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

Title: Residual Seminal Vesicle Displacement in Marker-Based Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer and the Impact on Margin Design

Abstract

Purpose: The objectives of this study were to quantify residual interfraction displacement of seminal vesicles (SV) and investigate the efficacy of rotation correction on SV displacement in marker-based prostate image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). We also determined the effect of marker registration on the measured SV displacement and its impact on margin design. Methods and Materials: SV displacement was determined relative to marker registration by using 296 cone beam computed tomography scans of 13 prostate cancer patients with implanted markers. SV were individually registered in the transverse plane, based on gray-value information. The target registration error (TRE) for the SV due to marker registration inaccuracies was estimated. Correlations between prostate gland rotations and SV displacement and between individual SV displacements were determined. Results: The SV registration success rate was 99%. Displacement amounts of both SVs were comparable. Systematic and random residual SV displacements were 1.6 mm and 2.0 mm in the left-right direction, respectively, and 2.8 mm and 3.1 mm in the anteroposterior (AP) direction, respectively. Rotation correction did not reduce residual SV displacement. Prostate gland rotation around the left-right axis correlated with SV AP displacement (R{sup 2} = 42%); a correlation existed between both SVs for AP displacement (R{sup 2} =more » 62%); considerable correlation existed between random errors of SV displacement and TRE (R{sup 2} = 34%). Conclusions: Considerable residual SV displacement exists in marker-based IGRT. Rotation correction barely reduced SV displacement, rather, a larger SV displacement was shown relative to the prostate gland that was not captured by the marker position. Marker registration error partly explains SV displacement when correcting for rotations. Correcting for rotations, therefore, is not advisable when SV are part of the target volume. Margin design for SVs should take these uncertainties into account.« less

Authors:
; ;  [1];  [2];  [3];  [1];  [1]
  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam (Netherlands)
  2. Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, Ontario Cancer Institute, Department of Radiation Oncology, Toronto (Canada)
  3. Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, Ontario Cancer Institute, Department of Radiation Physics, Toronto (Canada)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
21491780
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics; Journal Volume: 80; Journal Issue: 2; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.026; PII: S0360-3016(10)00875-8; Copyright (c) 2011 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; CORRECTIONS; CORRELATIONS; ERRORS; NEOPLASMS; PROSTATE; RADIOTHERAPY; ROTATION; BODY; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES; DISEASES; GLANDS; MALE GENITALS; MEDICINE; MOTION; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ORGANS; RADIOLOGY; THERAPY; TOMOGRAPHY

Citation Formats

Smitsmans, Monique H.P., Bois, Josien de, Sonke, Jan-Jakob, Catton, Charles N., Jaffray, David A., Lebesque, Joos V., and Herk, Marcel van, E-mail: portal@nki.n. Residual Seminal Vesicle Displacement in Marker-Based Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer and the Impact on Margin Design. United States: N. p., 2011. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.026.
Smitsmans, Monique H.P., Bois, Josien de, Sonke, Jan-Jakob, Catton, Charles N., Jaffray, David A., Lebesque, Joos V., & Herk, Marcel van, E-mail: portal@nki.n. Residual Seminal Vesicle Displacement in Marker-Based Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer and the Impact on Margin Design. United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.026.
Smitsmans, Monique H.P., Bois, Josien de, Sonke, Jan-Jakob, Catton, Charles N., Jaffray, David A., Lebesque, Joos V., and Herk, Marcel van, E-mail: portal@nki.n. Wed . "Residual Seminal Vesicle Displacement in Marker-Based Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer and the Impact on Margin Design". United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.026.
@article{osti_21491780,
title = {Residual Seminal Vesicle Displacement in Marker-Based Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer and the Impact on Margin Design},
author = {Smitsmans, Monique H.P. and Bois, Josien de and Sonke, Jan-Jakob and Catton, Charles N. and Jaffray, David A. and Lebesque, Joos V. and Herk, Marcel van, E-mail: portal@nki.n},
abstractNote = {Purpose: The objectives of this study were to quantify residual interfraction displacement of seminal vesicles (SV) and investigate the efficacy of rotation correction on SV displacement in marker-based prostate image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). We also determined the effect of marker registration on the measured SV displacement and its impact on margin design. Methods and Materials: SV displacement was determined relative to marker registration by using 296 cone beam computed tomography scans of 13 prostate cancer patients with implanted markers. SV were individually registered in the transverse plane, based on gray-value information. The target registration error (TRE) for the SV due to marker registration inaccuracies was estimated. Correlations between prostate gland rotations and SV displacement and between individual SV displacements were determined. Results: The SV registration success rate was 99%. Displacement amounts of both SVs were comparable. Systematic and random residual SV displacements were 1.6 mm and 2.0 mm in the left-right direction, respectively, and 2.8 mm and 3.1 mm in the anteroposterior (AP) direction, respectively. Rotation correction did not reduce residual SV displacement. Prostate gland rotation around the left-right axis correlated with SV AP displacement (R{sup 2} = 42%); a correlation existed between both SVs for AP displacement (R{sup 2} = 62%); considerable correlation existed between random errors of SV displacement and TRE (R{sup 2} = 34%). Conclusions: Considerable residual SV displacement exists in marker-based IGRT. Rotation correction barely reduced SV displacement, rather, a larger SV displacement was shown relative to the prostate gland that was not captured by the marker position. Marker registration error partly explains SV displacement when correcting for rotations. Correcting for rotations, therefore, is not advisable when SV are part of the target volume. Margin design for SVs should take these uncertainties into account.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.026},
journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
number = 2,
volume = 80,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2011},
month = {Wed Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2011}
}