Treatment accuracy without rotational setup corrections in intracranial SRT

A retrospective study on improving the accuracy of radiotherapy for patients with breast cancer with lymph node metastasis using Styrofoam

BACKGROUND

To retrospectively analyze the accuracy of radiotherapy using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), Styrofoam fixation, and breast bracket fixation in the chest wall target area and supraclavicular lymphatic drainage area (supraclavicular target area) of patients with breast cancer.and compare the setting efficiency and comfort satisfaction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 65 patients with postoperative lymphatic metastasis of breast cancer, including 36 cases of Styrofoam fixation and 29 cases of breast bracket fixation, were recruited from March 2021 to August 2022 and retrospectively analyzed. All the patients underwent CBCT scans weekly, and the setup errors of the chest wall and supraclavicular target volume were compared and recorded. The planning target volume (PTV) margins of the two groups were calculated using the correlation MPTV = 2.5Σ + 0.7σ. The setup time and comfort satisfaction scores of the two groups were recorded and analyzed. The correlations among errors in each direction were analyzed using the Pearson correlation analysis.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in the left-right direction (X) axis of the chest wall target area between the Styrofoam and breast bracket groups (1.59 ± 1.47 mm vs. 2.05 ± 1.64 mm, P = 0.012). There were statistical differences in the ventrodorsal direction (Z) and bed angle of the supraclavicular target area, the data were (1.36 ± 1.27 mm vs. 1.75 ± 1.55 mm, P = 0.046; 0.47 ± 0.47° vs. 0.66 ± 0.59°, P = 0.006, respectively). In the X, Y, and Z directions, the respective PTV margins of the two groups in the chest wall target area were 5.01 mm, 5.99 mm, and 5.47 mm in the Styrofoam group, while those in the breast bracket group were 6.10 mm, 6.34 mm, and 6.10 mm, respectively. Moreover, the PTV margins of the supraclavicular target in the three directions were 3.69 mm, 3.86 mm, and 4.28 mm in the Styrofoam group, while those in the breast bracket group were 3.99 mm, 3.72 mm, and 5.45 mm, respectively. The setup time of the two groups was 3.4 ± 1.1 min and 5.5 ± 3.1 min (P = 0.007). The subjective comfort satisfaction scores of the two groups were 27.50 ± 1.24 and 25.44 ± 1.23 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of Styrofoam fixation in radiotherapy of breast cancer in the supraclavicular lymph node area has several advantages as compared to breast bracket fixation, including higher positioning accuracy, smaller external expansion boundary, improved work efficiency, and patients' comfort, which might provide a reference for clinical work.

Evaluation of corrective effect of 6 degree of freedom couch on setup errors in intensity modulated radiotherapy for postoperative rectal cancer patients

Objective

To explore the corrective effect of 6 degree of freedom couch on rotation errors in intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for postoperative rectal cancer patients, further to probe into the clinical application value of 6 degree of freedom couch in radiotherapy.

Methods

From January 1, 2020 to December 1, 2020, 30 patients with rectal cancer receiving postoperative intensity modulated radiotherapy in The First Hospital of Hebei Medical University were included in this retrospective study. The setup error values in all direction of patients before and after 6 degree of freedom correction were collected during each radiotherapy session.

Results

In this study, a total of 382 data before and after the correction of 6 degree of freedom couch were collected. It was found that the setup errors in the Y direction gradually increased, was maximal in the third week, and then became smaller, and the setup errors in the other directions increased with the extension of radiotherapy time and reached the maximum at the 5th week. In the translation direction, the setup errors value in Z direction occurred more frequently than that in X and Y directions between the range of 0.21-0.80 cm. In the rotation direction, the setup errors value in rotation X direction occurred more frequently than that in rotation Y and Z directions between the range of 0.21°-2.99°. In addition, after the correction of the 6 degree of freedom couch in real time, the setup errors in patients were significantly reduced in all directions (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

In summary, it was recommended to clinically use 6 degree of freedom couch combined with IMRT for real-time correction of placement errors in patients with rectal cancer undergoing radiotherapy. At the same time, it was necessary to observe the tumor size and body weight changes of patients on the 5th week. If necessary, radiotherapy positioning and planning should be performed in time.

A simplified non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy for the whole brain radiotherapy with hippocampus avoidance

Purpose

To evaluate the feasibility of using a simplified non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (NC-VMAT) and investigate its dosimetric advantages compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (C-VMAT) for hippocampal-avoidance whole brain radiation therapy (HA-WBRT).

Methods

Ten patients with brain metastase (BM) were included for HA-WBRT. Three treatment plans were generated for each case using IMRT, C-VMAT, and NC-VMAT, respectively.

Results

The dosimetric results of the three techniques complied roughly with the RTOG 0933 criteria. After dose normalization, the V_30Gy of whole brain planned target volume (WB-PTV) in all the plans was controlled at 95%. Homogeneity index (HI) of WB-PTV was significantly reduced in NC-VMAT (0.249 ± 0.017) over IMRT (0.265 ± 0.020, p=0.005) and C-VMAT (0.261 ± 0.014, p=0.020). In terms of conformity index (CI), NC-VMAT could provide a value of 0.821 ± 0.010, which was significantly superior to IMRT (0.788 ± 0.019, p<0.001). According to D_2% of WB-PTV, NC-VMAT could provide a value of 35.62 ± 0.37Gy, significantly superior to IMRT (36.43 ± 0.65Gy, p<0.001). According to D_50% of WB-PTV, NC-VMAT can achieve the lowest value of 33.18 ± 0.29Gy, significantly different from IMRT (33.47 ± 0.43, p=0.034) and C-VMAT (33.58 ± 0.37, p=0.006). Regarding D_2%, D_98%, and D_mean of hippocampus, NC-VMAT could control them at 15.57 ± 0.18Gy, 8.37 ± 0.26Gy and 11.71 ± 0.48Gy, respectively. D_2% and D_mean of hippocampus for NC-VMAT was significantly lower than IMRT (D_2%: 16.07 ± 0.29Gy, p=0.001 D_mean: 12.18 ± 0.33Gy, p<0.001) and C-VMAT (D_2%: 15.92 ± 0.37Gy, p=0.009 D_mean: 12.21 ± 0.54Gy, p<0.001). For other organs-at-risk (OARs), according to D_2% of the right optic nerves and the right lenses, NC-VMAT had the lowest values of 31.86 ± 1.11Gy and 7.15 ± 0.31Gy, respectively, which were statistically different from the other two techniques. For other organs including eyes and optic chiasm, NC-VMAT could achieve the lowest doses, different from IMRT statistically.

Conclusion

The dosimetry of the three techniques for HA-WBRT could roughly comply with the proposals from RTOG 0933. After dose normalization (D_95%=30Gy), NC-VMAT could significantly improve dose homogeneity and reduce the D_50% in the brain. Besides, it can reduce the D_2% of the hippocampus, optic nerves, and lens. With this approach, an efficient and straightforward plan was accomplished.

Positioning error analysis of the fraxion localization system in the intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy of tumors

OBJECTIVE

To investigate positioning error analysis of the Fraxion localization system in the intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy of tumors.

METHODS

64 patients were divided into two groups: a control group (36 patients with the standard thermoplastic mask) and a model group (28 patients with the Fraxion localization system). 3D images of the treated position were obtained by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Positioning errors were obtained by, respectively, registering these two sets of CBCT images to planning CT images, using a 6°-freedom robotic patient positioning system (HexaPOD Evo RT System). The changes in positioning errors with the Fraxion localization system and with the standard thermoplastic mask were analyzed.

RESULTS

CBCT scan results of the model group showed that the mean of linear error of three directions [superior-inferior (SI), lateral (LAT), and anterior-posterior (AP)] was 0.710 ± 0.676 mm, 0.817 ± 0.687 mm, and 0.710 ± 0.685 mm, respectively. The corresponding PTV was 1.23 mm, 1.26 mm, and 1.36 mm. The differences between the 3D images and the planned CT images were significant (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The Fraxion radiotherapy system can not only improve the positioning accuracy and reduce positioning errors but also narrow the PTV margin and reduce the radiated volume of normal tissue.

The impact of isocentric shifts on delivery accuracy during the irradiation of small cerebral targets-Quantification and possible corrections

Purpose

To assess the impact of isocenter shifts due to linac gantry and table rotation during cranial stereotactic radiosurgery on D₉₈, target volume coverage (TVC), conformity (CI), and gradient index (GI).

Methods

Winston‐Lutz (WL) checks were performed on two Elekta Synergy linacs. A stereotactic quality assurance (QA) plan was applied to the ArcCHECK phantom to assess the impact of isocenter shift corrections on Gamma pass rates. These corrections included gantry sag, distance of collimator and couch axes to the gantry axis, and distance between cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) isocenter and treatment beam (MV) isocenter. We applied the shifts via script to the treatment plan in Pinnacle 16.2. In a planning study, isocenter and mechanical rotation axis shifts of 0.25 to 2 mm were applied to stereotactic plans of spherical planning target volumes (PTVs) of various volumes. The shifts determined via WL measurements were applied to 16 patient plans with PTV sizes between 0.22 and 10.4 cm³.

Results

ArcCHECK measurements of a stereotactic treatment showed significant increases in Gamma pass rate for all three measurements (up to 3.8 percentage points) after correction of measured isocenter deviations. For spherical targets of 1 cm³, CI was most severely affected by increasing the distance of the CBCT isocenter (1.22 to 1.62). Gradient index increased with an isocenter‐collimator axis distance of 1.5 mm (3.84 vs 4.62). D₉₈ (normalized to reference) dropped to 0.85 (CBCT), 0.92 (table axis), 0.95 (collimator axis), and 0.98 (gantry sag), with similar but smaller changes for larger targets. Applying measured shifts to patient plans lead to relevant drops in D₉₈ and TVC (7%) for targets below 2 cm³ treated on linac 1.

Conclusion

Mechanical deviations during gantry, collimator, and table rotation may adversely affect the treatment of small stereotactic lesions. Adjustments of beam isocenters in the treatment planning system (TPS) can be used to both quantify their impact and for prospective correction of treatment plans.

Assessment of the use of different imaging and delivery techniques for cranial treatments on the Halcyon linac

Purpose

In this work, we investigated the effect on the workflow and setup accuracy of using surface guided radiation therapy (SGRT) for patient setup, megavoltage cone beam CT (MVCBCT) or kilovoltage cone beam CT (kVCBCT) for imaging and fixed IMRT or volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for treatment delivery with the Halcyon linac.

Methods

We performed a retrospective investigation of 272 treatment fractions, using three different workflows. The first and second workflows used MVCBCT and fixed IMRT for imaging and treatment delivery, and the second one also used SGRT for patient setup. The third workflow used SGRT for setup, kVCBCT for imaging and VMAT for delivery. Workflows were evaluated by comparing the number of fractions requiring repeated imaging acquisitions and the time required for setup, imaging and treatment delivery. Setup position accuracy was assessed by comparing the daily kV‐ or MV‐ CBCT with the planning CT and measuring the residual rotational errors for pitch, yaw and roll angles.

Results

Without the use of SGRT, the imaging fields were delivered more than once on 11.1% of the fractions, while re‐imaging was necessary in 5.5% of the fractions using SGRT. The total treatment time, including setup, imaging, and delivery, for the three workflows was 531 ± 157 s, 503 ± 130 s and 457 ± 91 s, respectively. A statistically significant difference was observed when comparing the third workflow with the first two. The total residual rotational errors were 1.96 ± 1.29°, 1.28 ± 0.67° and 1.22 ± 0.76° and statistically significant differences were observed when comparing workflows with and without SGRT.

Conclusions

The use of SGRT allowed for a reduction of re‐imaging during patient setup and improved patient position accuracy by reducing residual rotational errors. A reduction in treatment time using kVCBCT with SGRT was observed. The most efficient workflow was the one including kVCBCT and SGRT for setup and VMAT for delivery.

TomoTherapy treatments of multiple brain lesions: an in-phantom accuracy evaluation

Aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy which can be obtained with helical TomoTherapy^® (HT, Accuray) systems in the case of multiple intracranial targets treatments. Set-up accuracy was measured, for different registration options and MegaVoltage CT (MVCT) slice thickness, by applying known misalignments to an ad-hoc developed phantom. End-to-end (E2E) tests were performed to assess the delivery accuracy in phantoms containing multiple targets by using radiochromic films: measured dose distribution centroids were compared with physical and calculated target positions on axial and coronal planes. A Gamma index analysis was carried out on planned and measured planar dose maps. The bone and tissue algorithm with the fine MVCT reconstruction grid gave the best results among the automatic options. The most accurate registration modality resulted to be the manual one with a sub-voxel accuracy shifts and a capability in the detection of rotations within 0.3°. For the E2E along the coronal plane (six targets), a mean deviation between measured dose distribution centroids and physical barycenters of 0.6 mm (range 0.1 mm-1.3 mm) was observed. Along the axial plane (five targets), a mean deviation of 1.2 mm (range 0.7 mm-2.1 mm) was found for the centroids shifts. Gamma index (5%, 1 mm, local) passing rates higher than 87.5% between planned and delivered dose distributions were measured. These results demonstrate that multiple brain lesion HT treatments are feasible with an accuracy at least comparable to frameless linac-based delivery, when a set-up capable to assure angular corrections and a reliable patient immobilization is employed.

Clinical commissioning of a new patient positioning system, SyncTraX FX4, for intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy

Background & Aims

A new real‐time tracking radiotherapy (RTRT) system, the SyncTraX FX4 (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan), consisting of four X‐ray tubes and four ceiling‐mounted flat panel detectors (FPDs) combined with a linear accelerator, was installed at Uonuma Kikan Hospital (Niigata, Japan) for the first time worldwide. In addition to RTRT, the SyncTraX FX4 system enables bony structure‐based patient verification. Here we provide the first report of this system's clinical commissioning for intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT).

Materials & Methods

A total of five tests were performed for the commissioning: evaluations of (1) the system's image quality; (2) the imaging and treatment coordinate coincidence; and (3) the localization accuracy of cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) and SyncTraX FX4; (4) the measurement of air kerma; (5) an end‐to‐end test.

Results & Discussion

The tests revealed the following. (1) All image quality evaluation items satisfied each acceptable criterion in all FPDs. (2) The maximum offsets among the centers were ≤0.40 mm in all combinations of the FPD and X‐ray tubes (preset). (3) The isocenter localization discrepancies between CBCT and preset #3 in the SyncTraX FX4 system were 0.29 ± 0.084 mm for anterior‐posterior, −0.19 ± 0.13 mm for superior‐inferior, 0.076 ± 0.11 mm for left‐right, −0.11 ± 0.066° for rotation, −0.14 ± 0.064° for pitch, and 0.072±0.058° for roll direction. the Pearson's product‐moment correlation coefficient between the two systems was >0.98 in all directions. (4) The mean air kerma value for preset #3 was 0.11 ± 0.0002 mGy in predefined settings (80 kV, 200 mA, 50 msec). (5) For 16 combinations of gantry and couch angles, median offset value in all presets was 0.31 mm (range 0.14–0.57 mm).

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate a competent performance of the SyncTraX FX4 system in terms of the localization accuracy for intracranial SRT.