linear intrafraction model was constructed using regression analysis performed between the diaphragm and tumor positions manifested on the pretreatment 4D‐CBCT images. By applying this model to posttreatment 4D‐CBCT images, the tumor positions were estimated from posttreatment 4D‐CBCT diaphragm positions and compared with measured values. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) test was performed to determine a suitable indicator for predicting the estimate accuracy of the linear model.

Results

Using the linear model, per‐phase position, mean position, and excursion estimation errors were 1.12 ± 0.99 mm, 0.97 ± 0.88 mm, and 0.79 ± 0.67 mm, respectively. Intrafractional per‐phase tumor position estimation error, mean position error, and excursion error were within 3 mm 95%, 96%, and 99% of the time, respectively. The residual sum of squares (RSS) determined from pretreatment images achieved the largest prediction power for the tumor position estimation error (discrepancy < 3 mm) with an Area Under ROC Curve (AUC) of 0.92 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Utilizing the relationship between diaphragm and tumor positions on the pretreatment 4D‐CBCT image, intrafractional tumor positions were estimated from intrafractional diaphragm positions. The estimation accuracy can be predicted using the RSS obtained from the pretreatment 4D‐CBCT image.

Evaluation of initial setup errors of two immobilization devices for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)

The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy and efficacy of two commonly used commercial immobilization systems for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in lung cancer. This retrospective study assessed the efficacy and setup accuracy of two immobilization systems: the Elekta Body Frame (EBF) and the Civco Body Pro‐Lok (CBP) in 80 patients evenly divided for each system. A cone beam CT (CBCT) was used before each treatment fraction for setup correction in both devices. Analyzed shifts were applied for setup correction and CBCT was repeated. If a large shift (>5 mm) occurred in any direction, an additional CBCT was employed for verification after localization. The efficacy of patient setup was analyzed for 105 sessions (48 with the EBF, 57 with the CBP). Result indicates that the CBCT was repeated at the 1^st treatment session in 22.5% and 47.5% of the EBF and CBP cases, respectively. The systematic errors {left–right (LR), anterior–posterior (AP), cranio‐caudal (CC), and 3D vector shift: (LR² + AP² + CC²)^1/2 (mm)}, were {0.5 ± 3.7, 2.3 ± 2.5, 0.7 ± 3.5, 7.1 ± 3.1} mm and {0.4 ± 3.6, 0.7 ± 4.0, 0.0 ± 5.5, 9.2 ± 4.2} mm, and the random setup errors were {5.1, 3.0, 3.5, 3.9} mm and {4.6, 4.8, 5.4, 5.3} mm for the EBF and the CBP, respectively. The 3D vector shift was significantly larger for the CBP (P < 0.01). The setup time was slightly longer for the EBF (EBF: 15.1 min, CBP: 13.7 min), but the difference was not statistically significant. It is concluded that adequate accuracy in SBRT can be achieved with either system if image guidance is used. However, patient comfort could dictate the use of CBP system with slightly reduced accuracy.

Reproducibility of a Noninvasive System for Eye Positioning and Monitoring in Stereotactic Radiotherapy of Ocular Melanoma

Purpose:

Our preferred treatment for juxtapapillary choroidal melanoma is stereotactic radiotherapy. We aim to describe our immobilization system and quantify its reproducibility.

Materials and Methods:

Patients were identified in our radiosurgery database. Patients were imaged at computed tomography simulator with an in-house system which allows visual monitoring of the eye as the patient fixates a small target. All patients were reimaged at least once prior to and/or during radiotherapy. The patients were treated on the CyberKnife system, 60 Gy in 10 daily fractions, using skull tracking in conjunction with our visual monitoring system. In order to quantify the reproducibility of the eye immobilization system, computed tomography scans were coregistered using rigid 6-dimensional skull registration. Using the coregistered scans, x, y, and z displacements of the lens/optic nerve insertion were measured. From these displacements, 3-dimensional vectors were calculated.

Results:

Thirty-four patients were treated from October 2010 to September 2015. Thirty-nine coregistrations were performed using 73 scans (2-3 scans per patient). The mean displacements of lens and optic nerve insertion were 0.1 and 0.0 mm. The median 3-dimensional displacements (absolute value) of lens and nerve insertion were 0.8 and 0.7 mm (standard deviation: 0.5 and 0.6 mm). Ninety-eight percent of 3-dimensional displacements were below 2 mm (maximum 2.4 mm). The calculated planning target volume (PTV) margins were 0.8, 1.4, and 1.5 mm in the anterior–posterior, craniocaudal, and right–left axes, respectively. Following this analysis, no further changes have been applied to our planning margin of 2 to 2.5 mm as it is also meant to account for uncertainties in magnetic resonance imaging to computed tomography registration, skull tracking, and also contouring variability.

Conclusion:

We have found our stereotactic eye immobilization system to be highly reproducible (<1 mm) and free of systematic error.

The significance of PTV dose coverage on cancer control outcomes in early stage non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with highly ablative stereotactic body radiation therapy

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated whether patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) without full prescription dose coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) had inferior outcomes.

METHODS

The SBRT regimen was 54 Gy in three fractions. Dosimetric constraints were as per the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0236 guidelines. All patients underwent four-dimensional CT (4D-CT) simulation. The internal target volume (ITV) was defined using 4D-CT, and the PTV was defined as a 6-mm longitudinal and a 3-mm axial expansion from the ITV. If normal tissue constraints were beyond tolerance, ITV-based dosing was employed where priority was made for full ITV coverage at the expense of PTV coverage. Patients with and without full PTV dose coverage were compared, and control rates were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

120 NSCLC cases were evaluated with 81% having adequate PTV dose coverage. ITV and PTV were significantly larger in the cohort with inadequate PTV dose coverage (p = 0.0085 and p = 0.0038, respectively), and the mean ITV and PTV doses were higher in patients with adequate PTV dose coverage (p = 0.002 and p < 0.0001, respectively). The 3-year local control rate was 100% for both cohorts. There was no difference in 3-year regional control (p = 0.36), disease-specific survival (p = 0.79) or overall survival (p = 0.73).

CONCLUSION

When delivering a highly ablative SBRT regimen for early-stage NSCLC, full-dose coverage of the ITV is sufficient for local control.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Our data are among the first to evaluate the utility of PTV margins in a highly ablative SBRT regimen and suggest that when dosing constraints cannot be met, full tumouricidal dose coverage of the ITV is sufficient for local control.

Influence of different treatment techniques and clinical factors over the intrafraction variation on lung stereotactic body radiotherapy

PURPOSE

In the present study we compared three different Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment delivery techniques in terms of treatment time (TT) and their relation with intrafraction variation (IFV). Besides that, we analyzed if different clinical factors could have an influence on IFV. Finally, we appreciated the soundness of our margins.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-five patients undergoing SBRT for stage I lung cancer or lung metastases up to 5 cm were included in the study. All underwent 4DCT scan to create an internal target volume (ITV) and a 5 mm margin was added to establish the planning target volume (PTV). Cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) were acquired before and after each treatment to quantify the IFV. Three different treatment delivery techniques were employed: fixed fields (FF), dynamically collimated arcs (AA) or a combination of both (FA). We studied if TT was different among these modalities of SBRT and whether TT and IFV were correlated. Clinical data related to patients and tumors were recorded as potential influential factors over the IFV.

RESULTS

A total of 52 lesions and 147 fractions were analyzed. Mean IFV for x-, y- and z-axis were 1 ± 1.16 mm, 1.29 ± 1.38 mm and 1.17 ± 1.08 mm, respectively. Displacements were encompassed by the 5 mm margin in 96.1 % of fractions. TT was significantly longer in FF therapy (24.76 ± 5.4 min), when compared with AA (15.30 ± 3.68 min) or FA (17.79 ± 3.52 min) (p < 0.001). Unexpectedly, IFV did not change significantly between them (p = 0.471). Age (p = 0.003) and left vs. right location (p = 0.005) were related to 3D shift ≥2 mm. In the multivariate analysis only age showed a significant impact on the IFV (OR = 1.07, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of AA, FF or FA does not impact on IFV although FF treatment takes significantly longer treatment time. Our immobilization device offers enough accuracy and the 5 mm margin may be considered acceptable as it accounts for more than 95 % of tumor shifts. Age is the only clinical factor that influenced IFV significantly in our analysis.

Imaging and dosimetric errors in 4D PET/CT-guided radiotherapy from patient-specific respiratory patterns: a dynamic motion phantom end-to-end study

Effective positron emission tomography / computed tomography (PET/CT) guidance in radiotherapy of lung cancer requires estimation and mitigation of errors due to respiratory motion. An end-to-end workflow was developed to measure patient-specific motion-induced uncertainties in imaging, treatment planning, and radiation delivery with respiratory motion phantoms and dosimeters. A custom torso phantom with inserts mimicking normal lung tissue and lung lesion was filled with [(18)F]FDG. The lung lesion insert was driven by six different patient-specific respiratory patterns or kept stationary. PET/CT images were acquired under motionless ground truth, tidal breathing motion-averaged (3D), and respiratory phase-correlated (4D) conditions. Target volumes were estimated by standardized uptake value (SUV) thresholds that accurately defined the ground-truth lesion volume. Non-uniform dose-painting plans using volumetrically modulated arc therapy were optimized for fixed normal lung and spinal cord objectives and variable PET-based target objectives. Resulting plans were delivered to a cylindrical diode array at rest, in motion on a platform driven by the same respiratory patterns (3D), or motion-compensated by a robotic couch with an infrared camera tracking system (4D). Errors were estimated relative to the static ground truth condition for mean target-to-background (T/Bmean) ratios, target volumes, planned equivalent uniform target doses, and 2%-2 mm gamma delivery passing rates. Relative to motionless ground truth conditions, PET/CT imaging errors were on the order of 10-20%, treatment planning errors were 5-10%, and treatment delivery errors were 5-30% without motion compensation. Errors from residual motion following compensation methods were reduced to 5-10% in PET/CT imaging, <5% in treatment planning, and <2% in treatment delivery. We have demonstrated that estimation of respiratory motion uncertainty and its propagation from PET/CT imaging to RT planning, and RT delivery under a dose painting paradigm is feasible within an integrated respiratory motion phantom workflow. For a limited set of cases, the magnitude of errors was comparable during PET/CT imaging and treatment delivery without motion compensation. Errors were moderately mitigated during PET/CT imaging and significantly mitigated during RT delivery with motion compensation. This dynamic motion phantom end-to-end workflow provides a method for quality assurance of 4D PET/CT-guided radiotherapy, including evaluation of respiratory motion compensation methods during imaging and treatment delivery.