Dosimetric benefit of DMLC tracking for conventional and sub-volume boosted prostate intensity-modulated arc radiotherapy

Focal Boost in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy: A Review of Planning Studies and Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Focal boost radiotherapy was developed to deliver elevated doses to functional sub-volumes within a target. Such a technique was hypothesized to improve treatment outcomes without increasing toxicity in prostate cancer treatment.

PURPOSE

To summarize and evaluate the efficacy and variability of focal boost radiotherapy by reviewing focal boost planning studies and clinical trials that have been published in the last ten years.

METHODS

Published reports of focal boost radiotherapy, that specifically incorporate dose escalation to intra-prostatic lesions (IPLs), were reviewed and summarized. Correlations between acute/late ≥G2 genitourinary (GU) or gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity and clinical factors were determined by a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

By reviewing and summarizing 34 planning studies and 35 trials, a significant dose escalation to the GTV and thus higher tumor control of focal boost radiotherapy were reported consistently by all reviewed studies. Reviewed trials reported a not significant difference in toxicity between focal boost and conventional radiotherapy. Acute ≥G2 GU and late ≥G2 GI toxicities were reported the most and least prevalent, respectively, and a negative correlation was found between the rate of toxicity and proportion of low-risk or intermediate-risk patients in the cohort.

CONCLUSION

Focal boost prostate cancer radiotherapy has the potential to be a new standard of care.

AAPM Task Group 264: The safe clinical implementation of MLC tracking in radiotherapy

The era of real-time radiotherapy is upon us. Robotic and gimbaled linac tracking are clinically established technologies with the clinical realization of couch tracking in development. Multileaf collimators (MLCs) are a standard equipment for most cancer radiotherapy systems, and therefore MLC tracking is a potentially widely available technology. MLC tracking has been the subject of theoretical and experimental research for decades and was first implemented for patient treatments in 2013. The AAPM Task Group 264 Safe Clinical Implementation of MLC Tracking in Radiotherapy Report was charged to proactively provide the broader radiation oncology community with (a) clinical implementation guidelines including hardware, software, and clinical indications for use, (b) commissioning and quality assurance recommendations based on early user experience, as well as guidelines on Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, and (c) a discussion of potential future developments. The deliverables from this report include: an explanation of MLC tracking and its historical development; terms and definitions relevant to MLC tracking; the clinical benefit of, clinical experience with and clinical implementation guidelines for MLC tracking; quality assurance guidelines, including example quality assurance worksheets; a clinical decision pathway, future outlook and overall recommendations.

Commissioning of a motion system to investigate dosimetric consequences due to variability of respiratory waveforms

A commercially available six‐dimensional (6D) motion system was assessed for accuracy and clinical use in our department. Positional accuracy and respiratory waveform reproducibility were evaluated for the motion system. The system was then used to investigate the dosimetric consequences of respiratory waveform variation when an internal target volume (ITV) approach is used for motion management. The maximum deviations are 0.3 mm and 0.22° for translation and rotation accuracy, respectively, for the tested clinical ranges. The origin reproducibility is less than ±0.1 mm. The average differences are less than 0.1 mm with a maximum standard deviation of 0.8 mm between waveforms of actual patients and replication of those waveforms by HexaMotion for three breath‐hold and one free‐breathing waveform. A modified gamma analysis shows greater than 98% agreement with a 0.5 mm and 100 ms threshold. The motion system was used to investigate respiratory waveform variation and showed that, as the amplitude of the treatment waveform increases above that of the simulation waveform, the periphery of the target volume receives less dose than expected. However, by using gating limits to terminate the beam outside of the simulation amplitude, the results are as expected dosimetrically. Specifically, the average dose difference in the periphery between treating with the simulation waveform and the larger amplitude waveform could be up to 12% less without gating limits, but only differed 2% or less with the gating limits in place. The general functionality of the system performs within the manufacturer's specifications and can accurately replicate patient specific waveforms. When an ITV approach is used for motion management, we found the use of gating limits that coincide with the amplitude of the patient waveform at simulation helpful to prevent the potential underdosing of the target due to changes in patient respiration.

PACS numbers: 87.55.Kh, 87.55.Qr, 87.56.Fc

Time-resolved dose distributions to moving targets during volumetric modulated arc therapy with and without dynamic MLC tracking

PURPOSE

The highly conformal doses delivered by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) may be compromised by intrafraction target motion. Although dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC) tracking can mitigate the dosimetric impact of motion on the accumulated dose, residual errors still exist. The purpose of this study was to investigate the temporal evolution of dose errors throughout VMAT treatments delivered with and without DMLC tracking.

METHODS

Tracking experiments were performed on a linear accelerator connected to prototype DMLC tracking software. A three-axis motion stage reproduced representative clinical trajectories of four lung tumors and four prostates. For each trajectory, two VMAT treatment plans (low and high modulation) were delivered with and without DMLC tracking as well as to a static phantom for reference. Dose distributions were measured continuously at 72 Hz using a dosimeter with biplanar diode arrays. During tracking, the MLC leaves were continuously refitted to the 3D target position measured by an electromagnetic transponder at 30 Hz. The dosimetric errors caused in the 32 motion experiments were quantified by a time-resolved 3%/3 mm γ-test. The erroneously exposed areas in treatment beam's eye view (BEV) caused by inadequate real-time MLC adaptation were calculated and compared with the time-resolved γ failure rates.

RESULTS

The transient γ failure rate was on average 16.8% without tracking and 5.3% with tracking. The γ failure rate correlated well with the erroneously exposed areas in BEV (mean of Pearson r = 0.83, p < 0.001). For the final accumulated doses, the mean γ failure rate was 17.9% without tracking and 1.0% with tracking. With tracking the transient dose errors tended to cancel out resulting in the low mean γ failure rate for the accumulated doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Time-resolved measurements allow pinpointing of transient errors in dose during VMAT delivery as well as monitoring of erroneous dose evolution in key target positions. The erroneously exposed area in BEV was shown to be a good indicator of errors in the dose distribution during treatment delivery.

The impact of leaf width and plan complexity on DMLC tracking of prostate intensity modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

Intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) is commonly used to treat prostate cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of leaf width and plan complexity on dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC) tracking for prostate motion management during IMAT treatments.

METHODS

Prostate IMAT plans were delivered with either a high-definition MLC (HDMLC) or a Millennium MLC (M-MLC) (0.25 and 0.50 cm central leaf width, respectively), with and without DMLC tracking, to a dosimetric phantom that reproduced four prostate motion traces. The plan complexity was varied by applying leaf position constraints during plan optimization. A subset of the M-MLC plans was converted for delivery with the HDMLC, isolating the effect of the different leaf widths. The gamma index was used for evaluation. Tracking errors caused by target localization, leaf fitting, and leaf adjustment were analyzed.

RESULTS

The gamma pass rate was significantly improved with DMLC tracking compared to no tracking (p < 0.001). With DMLC tracking, the average gamma index pass rate was 98.6% (range 94.8%-100%) with the HDMLC and 98.1% (range 95.4%-99.7%) with the M-MLC, using 3%, 3 mm criteria and the planned dose as reference. The corresponding pass rates without tracking were 87.6% (range 76.2%-94.7%) and 91.1% (range 81.4%-97.6%), respectively. Decreased plan complexity improved the pass rate when static target measurements were used as reference, but not with the planned dose as reference. The main cause of tracking errors was leaf fitting errors, which were decreased by 42% by halving the leaf width.

CONCLUSIONS

DMLC tracking successfully compensated for the prostate motion. The finer leaf width of the HDMLC improved the tracking accuracy compared to the M-MLC. The tracking improvement with limited plan complexity was small and not discernible when using the planned dose as reference.