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

Title: SU-E-J-39: Dosimetric Benefit of Implanted Marker-Based CBCT Setup for Definitive Prostatic Radiotherapy

Abstract

Purpose Daily setup for definitive prostatic radiotherapy is challenged by suboptimal visibility of the prostate boundary and daily variation of rectum shape and position. For patients with improved bowel preparation, we conducted a dosimetric comparison between prostate implanted marker (IM)-based daily setup and anterior rectal wall (ARW)-based setup, with the hypothesis that the former leads to adequate target coverage with better rectal sparing. Methods Five IMRT/VMAT prostate cases with implanted markers were selected for analysis. Daily CBCT showed improvement of the rectal volume compared to planning CT. For each patient, the prostate and rectum were contoured on three CBCT images (fraction 5/15/25) with subsequent physician review. The CBCTs were then registered to a planning CT using IM-based registration. The deviation of ARW positions from planning CT to CBCT were analyzed at various sup-inf levels (−1.8 cm to 1.8 cm from level of prostate center). To estimate the potential dosimetric impact from ARW-based setup, the treatment plans were recalculated using A-P shifts ranging from −1mm to +6mm. Clinically important rectum DVH values including Dmax, D3cc and Dmean were computed. Results For the studied patients, we observed on average 32% rectum volume reduction from planning CT to CBCT. As a Results, themore » ARW on average shifts posteriorly by −1mm to +5mm, depending on the sup-inf level of observation, with larger shifts observed at more superior levels. Recalculation shows that when ARW shifts 1mm posteriorly, ARW-based CBCT setup leads to a 1.0%, 4.2%, and 3.2% increase in rectum Dmax, D3cc, and Dmean, respectively, compared to IM-based setup. The dosimetric deviations increase to 4.7%, 25.8% and 24.7% when ARW shifts 6mm posteriorly. No significant prostate-only dose difference was observed. Conclusion For patients with improved bowel preparation, IM-based CBCT setup leads to accurate prostate coverage along with significantly lower rectal dose, compared to ARW-based setup.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22494065
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGES; PATIENTS; PROSTATE; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; RECTUM

Citation Formats

Zhen, H, Wu, Z, Bluemenfeld, P, Chu, J, and Wang, D. SU-E-J-39: Dosimetric Benefit of Implanted Marker-Based CBCT Setup for Definitive Prostatic Radiotherapy. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924126.
Zhen, H, Wu, Z, Bluemenfeld, P, Chu, J, & Wang, D. SU-E-J-39: Dosimetric Benefit of Implanted Marker-Based CBCT Setup for Definitive Prostatic Radiotherapy. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924126.
Zhen, H, Wu, Z, Bluemenfeld, P, Chu, J, and Wang, D. Mon . "SU-E-J-39: Dosimetric Benefit of Implanted Marker-Based CBCT Setup for Definitive Prostatic Radiotherapy". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924126.
@article{osti_22494065,
title = {SU-E-J-39: Dosimetric Benefit of Implanted Marker-Based CBCT Setup for Definitive Prostatic Radiotherapy},
author = {Zhen, H and Wu, Z and Bluemenfeld, P and Chu, J and Wang, D},
abstractNote = {Purpose Daily setup for definitive prostatic radiotherapy is challenged by suboptimal visibility of the prostate boundary and daily variation of rectum shape and position. For patients with improved bowel preparation, we conducted a dosimetric comparison between prostate implanted marker (IM)-based daily setup and anterior rectal wall (ARW)-based setup, with the hypothesis that the former leads to adequate target coverage with better rectal sparing. Methods Five IMRT/VMAT prostate cases with implanted markers were selected for analysis. Daily CBCT showed improvement of the rectal volume compared to planning CT. For each patient, the prostate and rectum were contoured on three CBCT images (fraction 5/15/25) with subsequent physician review. The CBCTs were then registered to a planning CT using IM-based registration. The deviation of ARW positions from planning CT to CBCT were analyzed at various sup-inf levels (−1.8 cm to 1.8 cm from level of prostate center). To estimate the potential dosimetric impact from ARW-based setup, the treatment plans were recalculated using A-P shifts ranging from −1mm to +6mm. Clinically important rectum DVH values including Dmax, D3cc and Dmean were computed. Results For the studied patients, we observed on average 32% rectum volume reduction from planning CT to CBCT. As a Results, the ARW on average shifts posteriorly by −1mm to +5mm, depending on the sup-inf level of observation, with larger shifts observed at more superior levels. Recalculation shows that when ARW shifts 1mm posteriorly, ARW-based CBCT setup leads to a 1.0%, 4.2%, and 3.2% increase in rectum Dmax, D3cc, and Dmean, respectively, compared to IM-based setup. The dosimetric deviations increase to 4.7%, 25.8% and 24.7% when ARW shifts 6mm posteriorly. No significant prostate-only dose difference was observed. Conclusion For patients with improved bowel preparation, IM-based CBCT setup leads to accurate prostate coverage along with significantly lower rectal dose, compared to ARW-based setup.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924126},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
  • Purpose: To quantify setup errors by pretreatment kilovolt cone-beam computed tomography(KV-CBCT) scans for middle or distal esophageal carcinoma patients. Methods: Fifty-two consecutive middle or distal esophageal carcinoma patients who underwent IMRT were included this study. A planning CT scan using a big-bore CT simulator was performed in the treatment position and was used as the reference scan for image registration with CBCT. CBCT scans(On-Board Imaging v1. 5 system, Varian Medical Systems) were acquired daily during the first treatment week. A total of 260 CBCT scans was assessed with a registration clip box defined around the PTV-thorax in the reference scanmore » based on(nine CBCTs per patient) bony anatomy using Offline Review software v10.0(Varian Medical Systems). The anterior-posterior(AP), left-right(LR), superiorinferior( SI) corrections were recorded. The systematic and random errors were calculated. The CTV-to-PTV margins in each CBCT frequency was based on the Van Herk formula (2.5Σ+0.7σ). Results: The SD of systematic error (Σ) was 2.0mm, 2.3mm, 3.8mm in the AP, LR and SI directions, respectively. The average random error (σ) was 1.6mm, 2.4mm, 4.1mm in the AP, LR and SI directions, respectively. The CTV-to-PTV safety margin was 6.1mm, 7.5mm, 12.3mm in the AP, LR and SI directions based on van Herk formula. Conclusion: Our data recommend the use of 6 mm, 8mm, and 12 mm for esophageal carcinoma patient setup in AP, LR, SI directions, respectively.« less
  • Purpose: To assess an accuracy of fiducial maker-based setup using ExacTrac (ExT-based setup) as compared with soft tissue-based setup using Cone-beam CT (CBCT-based setup) for patients with prostate cancer receiving intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for the purpose of investigating whether ExT-based setup can be an alternative to CBCT-based setup. Methods: The setup accuracy was analyzed prospectively for 7 prostate cancer patients with implanted three fiducial markers received IMRT. All patients were treated after CBCT-based setup was performed and corresponding shifts were recorded. ExacTrac images were obtained before and after CBCT-based setup. The fiducial marker-based shifts were calculated based on thosemore » two images and recorded on the assumption that the setup correction was carried out by fiducial marker-based auto correction. Mean and standard deviation of absolute differences and the correlation between CBCT and ExT shifts were estimated. Results: A total of 178 image dataset were analyzed. On the differences between CBCT and ExT shifts, 133 (75%) of 178 image dataset resulted in smaller differences than 3 mm in all dimensions. Mean differences in the anterior-posterior (AP), superior-inferior (SI), and left-right (LR) dimensions were 1.8 ± 1.9 mm, 0.7 ± 1.9 mm, and 0.6 ± 0.8 mm, respectively. The percentages of shift agreements within ±3 mm were 76% for AP, 90% for SI, and 100% for LR. The Pearson coefficient of correlation for CBCT and ExT shifts were 0.80 for AP, 0.80 for SI, and 0.65 for LR. Conclusion: This work showed that the accuracy of ExT-based setup was correlated with that of CBCT-based setup, implying that ExT-based setup has a potential ability to be an alternative to CBCT-based setup. The further work is to specify the conditions that ExT-based setup can provide the accuracy comparable to CBCT-based setup.« less
  • Purpose: To compare two registration methods in the CBCT guided radiotherapy for cervical carcinoma, analyze the setup errors and registration methods, determine the margin required for clinical target volume(CTV) extending to planning target volume(PTV). Methods: Twenty patients with cervical carcinoma were enrolled. All patients were underwent CT simulation in the supine position. Transfering the CT images to the treatment planning system and defining the CTV, PTV and the organs at risk (OAR), then transmit them to the XVI workshop. CBCT scans were performed before radiotherapy and registered to planning CT images according to bone and gray value registration methods. Comparedmore » two methods and obtain left-right(X), superior-inferior(Y), anterior-posterior (Z) setup errors, the margin required for CTV to PTV were calculated. Results: Setup errors were unavoidable in postoperative cervical carcinoma irradiation. The setup errors measured by method of bone (systemic ± random) on X(1eft.right),Y(superior.inferior),Z(anterior.posterior) directions were(0.24±3.62),(0.77±5.05) and (0.13±3.89)mm, respectively, the setup errors measured by method of grey (systemic ± random) on X(1eft-right), Y(superior-inferior), Z(anterior-posterior) directions were(0.31±3.93), (0.85±5.16) and (0.21±4.12)mm, respectively.The spatial distributions of setup error was maximum in Y direction. The margins were 4 mm in X axis, 6 mm in Y axis, 4 mm in Z axis respectively.These two registration methods were similar and highly recommended. Conclusion: Both bone and grey registration methods could offer an accurate setup error. The influence of setup errors of a PTV margin would be suggested by 4mm, 4mm and 6mm on X, Y and Z directions for postoperative radiotherapy for cervical carcinoma.« less
  • Purpose: Our previous study showed that weekly dose monitoring using cone-beam CT (CBCT) images can guide the timing and need for adaptive re-planning during the treatment of head and neck (HN) cancer. Here we aim to confirm the dosimetric improvement of adaptive radiotherapy (ART) using weekly CBCTs. Methods: We randomly selected seven HN patients treated with ART due to noticeable anatomic changes. Twenty weekly images acquired during the second treatment course were included. These CBCTs were aligned with both the initial and re-planning simulation CTs according to the clinical shifts. Daily doses were re-calculated for both the initial and adaptivemore » plans. Contours of the tumor and organs-at-risk (OARs) were manually delineated by a physician on the re-planning CT and then were transferred to the CBCTs for plan evaluation. Contour modifications were made based on the daily anatomic changes observed on CBCTs. All patients were treated with 70Gy to the primary tumor and 56Gy to the elective lymph nodes. Results: Volumetric changes of the tumor (range — 43.9%∼+15.9%) were observed. The average D99 to the primary tumor was (70.1±2.0)Gy (range 62.2∼72.5Gy) for the adaptive plan and (66.0±5.5)Gy (range 50.9∼70.7Gy) for the initial plan(p<<0.01). The average D99 to the elective neck was (56.3±1.3)Gy (range 52.8∼59.2Gy) for the adaptive plan and (52.4±7.0)Gy (range 37.7∼58.6Gy) for the initial plan(p=0.01). The parotid decreased in volume during the treatment course (range 7.3%∼42.2%). The average D-mean to the spared parotid decreased by 15.3% (p=0.002) for the adaptive plan when compared to the original. With ART, 4 out of 7 patients experienced better sparing of the spinal cord (D-max reduced by 2.5%∼10.2%) and the oral cavity (D-mean reduced by 3.5%∼20.1%). Conclusion: Weekly CBCT dosimetry confirms that ART is an effective method to accommodate on-treatment anatomic changes. In select patients, tumor coverage and OAR sparing may be improved with ART. Research is funded by Siemens.« less
  • Purpose: Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map may help to delineate the gross tumor volume (GTV) in prostate gland. Dose painting with external beam radiotherapy for GTV might increase the local tumor control. The purpose of this study is to explore the maximum boosting dose on GTV using VMAT without sacrificing sparing of organs at risk (OARs) in MRI based planning. Methods: VMAT plans for 5 prostate patients were generated following the commonly used dose volume (DV) criteria based on structures contoured on T2 weighted MRI with bulk electron density assignment using electron densities derived from ICRU46. GTV for each patientmore » was manually delineated based on ADC maps and fused to T2-weighted image set for planning study. A research planning system with Monte Carlo dose engine (Monaco, Elekta) was used to generate the VMAT plans with boosting dose on GTV gradually increased from 85Gy to 100Gy. DV parameters, including V(boosting-dose) (volume covered by boosting dose) for GTV, V75.6Gy for PTV, V45Gy, V70Gy, V72Gy and D1cc (Maximum dose to 1cc volume) for rectum and bladder, were used to measure plan quality. Results: All cases achieve at least 99.0% coverage of V(boosting-dose) on GTV and 95% coverage of V75.6Gy to the PTV. All the DV criteria, V45Gy≤50% and V70Gy≤15% for bladder and rectum, D1cc ≤77Gy (Rectum) and ≤80Gy (Bladder), V72Gy≤5% (rectum and bladder) were maintained when boosting GTV to 95Gy for all cases studied. Except for two patients, all the criteria were also met when the boosting dose goes to 100Gy. Conclusion: It is dosimetrically feasible safe to boost the dose to at least 95Gy to ADC defined GTV in prostate cancer using MRI guided VMAT delivery. Conclusion: It is dosimetrically feasible safe to boost the dose to at least 95Gy to ADC defined GTV in prostate cancer using MRI guided VMAT delivery. This research is partially supported by Elekta Inc.« less