1
|
Li B, Huang J, Ruan J, Peng Q, Huang S, Li Y, Li F. Dosimetric impact of CT metal artifact reduction for spinal implants in stereotactic body radiotherapy planning. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2023; 13:8290-8302. [PMID: 38106297 PMCID: PMC10721987 DOI: 10.21037/qims-23-442] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 09/14/2023] [Indexed: 12/19/2023]
Abstract
Background Metal artifacts due to spinal implants may affect the accuracy of dose calculation for radiotherapy. However, the dosimetric impact of metal artifact reduction (MAR) for spinal implants in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans has not been well studied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric impact of MAR in spinal SBRT planning with three clinically common dose calculation algorithms. Methods Gammex phantom and 10 patients' computed tomography (CT) images were studied to investigate the effects of titanium implants. A commercial orthopedic MAR algorithm was employed to reduce artifacts. Dose calculations for SBRT were conducted on both artifact-corrected and uncorrected images using three commercial algorithms [analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA), Acuros XB (AXB), and Monte Carlo (MC)]. Dose discrepancies between artifact-corrected and uncorrected cases were appraised using a dose-volume histogram (DVH) and 3-dimensional (3D) gamma analysis with different distance to agreement (DTA) and dose difference criteria. The gamma agreement index (GAI) was denoted as G(∆D, DTA). Statistical analysis of t-test was utilized to evaluate the dose differences of different algorithms. Results The phantom study demonstrated that titanium metal artifacts can be effectively reduced. The patient cases study showed that dose differences between the artifact-corrected and uncorrected datasets were small evaluated by gamma index and DVH. Gamma analysis found that even the strict criterion local G(1,1) had average values ≥93.9% for the three algorithms. For all DVH metrics, average differences did not exceed 0.7% in planning target volume (PTV) and 2.1% in planning risk volume of spinal cord (PRV-SC). Statistical analysis showed that the observed dose differences of MC method were significantly larger than those of AAA (P<0.01 for D98% of PTV and P<0.001 for D0.1cc of spinal cord) and AXB methods (P<0.001 for D98% and P<0.0001 for D0.1cc). Conclusions Dosimetric impact of artifacts caused by titanium implants is not significant in spinal SBRT planning, which indicates that dose calculation algorithms might not be very sensitive to CT number variation caused by titanium inserts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bin Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Jiexing Huang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Junjie Ruan
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Qinghe Peng
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Sijuan Huang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yunfei Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Fanghua Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Huiskes M, Astreinidou E, Kong W, Breedveld S, Heijmen B, Rasch C. Dosimetric impact of adaptive proton therapy in head and neck cancer - A review. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2023; 39:100598. [PMID: 36860581 PMCID: PMC9969246 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100598] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2022] [Revised: 02/10/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) in head and neck cancer (HNC) is susceptible to anatomical changes and patient set-up inaccuracies during the radiotherapy course, which can cause discrepancies between planned and delivered dose. The discrepancies can be counteracted by adaptive replanning strategies. This article reviews the observed dosimetric impact of adaptive proton therapy (APT) and the timing to perform a plan adaptation in IMPT in HNC. Methods A literature search of articles published in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science from January 2010 to March 2022 was performed. Among a total of 59 records assessed for possible eligibility, ten articles were included in this review. Results Included studies reported on target coverage deterioration in IMPT plans during the RT course, which was recovered with the application of an APT approach. All APT plans showed an average improved target coverage for the high- and low-dose targets as compared to the accumulated dose on the planned plans. Dose improvements up to 2.5 Gy (3.5 %) and up to 4.0 Gy (7.1 %) in the D98 of the high- and low dose targets were observed with APT. Doses to the organs at risk (OARs) remained equal or decreased slightly after APT was applied. In the included studies, APT was largely performed once, which resulted in the largest target coverage improvement, but eventual additional APT improved the target coverage further. There is no data showing what is the most appropriate timing for APT. Conclusion APT during IMPT for HNC patients improves target coverage. The largest improvement in target coverage was found with a single adaptive intervention, and an eventual second or more frequent APT application improved the target coverage further. Doses to the OARs remained equal or decreased slightly after applying APT. The most optimal timing for APT is yet to be determined.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Merle Huiskes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands,Corresponding author at: Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Albinusdreef 2, P.O. Box 9600, Postal zone K1-P, 2300 RC Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - Eleftheria Astreinidou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Wens Kong
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Breedveld
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ben Heijmen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Coen Rasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands,HollandPTC, Delft, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Arumugam S, Pavey D, Oar A, Holloway L, Sidhom M, Lee M. The first real-time intrafraction target position monitoring in pancreas SBRT on an Elekta linear accelerator. Phys Eng Sci Med 2021; 44:625-38. [PMID: 34019228 DOI: 10.1007/s13246-021-01007-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2020] [Accepted: 05/03/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
To perform implanted fiducial based real-time target position monitoring in pancreas stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the x-ray imaging system available in a Elekta linear accelerator. An in-house system was developed and clinically utilised for real-time target position monitoring of pancreas SBRT delivery. The developed system was used for the target position monitoring of a pancreas cancer patient treated in free breathing treatment within the study entitled 'Mfolfirinox And STEreotactic Radiotherapy for Patients with Locally Advanced paNcreas cancer (MASTERPLAN): a feasibility study' (ACTRN 12617001642370) consisting of five treatment fractions. The clinical efficacy of the system was studied by performing a retrospective cumulative dose assessment of delivered dose using observed position deviations. The developed system identified two events of baseline shifts in target position that exceeded the accepted tolerance level of ± 3 mm from reference planned position. The retrospective dose assessment study showed that if the position deviations were not detected and corrected for, the maximum dose to duodenum would have increased from 34.6 to 38.8 Gy. The first real-time position monitoring in pancreas SBRT on an Elekta linear accelerator was successfully performed. The developed system was shown to improve the safety and accuracy of SBRT delivery.
Collapse
|
4
|
Roch M, Zapatero A, Castro P, Hernández D, Chevalier M, García-Vicente F. Dosimetric impact of rectum and bladder anatomy and intrafractional prostate motion on hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy. Clin Transl Oncol 2021; 23:2293-2301. [PMID: 33913091 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-021-02628-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2021] [Accepted: 04/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric impact on hypofractionated prostate radiation therapy of two geometric uncertainty sources: rectum and bladder filling and intrafractional prostate motion. MATERIALS AND METHODS This prospective study included 544 images (375 pre-treatment cone-beam CT [CBCT] and 169 post-treatment CBCT) from 15 prostate adenocarcinoma patients. We recalculated the dose on each pre-treatment CBCT once the positioning errors were corrected. We also recalculated two dose distributions on each post-treatment CBCT, either using or not intrafractional motion correction. A correlation analysis was performed between CBCT-based dose and rectum and bladder filling as well as intrafraction prostate displacements. RESULTS No significant differences were found between administered and planned rectal doses. However, we observed an increase in bladder dose due to a lower bladder filling in 66% of treatment fractions. These differences were reduced at the end of the fraction since the lower bladder volume was compensated by the filling during the treatment session. A statistically significant reduction in target volume coverage was observed in 27% of treatment sessions and was correlated with intrafractional prostate motion in sagittal plane > 4 mm. CONCLUSIONS A better control of bladder filling is recommended to minimize the number of fractions in which the bladder volume is lower than planned. Fiducial mark tracking with a displacement threshold of 5 mm in any direction is recommended to ensure that the prescribed dose criteria are met.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Roch
- Department of Medical Physics, Hospital La Princesa, Health Research Institute IIS-IP, Diego de León 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.
| | - A Zapatero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital La Princesa, IIS-IP, Madrid, Spain
| | - P Castro
- Department of Medical Physics, Hospital La Princesa, Health Research Institute IIS-IP, Diego de León 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain
| | - D Hernández
- Department of Medical Physics, Hospital La Princesa, Health Research Institute IIS-IP, Diego de León 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain
| | - M Chevalier
- Medical Physics Group, Radiology Department, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - F García-Vicente
- Department of Medical Physics, Hospital Ramón Y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Simon-Cornu M, Beaugelin-Seiller K, Boyer P, Calmon P, Garcia-Sanchez L, Mourlon C, Nicoulaud V, Sy M, Gonze MA. Evaluating variability and uncertainty in radiological impact assessment using SYMBIOSE. J Environ Radioact 2015; 139:91-102. [PMID: 25464045 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2014.09.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2014] [Revised: 09/09/2014] [Accepted: 09/22/2014] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
SYMBIOSE is a modelling platform that accounts for variability and uncertainty in radiological impact assessments, when simulating the environmental fate of radionuclides and assessing doses to human populations. The default database of SYMBIOSE is partly based on parameter values that are summarized within International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) documents. To characterize uncertainty on the transfer parameters, 331 Probability Distribution Functions (PDFs) were defined from the summary statistics provided within the IAEA documents (i.e. sample size, minimal and maximum values, arithmetic and geometric means, standard and geometric standard deviations) and are made available as spreadsheet files. The methods used to derive the PDFs without complete data sets, but merely the summary statistics, are presented. Then, a simple case-study illustrates the use of the database in a second-order Monte Carlo calculation, separating parametric uncertainty and inter-individual variability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Simon-Cornu
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France.
| | - K Beaugelin-Seiller
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France
| | - P Boyer
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France
| | - P Calmon
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SESURE, LERCM, Cadarache, France
| | - L Garcia-Sanchez
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, L2BT, Cadarache, France
| | - C Mourlon
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France
| | - V Nicoulaud
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France
| | - M Sy
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France
| | - M A Gonze
- Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), PRP-ENV, SERIS, LM2E, Cadarache, France
| |
Collapse
|