skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Interfractional Variations in Patient Setup and Anatomic Change Assessed by Daily Computed Tomography

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the interfractional variations in patient setup and anatomic changes at seven anatomic sites observed in image-guided radiotherapy. Methods and Materials: A total of 152 patients treated at seven anatomic sites using a Hi-Art helical tomotherapy system were analyzed. Daily tomotherapy megavoltage computed tomography images acquired before each treatment were fused to the planning kilovoltage computed tomography images to determine the daily setup errors and organ motions and deformations. The setup errors were corrected before treatment and were used, along with the organ motions, to determine the clinical target volume/planning target volume margins. The organ motions and deformations for 3 representative patient cases (pancreas, uterus, and soft-tissue sarcoma) and for 14 kidneys of 7 patients are presented. Results: Interfractional setup errors in the skull, brain, and head and neck are significantly smaller than those in the chest, abdomen, pelvis, and extremities. These site-specific relationships are statistically significant. The margins required to account for these setup errors range from 3 to 8 mm for the seven sites. The margin to account for both setup errors and organ motions for kidney is 16 mm. Substantial interfractional anatomic changes were observed. For example, the pancreas moved up to {+-}20 mm andmore » volumes of the uterus and sarcoma varied {<=}30% and 100%, respectively. Conclusion: The interfractional variations in patient setup and in shapes, sizes, and positions of both targets and normal structures are site specific and may be used to determine the site-specific margins. The data presented in this work dealing with seven anatomic sites may be useful in developing adaptive radiotherapy.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [2];  [2]
  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI (United States). E-mail: ali@radonc.mcw.edu
  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
20951681
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics; Journal Volume: 68; Journal Issue: 2; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.024; PII: S0360-3016(06)03653-4; Copyright (c) 2007 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ABDOMEN; BRAIN; CHEST; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; ERRORS; HEAD; IMAGES; KIDNEYS; NECK; PANCREAS; PATIENTS; PELVIS; RADIOTHERAPY; SARCOMAS; SKULL; UTERUS

Citation Formats

Li, X. Allen, Qi, X. Sharon, Pitterle, Marissa, Kalakota, Kapila, Mueller, Kevin, Erickson, Beth A., Wang Dian, Schultz, Christopher J., Firat, Selim Y., and Wilson, J. Frank. Interfractional Variations in Patient Setup and Anatomic Change Assessed by Daily Computed Tomography. United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.024.
Li, X. Allen, Qi, X. Sharon, Pitterle, Marissa, Kalakota, Kapila, Mueller, Kevin, Erickson, Beth A., Wang Dian, Schultz, Christopher J., Firat, Selim Y., & Wilson, J. Frank. Interfractional Variations in Patient Setup and Anatomic Change Assessed by Daily Computed Tomography. United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.024.
Li, X. Allen, Qi, X. Sharon, Pitterle, Marissa, Kalakota, Kapila, Mueller, Kevin, Erickson, Beth A., Wang Dian, Schultz, Christopher J., Firat, Selim Y., and Wilson, J. Frank. Fri . "Interfractional Variations in Patient Setup and Anatomic Change Assessed by Daily Computed Tomography". United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.024.
@article{osti_20951681,
title = {Interfractional Variations in Patient Setup and Anatomic Change Assessed by Daily Computed Tomography},
author = {Li, X. Allen and Qi, X. Sharon and Pitterle, Marissa and Kalakota, Kapila and Mueller, Kevin and Erickson, Beth A. and Wang Dian and Schultz, Christopher J. and Firat, Selim Y. and Wilson, J. Frank},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To analyze the interfractional variations in patient setup and anatomic changes at seven anatomic sites observed in image-guided radiotherapy. Methods and Materials: A total of 152 patients treated at seven anatomic sites using a Hi-Art helical tomotherapy system were analyzed. Daily tomotherapy megavoltage computed tomography images acquired before each treatment were fused to the planning kilovoltage computed tomography images to determine the daily setup errors and organ motions and deformations. The setup errors were corrected before treatment and were used, along with the organ motions, to determine the clinical target volume/planning target volume margins. The organ motions and deformations for 3 representative patient cases (pancreas, uterus, and soft-tissue sarcoma) and for 14 kidneys of 7 patients are presented. Results: Interfractional setup errors in the skull, brain, and head and neck are significantly smaller than those in the chest, abdomen, pelvis, and extremities. These site-specific relationships are statistically significant. The margins required to account for these setup errors range from 3 to 8 mm for the seven sites. The margin to account for both setup errors and organ motions for kidney is 16 mm. Substantial interfractional anatomic changes were observed. For example, the pancreas moved up to {+-}20 mm and volumes of the uterus and sarcoma varied {<=}30% and 100%, respectively. Conclusion: The interfractional variations in patient setup and in shapes, sizes, and positions of both targets and normal structures are site specific and may be used to determine the site-specific margins. The data presented in this work dealing with seven anatomic sites may be useful in developing adaptive radiotherapy.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.024},
journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
number = 2,
volume = 68,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007},
month = {Fri Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007}
}
  • Purpose: To quantify interfraction motion in patients with intact cervical cancer and assess implications for clinical target volume (CTV) coverage and required planning margins. Methods and Materials: We analyzed 10 patients undergoing external beam radiotherapy using online cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) before each fraction. CTVs were contoured on the planning CT and on each CBCT. Each CBCT was rigidly registered to the planning CT with respect to bony anatomy. The CTV from each CBCT was projected onto the planning CT and compared to the CTV from the planning CT. Uniform three-dimensional expansions were applied to the planning CTV tomore » assess required planning margins. For each fraction, the minimum margin required to encompass the CTV was calculated, and the volume of CTV (on the CBCT) encompassed by the PTV was determined as a function of margin size. Results: A uniform CTV planning treatment volume margin of 15 mm would have failed to encompass the CTV in 32% of fractions. The mean volume of CTV missed, however, was small (4 cc). The mean planning margin (across patients and fractions) required to encompass the CTV was 15 mm. Variation in margin estimates was high, with interpatient variation being the predominant component. Increased rectal volume was associated with posterior (p < 0.0001) and superior (p = 0.0004) shifts in the CTV, whereas increased bladder volume was associated with superior shifts (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Interfraction motion results in a high probability of missing the CTV using conventional planning margins, but the volume of CTV missed is small. Adaptive radiotherapy approaches are needed to improve treatment accuracy.« less
  • Purpose: The aim of this study was to quantify interfractional pancreatic position variation using fiducial markers visible on daily cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. In addition, we analyzed possible migration of the markers to investigate their suitability for tumor localization. Methods and Materials: For 13 pancreatic cancer patients with implanted Visicoil markers, CBCT scans were obtained before 17 to 25 fractions (300 CBCTs in total). Image registration with the reference CT was used to determine the displacement of the 2 to 3 markers relative to bony anatomy and to each other. We analyzed the distance between marker pairs asmore » a function of time to identify marker registration error (SD of linear fit residuals) and possible marker migration. For each patient, we determined the mean displacement of markers relative to the reference CT (systematic position error) and the spread in displacements (random position error). From this, we calculated the group systematic error, Σ, and group random error, σ. Results: Marker pair distances showed slight trends with time (range, −0.14 to 0.14 mm/day), possibly due to tissue deformation, but no shifts that would indicate marker migration. The mean SD of the fit residuals was 0.8 mm. We found large interfractional position variations, with for 116 of 300 (39%) fractions a 3-dimensional vector displacement of >10 mm. The spread in displacement varied significantly (P<.01) between patients, from a vector range of 9.1 mm to one of 24.6 mm. For the patient group, Σ was 3.8, 6.6, and 3.5 mm; and σ was 3.6, 4.7 and 2.5 mm, in left–right, superior–inferior, and anterior–posterior directions, respectively. Conclusions: We found large systematic displacements of the fiducial markers relative to bony anatomy, in addition to wide distributions of displacement. These results for interfractional position variation confirm the potential benefit of using fiducial markers rather than bony anatomy for daily online position verification for pancreatic cancer patients.« less
  • Purpose: To assess day-to-day differences between planned and delivered target volume (TV) and organ-at-risk (OAR) dose distributions in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and to investigate the dosimetric impact of setup corrections. Methods and Materials: For 14 patients previously treated with SBRT, the planning CT scan and three treatment scans (one for each fraction) were included in this study. For each treatment scan, two dose distributions were calculated: one using the planned setup for the body frame (no correction), and one using the clinically applied (corrected) setup derived from measured tumor displacements. Per scan, the two dose distributions weremore » mutually compared, and the clinically delivered distribution was compared with planning. Doses were recalculated in equivalent 2-Gy fraction doses. Statistical analysis was performed with the linear mixed model. Results: With setup corrections, the mean loss in TV coverage relative to planning was 1.7%, compared with 6.8% without corrections. For calculated equivalent uniform doses, these figures were 2.3% and 15.5%, respectively. As for the TV, mean deviations of delivered OAR doses from planning were small (between -0.4 and +0.3 Gy), but the spread was much larger for the OARs. In contrast to the TV, the mean impact of setup corrections on realized OAR doses was close to zero, with large positive and negative exceptions. Conclusions: Daily correction of the treatment setup is required to obtain adequate TV coverage. Because of day-to-day patient anatomy changes, large deviations in OAR doses from planning did occur. On average, setup corrections had no impact on these doses. Development of new procedures for image guidance and adaptive protocols is warranted.« less
  • Purpose: To evaluate the use of megavoltage cone-beam computed tomography (MV CBCT) to measure interfractional variation in lung tumor position. Methods and Materials: Eight non-small-cell lung cancer patients participated in the study, 4 with respiratory gating and 4 without. All patients underwent MV CBCT scanning at weekly intervals. Contoured planning CT and MV CBCT images were spatially registered based on vertebral anatomy, and displacements of the tumor centroid determined. Setup error was assessed by comparing weekly portal orthogonal radiographs with digitally reconstructed radiographs generated from planning CT images. Hypothesis testing was performed to test the statistical significance of the volumemore » difference, centroid displacement, and setup uncertainty. Results: The vertebral bodies and soft tissue portions of tumor within lung were visible on the MV CBCT scans. Statistically significant systematic volume decrease over the course of treatment was observed for 1 patient. The average centroid displacement between simulation CT and MV CBCT scans were 2.5 mm, -2.0 mm, and -1.5 mm with standard deviations of 2.7 mm, 2.7 mm, and 2.6 mm in the right-left, anterior-posterior and superior-inferior directions. The mean setup errors were smaller than the centroid shifts, while the standard deviations were comparable. In most cases, the gross tumor volume (GTV) defined on the MV CBCT was located on average at least 5 mm inside a 10 mm expansion of the GTV defined on the planning CT scan. Conclusions: The MV CBCT technique can be used to image lung tumors and may prove valuable for image-guided radiotherapy. Our conclusions must be verified in view of the small patient number.« less
  • Purpose: To present a technique that can be implemented in-house to evaluate the efficacy of immobilization and image-guided setup of patients with different treatment sites on helical tomotherapy. This technique uses an analysis of alignment shifts between kilovoltage computed tomography and post-treatment megavoltage computed tomography images. The determination of the shifts calculated by the helical tomotherapy software for a given site can then be used to define appropriate planning target volume internal margins. Methods and Materials: Twelve patients underwent post-treatment megavoltage computed tomography scans on a helical tomotherapy machine to assess patient setup fidelity and net intrafraction motion. Shifts weremore » studied for the prostate, head and neck, and glioblastoma multiforme. Analysis of these data was performed using automatic and manual registration of the kilovoltage computed tomography and post-megavoltage computed tomography images. Results: The shifts were largest for the prostate, followed by the head and neck, with glioblastoma multiforme having the smallest shifts in general. It appears that it might be more appropriate to use asymmetric planning target volume margins. Each margin value reported is equal to two standard deviations of the average shift in the given direction. Conclusion: This method could be applied using individual patient post-image scanning and combined with adaptive planning to reduce or increase the margins as appropriate.« less