Evaluation of daily online set-up errors and organ displacement uncertainty during conformal radiation treatment of the prostate

Evaluation of margins in pelvic lymph nodes and prostate radiotherapy and the impact of bladder and rectum on prostate position

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were: determination of the CTV to PTV margins for prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. Investigation of the impact of registration modality (pelvic bones or prostate) on the CTV to PTV margins of pelvic lymph nodes. Investigation of the variations of bladder and rectum over the treatment course. Investigation of the impact of bladder and rectum variations on prostate position.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study included 15 patients treated for prostate adenocarcinoma. Daily kilo voltage images and weekly CBCT scans were performed to assess prostate displacements and common and external iliac vessels motion. These data was used to calculate the CTV to PTV margins using Van Herk equation in the setting of a daily bone registration. We also compared the CTV to PTV margins of pelvic lymph nodes according to registration method; based on pelvic bone or prostate. We delineated bladder and rectum on all CBCT scans to assess their variations over treatment course at 4 anatomic levels [1.5cm above pubic bone (PB), superior edge, mid- and inferior edge of PB].

RESULTS

Using Van Herk equation, the prostate CTV to PTV margins (bone registration) were 8.03mm, 5.42mm and 8.73mm in AP, ML and SI direction with more than 97% of prostate displacements were less than 5mm. The CTV to PTV margins ranged from 3.12mm to 3.25mm for external iliac vessels and from 3.12mm to 4.18mm for common iliac vessels. Compared to registration based on prostate alignment, bone registration resulted in an important reduction of the CTV to PTV margins up to 54.3% for external iliac vessels and up to 39.6% for common iliac vessels. There was no significant variation of the mean bladder volume over the treatment course. There was a significant variation of the mean rectal volume before and after the third week of treatment. After the third week, the mean rectal volume seemed to be stable. The uni- and multivariate analysis identified the anterior wall of rectum as independent factor acting on prostate motion in AP direction at 2 levels (superior edge of, mid PB). The right rectal wall influenced the prostate motion in ML direction at inferior edge of PB. The bladder volume tends toward significance as factor acting on prostate motion in AP direction.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend CTV to PTV margins of 8mm, 6mm and 9mm in AP, ML and SI directions for prostate. And, we suggest 4mm and 5mm for external and common iliac vessels respectively. We also prefer registration based on bony landmarks to minimize bowel irradiation. More CBCT scans should be performed during the first 3weeks and especially the first week to check rectum volume.

Preliminary Clinical Evaluation of Intrafraction Prostate Displacements for Two Immobilization Systems

Immobilization systems and their corresponding set-up errors influence the clinical target volume to the planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margins, which is critical for hypofractionated prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). This preliminary study evaluates intrafraction prostate displacement for two immobilization systems (A and B). Six consecutive patients having localized prostate cancer and implanted prostate marker seeds were studied. Planar X-ray images were acquired pre- and post-treatment to find the intrafraction prostate displacement. The average absolute displacements (lateral, longitudinal, vertical) were 0.9 ± 0.4 mm, 1.7 ± 0.1 mm, 1.3 ± 0.3 mm (system A), and 0.5 ± 0.2 mm, 0.6 ± 0.1 mm, 0.8 ± 0.3 mm (system B), with average three-dimensional displacements of 2.6 ± 0.2 mm (system A) and 1.3 ± 0.2 mm (system B). The computed CTV-PTV margins (lateral, longitudinal, vertical) were 2.5 mm, 2.5 mm, 3.6 mm and 1.4 mm, 1.6 mm, 2.4 mm for systems A and B, respectively. This suggests that the immobilization system influences intrafraction prostate displacement and, therefore, the margins applied. However, the margins found for both systems are comparable to the margins used for hypofractionated prostate SBRT.

Evaluation of set-up errors and determination of set-up margin in pelvic radiotherapy by electronic portal imaging device (EPID)

Introduction and purpose:

The error in set-up of patients is an inherent part of treatment processes. The positioning errors can be used to determine the margins of the planning target volume (PTV) to cover the target volume, while minimising the radiation dose delivered to normal tissues. This study aimed to evaluate random and systematic errors occurring in inter-fraction set-ups of pelvic radiotherapy measured by electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and then to propose the optimum clinical target volume (CTV) to PTV margin in pelvic cancer patients.

Materials and methods:

This study examined 22 patients treated with pelvic radiotherapy. A total of 182 portal images were evaluated. Population random (σ) and systematic (Σ) errors were determined based on the portal images in three directions (X, Y and Z). The set-up margin for CTV to PTV was calculated by published margin formulae of International Commission on Radiation Units and measurements (ICRU) report No. 62 recommendation and formulas presented by Stroom and Heijmen and Van Herk et al.

Results:

Systematic set-up errors for radiotherapy to patients ranged between 2·36 and 4·99 mm, and random errors ranged between 1·51 and 2·74 mm. The margin required to cover the target volume retrospectively was calculated based on ICRU 62 and formulas presented by Stroom and Heijmen and Van Herk et al. were used to calculate the range 2·8–5·7 mm, 5·7–11·9 mm and 6·9–14·4 mm, respectively.

Conclusion:

According to our findings, it can be concluded that by extending the CTV margin by 6·9–14·4 mm, we can ensure that 90% of the pelvic cancer patients will receive ≥ 95% of the prescribed dose in the CTV area.

Prospective evaluation of the setup errors and its impact on safety margin for cervical cancer pelvic conformal radiotherapy

Aim

The primary objective was to assess set-up errors (SE) and secondary objective was to determine optimal safety margin (SM).

Background

To evaluate the SE and its impact on the SM utilizing electronic portal imaging (EPI) for pelvic conformal radiotherapy.

Material and methods

20 cervical cancer patients were enrolled in this prospective study. Supine position with ankle and knee rest was used during CT simulation. The contouring was done using consensus guideline for intact uterus. 50 Gy in 25 fractions were delivered at the isocenter with ≥95% PTV coverage. Two orthogonal (Anterior and Lateral) digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) was constructed as a reference image. The pair of orthogonal [Anterior-Posterior and Right Lateral] single exposure EPIs during radiation was taken. The reference DRR and EPIs were compared for shifts, and SE was calculated in the X-axis, Y-axis, and Z-axis directions.

Results

320 images (40 DRRs and 280 EPIs) were assessed. The systematic error in the Z-axis (AP EPI), X-axis (AP EPI), and Y-axis (Lat EPI) ranged from -12.0 to 11.8 mm, -10.3 to 7.5 mm, and -8.50 to 9.70 mm, while the random error ranged from 1.60 to 6.15 mm, 0.59 to 4.93 mm, and 1.02 to -4.35 mm. The SM computed were 7.07, 6.36, and 7.79 mm in the Y-axis, X-axis, and Z-axis by Van Herk's equation, and 6.0, 5.51, and 6.74 mm by Stroom's equation.

Conclusion

The computed SE helps defining SM, and it may differ between institutions. In our study, the calculated SM was approximately 8 mm in the Z-axis, 7 mm in X and Y axis for pelvic conformal radiotherapy.

The experience of a developing country using an electronic portal imaging device for the verification of patient positioning and dosimetry in radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Purpose

This is a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of routine use of electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localised prostate cancer.

Materials and methods

Data from 20 patients with localised prostate cancer treated by radical radiotherapy using intensity-modulated technique in Habib Bourguiba Hospital were analysed to define the action levels for pretreatment planer dose distribution of 100 treatment fields and the set-up errors of 418 portal imaging. Pretreatment planar dose distribution was measured with the EPID. The additional dose from repeated portal imaging was determined with treatment planning system.

Results

For all 100 fields, the predicted and the measured planar dose distribution agrees well with mean±standard deviation value for γmax=2·31±0·57, γavg=0·36±0·07 and γ%≤1=98·94%±0·71%, respectively. For the evaluation of set-up errors, the mean total errors with 1 SD in the lateral, longitudinal and vertical directions were 0·11±0·44 cm; 0·02±0·37 cm and −0·02±0·21 cm, respectively. The imaging additional dose was evaluated as 1 cGy per monitor unit.

Conclusion

EPID is a useful tool to verify pretreatment dose distribution and to assess the correct field position without a significant increase in the absorbed dose due to the repetition of portal imaging.

Positioning error and expanding margins of planning target volume with kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography for prostate cancer radiotherapy

Objective

In this study, prostate cancer patients were treated with image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). The translational positioning errors were discussed to provide the basis for determining margins of the planning target volume (PTV).

Methods

Thirty prostate cancer patients were treated with radical radiotherapy using the IGRT system. Patients were placed in the supine position and underwent kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography (KVCBCT) scans before radiotherapy. A total of 447 images were acquired. The translational positioning errors were obtained in three linear directions which were X (left-to-right), Y (superior-to-inferior) and Z (anterior-to-posterior) axes (denoted as Lx, Ly and Lz) through the contrast between images adjusted with gray and manual registrations and the planning CT images. Rotational errors were denoted as Rx, Ry and Rz.

Results

Uncorrected translational errors Lx, Ly and Lz in the 251 positioning images were all higher than those after correction, and the differences were all statistically significant (P=0.000, 0.037 and 0.004, respectively). For rotational errors Rx, Ry and Rz, only Rx had a significant difference before and after correction (P=0.044). Before correction, PTV margins in the X, Y and Z directions were 0.61, 0.78 and 0.41 cm, respectively; after correction, these were 0.17, 0.12 and 0.17 cm, respectively.

Conclusion

KVCBCT can be applied to measure positioning errors in prostate cancer radiotherapy and correct these errors in real time through the 6° robotic patient positioning system, in order to improve patient positioning accuracy. The application of IGRT with KVCBCT may reduce PTV margins.

Does body mass index or subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness affect interfraction prostate motion in patients receiving radical prostate radiotherapy?

Aim

It is unclear whether body mass index (BMI) is a useful measurement for examining prostate motion. Patient’s subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness (SAT) and weight has been shown to correlate with prostate shifts in the left/right direction. We sought to analyse the relationship between BMI and interfraction prostate movement in order to determine planning target volume (PTV) margins based on patient BMI.

Materials and methods

In all, 38 prostate cancer patients with three implanted gold fiducial markers in their prostate were recruited. Height, mass and SAT were measured, and the extent of interfraction prostate movement in the left/right, superior/inferior and anterior/posterior directions was recorded during each daily fiducial marker-based image-guided radiotherapy treatment. Mean corrective shift in each direction for each patient, along with BMI values, were calculated.

Results

The median BMI value was 28·4 kg/m2 (range 21·4–44·7). Pearson’s product-moment correlation analysis showed no significant relationship between BMI, mass or SAT and the extent of prostate movement in any direction. Linear regression analysis also showed no relationship between any of the patient variables and the extent of prostate movement in any direction (BMI: R2=0·006 (ρ=0·65), 0·002 (ρ=0·80) and 0·001 (ρ=0·86); mass: R2=0·001 (ρ=0·87), 0·010 (ρ=0·54) and 0·000 (ρ=0·99); SAT: R2=0·012 (ρ=0·51), 0·013 (ρ=0·50) and 0·047 (ρ=0·19) for shifts in the X, Y and Z axis, respectively). Patients were grouped according to BMI, as BMI<30 (n=25, 65·8%) and BMI≥30 (n=13, 34·2%). A two-tailed t-test showed no significant difference between the mean prostate shifts for the two groups in any direction (ρ=0·320, 0·839 and 0·325 for shifts in the X, Y and Z axis, respectively).

Findings

BMI is not a useful parameter for determining individualised PTV margins. Gold fiducial marker insertion should be used as standard to improve treatment accuracy.

Under conditions of large geometric miss, tumor control probability can be higher for static gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy compared to volume-modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

The purpose of this work was to compare static gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in terms of tumor control probability (TCP) under scenarios involving large geometric misses, i.e., those beyond what are accounted for when margin expansion is determined. Using a planning approach typical for these treatments, a linear-quadratic-based model for TCP was used to compare mean TCP values for a population of patients who experiences a geometric miss (i.e., systematic and random shifts of the clinical target volume within the planning target dose distribution). A Monte Carlo approach was used to account for the different biological sensitivities of a population of patients. Interestingly, for errors consisting of coplanar systematic target volume offsets and three-dimensional random offsets, static gantry IMRT appears to offer an advantage over VMAT in that larger shift errors are tolerated for the same mean TCP. For example, under the conditions simulated, erroneous systematic shifts of 15mm directly between or directly into static gantry IMRT fields result in mean TCP values between 96% and 98%, whereas the same errors on VMAT plans result in mean TCP values between 45% and 74%. Random geometric shifts of the target volume were characterized using normal distributions in each Cartesian dimension. When the standard deviations were doubled from those values assumed in the derivation of the treatment margins, our model showed a 7% drop in mean TCP for the static gantry IMRT plans but a 20% drop in TCP for the VMAT plans. Although adding a margin for error to a clinical target volume is perhaps the best approach to account for expected geometric misses, this work suggests that static gantry IMRT may offer a treatment that is more tolerant to geometric miss errors than VMAT.

Displacements of fiducial markers in patients with prostate cancer treated with image guided radiotherapy: A single-institution descriptive study

AIM

To describe daily displacements when using fiducial markers as surrogates for the target volume in patients with prostate cancer treated with IGRT.

BACKGROUND

The higher grade of conformity achieved with the use of modern radiation technologies in prostate cancer can increase the risk of geographical miss; therefore, an associated protocol of IGRT is recommended.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective, consecutive study was designed. 128 prostate cancer patients treated with daily on-line IGRT based on 2D kV orthogonal images were included. Daily displacement of the fiducial markers was considered as the difference between the position of the patient when using skin tattoos and the position after being relocated using fiducial markers. Measures of central tendency and dispersion were used to describe fiducial displacements.

RESULTS

The implant itself took a mean time of 15 min. We did not detect any complications derived from the implant. 4296 sets of orthogonal images were identified, 128 sets of images corresponding to treatment initiation were excluded; 91 (2.1%) sets of images were excluded from the analysis after having identified that these images contained extreme outlier values. If IGRT had not been performed 25%, 10% or 5% of the treatments would have had displacements superior to 4, 7 or 9 mm respectively in any axis.

CONCLUSIONS

Image guidance is required when using highly conformal techniques; otherwise, at least 10% of daily treatments could have significant displacements. IGRT based on fiducial markers, with 2D kV orthogonal images is a convenient and fast method for performing image guidance.

A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Reproducibility of different immobilization systems, which may affect set-up errors, remains uncertain. Immobilization systems and their corresponding set-up errors influence the clinical target volume to planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margins and thus may result in undesirable treatment outcomes. This study compared the reproducibility of patient positioning with Hipfix system and whole body alpha cradle with respect to localized prostate cancer and investigated the existing CTV-PTV margins in the clinical oncology departments of two hospitals.

METHODS

Forty sets of data of patients with localized T1-T3 prostate cancer were randomly selected from two regional hospitals, with 20 patients immobilized by a whole-body alpha cradle system and 20 by a thermoplastic Hipfix system. Seven sets of the anterior-posterior (AP), cranial-caudal (CC) and medial-lateral (ML) deviations were collected from each patient. The reproducibility of patient positioning within the two hospitals was compared using a total vector error (TVE) parameter. In addition, CTV-PTV margins were computed using van Herk's formula. The resulting values were compared to the current CTV-PTV margins in both hospitals.

RESULTS

The TVE values were 5.1 and 2.8 mm for the Hipfix and the whole-body alpha cradle systems respectively. TVE associated with the whole-body alpha cradle system was found to be significantly less than the Hipfix system (p < 0.05). The CC axis in the Hipfix system attained the highest frequency of large (23.6%) and serious (7.9%) set-up errors. The calculated CTV to PTV margin was 8.3, 1.9 and 2.3 mm for the Hipfix system, and 2.1, 3.4 and 1.8 mm for the whole body alpha cradle in CC, ML and AP axes respectively. All but one (CC axis using Hipfix) margin calculated did not exceed the corresponding hospital protocol. The whole body alpha cradle system was found to be significantly better than the Hipfix system in terms of reproducibility (p < 0.05), especially in the CC axis.

CONCLUSIONS

The whole body alpha cradle system was more reproducible than the Hipfix system. In particular, the difference in CC axis contributed most to the results and the current CC margin for the Hipfix system might be considered as inadequate.

Assessment of interfractional prostate motion in patients immobilized in the prone position using a thermoplastic shell

The aim of this study was to evaluate the interfractional prostate motion of patients immobilized in the prone position using a thermoplastic shell. A total of 24 patients with prostate calcifications detectable using a kilo-voltage X-ray image-guidance system (ExacTrac X-ray system) were examined. Daily displacements of the calcification within the prostate relative to pelvic bony structures were calculated by the ExacTrac X-ray system. The average displacement and standard deviation (SD) in each of the left-right (LR), anterior-posterior (AP), and superior-inferior (SI) directions were calculated for each patient. Based on the results of interfractional prostate motion, we also calculated planning target volume (PTV) margins using the van Herk formula and examined the validity of the PTV margin of our institute (a 9-mm margin everywhere except posteriorly, where a 6-mm margin was applied). In total, 899 data measurements from 24 patients were obtained. The average prostate displacements ± SD relative to bony structures were 2.8 ± 3.3, -2.0 ± 2.0 and 0.2 ± 0.4 mm, in the SI, AP and LR directions, respectively. The required PTV margins were 9.7, 6.1 and 1.4 mm in the SI, AP and LR directions, respectively. The clinical target volumes of 21 patients (87.5%) were located within the PTV for 90% or more of all treatment sessions. Interfractional prostate motion in the prone position with a thermoplastic shell was equivalent to that reported for the supine position. The PTV margin of our institute is considered appropriate for alignment, based on bony structures.

An accuracy assessment of different rigid body image registration methods and robotic couch positional corrections using a novel phantom

PURPOSE

Image guided radiotherapy (IGRT) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images greatly reduces interfractional patient positional uncertainties. An understanding of uncertainties in the IGRT process itself is essential to ensure appropriate use of this technology. The purpose of this study was to develop a phantom capable of assessing the accuracy of IGRT hardware and software including a 6 degrees of freedom patient positioning system and to investigate the accuracy of the Elekta XVI system in combination with the HexaPOD robotic treatment couch top.

METHODS

The constructed phantom enabled verification of the three automatic rigid body registrations (gray value, bone, seed) available in the Elekta XVI software and includes an adjustable mount that introduces known rotational offsets to the phantom from its reference position. Repeated positioning of the phantom was undertaken to assess phantom rotational accuracy. Using this phantom the accuracy of the XVI registration algorithms was assessed considering CBCT hardware factors and image resolution together with the residual error in the overall image guidance process when positional corrections were performed through the HexaPOD couch system.

RESULTS

The phantom positioning was found to be within 0.04 (σ = 0.12)°, 0.02 (σ = 0.13)°, and -0.03 (σ = 0.06)° in X, Y, and Z directions, respectively, enabling assessment of IGRT with a 6 degrees of freedom patient positioning system. The gray value registration algorithm showed the least error in calculated offsets with maximum mean difference of -0.2(σ = 0.4) mm in translational and -0.1(σ = 0.1)° in rotational directions for all image resolutions. Bone and seed registration were found to be sensitive to CBCT image resolution. Seed registration was found to be most sensitive demonstrating a maximum mean error of -0.3(σ = 0.9) mm and -1.4(σ = 1.7)° in translational and rotational directions over low resolution images, and this is reduced to -0.1(σ = 0.2) mm and -0.1(σ = 0.79)° using high resolution images.

CONCLUSIONS

The phantom, capable of rotating independently about three orthogonal axes was successfully used to assess the accuracy of an IGRT system considering 6 degrees of freedom. The overall residual error in the image guidance process of XVI in combination with the HexaPOD couch was demonstrated to be less than 0.3 mm and 0.3° in translational and rotational directions when using the gray value registration with high resolution CBCT images. However, the residual error, especially in rotational directions, may increase when the seed registration is used with low resolution images.

Consideration of the likely benefit from implementation of prostate image-guided radiotherapy using current margin sizes: a radiobiological analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the benefit of introduction of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) to prostate radiotherapy practice with current clinical target volume-planning target volume (PTV) margins of 5-10 mm.

METHODS

Systematic error data collected from 50 patients were used together with a random error of σ=3.0 mm to model non-IGRT treatment. IGRT was modelled with residual errors of Σ=σ=1.5 mm. Population tumour control probability (TCP(pop)) was calculated for two three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy techniques: two-phase and concomitant boost. Treatment volumes and dose prescriptions were ostensibly the same. The relative field sizes of the treatment techniques, distribution of systematic errors and correlations between movement axes were examined.

RESULTS

The differences in TCP(pop) between the IGRT and non-IGRT regimes were 0.3% for the two-phase and 1.5% for the concomitant boost techniques. A 2-phase plan, in each phase of which the 95% isodose conformed to its respective PTV, required fields that were 3.5 mm larger than those required for the concomitant boost plan. Despite the larger field sizes, the TCP (without IGRT) in the two-phase plan was only 1.7% higher than the TCP in the concomitant boost plan. The deviation of craniocaudal systematic errors (p=0.02) from a normal distribution, and the correlation of translations in the craniocaudal and anteroposterior directions (p<0.0001) were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The expected population benefit of IGRT for the modelled situation was too small to be detected by a clinical trial of reasonable size, although there was a significant benefit to individual patients. For IGRT to have an observable population benefit, the trial would need to use smaller margins than those used in this study. Concomitant treatment techniques permit smaller fields and tighter conformality than two phases planned separately.

The extent and serial pattern of interfractional variation in patients with whole pelvic irradiation: a study using a kilovoltage orthogonal on-board imager

The purpose of this study is to assess the extent and serial pattern of setup error of conventional fractionated whole pelvic irradiation using a kilovoltage on-board imager. The daily on-board images of 69 patients were matched with the digitally reconstructed radiographs of simulation on the basis of pelvic bony structure. The shifts along x- (lateral), y- (longitudinal), and z- (vertical) axes, and the 3D vector, were measured. The shift between an origin of the first fraction and each fraction (Δshift(1st)) and the shift between an isocenter of simulation and each fraction (Δshift(Sim)) were calculated. To evaluate serial changes, the shifts of each fraction were classified into four consecutive sessions, and an ANOVA and chi-square test were used. The systematic error of the Δshift(Sim) and Δshift(1st) were 2.72 and 1.43 mm along the x-axis, 2.98 and 1.28 mm along the y-axis, and 4.26 and 2.39 mm along the z-axis, respectively. The Δshift(Sim) and Δshift(1st) ≥ 5 mm of the 3D vector occurred in 54.3% and 23.1%, respectively. The recommended margins to cover setup error in case of using Δshift(1st) were 3.81, 3.54, and 6.01 mm along x-, y-, and z-axes, whereas those using Δshift(Sim) were 6.39, 6.95, and 9.95 mm, respectively. With the passage of time, the Δshift(1st) ≥ 5 mm of 3D vector and along any axis in supine setup increased from 14.1% for first session to 22.5% for fourth session (p=0.027) and from 10.8% to 18.5% (p = 0.034), respectively. In prone setup, first session was better than others in the Δshift(1st) ≥ 5 mm of 3D vector and along any axis. It is expected that the correction using the on-board images on the first fraction improves geometrical uncertainties and reduces the margin for target coverage. Daily continuous OBI follow-up during conventional fractionated pelvic irradiation can increase the reproducibility and be more effective in the late period.

Gold marker displacement due to needle insertion during HDR-brachytherapy for treatment of prostate cancer: a prospective cone beam computed tomography and kilovoltage on-board imaging (kV-OBI) study

PURPOSE

To evaluate gold marker displacement due to needle insertion during HDR-brachytherapy for therapy of prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

18 patients entered into this prospective evaluation. Three gold markers were implanted into the prostate during the first HDR-brachytherapy procedure after the irradiation was administered. Three days after marker implantation all patients had a CT-scan for planning purpose of the percutaneous irradiation. Marker localization was defined on the digitally-reconstructed-radiographs (DRR) for daily (VMAT technique) or weekly (IMRT) set-up error correction. Percutaneous therapy started one week after first HDR-brachytherapy. After the second HDR-brachytherapy, two weeks after first HDR-brachtherapy, a cone-beam CT-scan was done to evaluate marker displacement due to needle insertion. In case of marker displacement, the actual positions of the gold markers were adjusted on the DRR.

RESULTS

The value of the gold marker displacement due to the second HDR-brachytherapy was analyzed in all patients and for each gold marker by comparison of the marker positions in the prostate after soft tissue registration of the prostate of the CT-scans prior the first and second HDR-brachytherapy. The maximum deviation was 5 mm, 7 mm and 12 mm for the anterior-posterior, lateral and superior-inferior direction. At least one marker in each patient showed a significant displacement and therefore new marker positions were adjusted on the DRRs for the ongoing percutaneous therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Needle insertion in the prostate due to HDR-brachytherapy can lead to gold marker displacements. Therefore, it is necessary to verify the actual position of markers after the second HDR-brachytherapy. In case of significant deviations, a new DRR with the adjusted marker positions should be generated for precise positioning during the ongoing percutaneous irradiation.

Comparison of the accuracy and precision of prostate localization with 2D-2D and 3D images

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Positional uncertainties related to the set-up of the prostate, using internal markers and either 2D-2D or 3D images, were studied. Set-up using direct prostate localization on CBCT scans is compared to set-up using internal markers.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

20 patients with prostate cancer were enrolled in the study. After each daily session, a set of 2D-2D and 3D images were acquired. The images isocenter was compared to reference images isocenter. For the set-up error analysis the systematic error, μ, and the set-up uncertainties, Σ and σ, were determined for the translational shift in the three directions, lat, lng and vrt. The set-up errors and uncertainties were calculated in the same way for rotations around the three axes, lat, lng and vrt.

RESULTS

Set-up uncertainties were evaluated for four different set-up methods. The systematic error uncertainties were found to be in the range 0.38-1.14 mm and for the random error 0.79-1.48 mm. For rotations the uncertainties ranges were 0.38-1.59° and 0.91-2.18° for systematic and random uncertainties, respectively. Set-up uncertainties, using internal markers or prostate itself to position the target in the isocenter, were comparable. The correlation between the two methods was better for translational shifts of the isocenter than for rotational shifts.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows that the precision of the 2D-2D set-up is equivalent to the precision of the 3D images. It also shows that the soft-tissue based set-up needs 1 mm larger set-up margins than the marker based set-up for the prostate patients, when CBCT is used for daily verification of the location of the prostate.

Dose assessment from an online kilovoltage imaging system in radiation therapy

We have investigated the dosimetric properties of a commercial kilovoltage cone beam computerised tomography (kV-CBCT) system. The kV-CBCT doses were measured in 16 and 32 cm diameter standard cylindrical Perspex computerised tomography (CT) and Rando anthropomorphic phantoms using 125 kVp and 1.0-2.0 mA s per projection. We also measured skin doses using thermoluminescence dosimeters placed on the skin surfaces of prostate cancer patients undergoing kV-kV image matching for daily set-up. The skin doses from kV-kV image matching of prostate cancer patients on the anterior and lateral skin surfaces ranged from 0.03 +/- 0.01 to 0.64 +/- 0.01 cGy depending on the beam filtration and technique factors employed. The mean doses on the Rando phantom ranged from 3.0 +/- 0.1 to 5.1 +/- 0.3 cGy for full-fan scans and from 3.8 +/- 0.1 to 6.6 +/- 0.2 cGy for half-fan scans using 125 kVp and 2 mA s per projection. The isocentre cone beam dose index (CBDI) in the 16 and 32 cm Perspex phantoms is 4.65 and 1.81 cGy, respectively (using a 0.6 cm(3) Capintec PR06C Farmer chamber) for full-fan scans, and the corresponding normalised CBDIs are 0.72 and 0.28 cGy/100 mA s, respectively. The mean weighted CBDIs are 4.93 and 2.14 cGy, and the normalised weighted CBDIs are 0.76 and 0.33 cGy/100 mA s for the 16 and 32 cm phantoms, respectively (full-fan scans). The normalised weighted CBDI for the half-fan scan is 0.41 cGy/100 mA s for the 32 cm diameter phantom. All measurements of the CBDI using the 0.6 cm(3) Farmer chamber are within 2-5% of measurements taken with the 100 mm CT chamber. The CBDI technique and definitions can be used to benchmark CBCT systems and to provide estimates of imaging doses to patients undergoing on-board imager (OBI)/CBCT image guided radiation therapy.