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

Title: SU-F-T-316: A Model to Deal with Dosimetric and Delivery Uncertainties in Radiotherapy Treatment Planning

Abstract

Purpose The conventional way of dealing with uncertainties resulting from dose calculation or beam delivery in IMRT, is to do verification measurements for the plan in question. Here we present an alternative based on recommendations given in the AAPM 142 report and treatment specific parameters that model the uncertainties for the plan delivery. Methods Basis of the model is the assignment of uncertainty parameters to all segment fields or control point sequences of a plan. The given field shape is analyzed for complexity, dose rate, number of MU, field size related output as well as factors for in/out field position and penumbra regions. Together with depth related uncertainties, a 3D matrix is generated by a projection algorithm. Patient anatomy is included as uncertainty CT data set as well. Therefore, object density is classified in 4 categories close to water, lung, bone and gradient regions with additional uncertainties. The result is then exported as a DICOM dose file by the software tool (written in IDL, Exelis), having the given resolution and target point. Results Uncertainty matrixes for several patient cases have been calculated and compared side by side in the planning system. The result is not quite always intuitive but itmore » clearly indicates high and low uncertainties related to OARs and target volumes as well as to measured gamma distributions.ConclusionThe imported uncertainty datasets may help the treatment planner to understand the complexity of the treatment plan. He then might decide to change the plan to produce a more suited uncertainty distribution, e.g. by changing the beam angles the high uncertainty spots can be influenced or try to use another treatment setup, resulting in a plan with lower uncertainties. A next step could be to include such a model into the optimization algorithm to add a new dose uncertainty constraint.« less

Authors:
; ;  [1]
  1. DKFZ, Heidelberg (Germany)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648922
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 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; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; COMPUTER CODES; DELIVERY; DOSE RATES; MATRICES; PLANNING; RADIOTHERAPY

Citation Formats

Haering, P, Lang, C, and Splinter, M. SU-F-T-316: A Model to Deal with Dosimetric and Delivery Uncertainties in Radiotherapy Treatment Planning. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956501.
Haering, P, Lang, C, & Splinter, M. SU-F-T-316: A Model to Deal with Dosimetric and Delivery Uncertainties in Radiotherapy Treatment Planning. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956501.
Haering, P, Lang, C, and Splinter, M. 2016. "SU-F-T-316: A Model to Deal with Dosimetric and Delivery Uncertainties in Radiotherapy Treatment Planning". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956501.
@article{osti_22648922,
title = {SU-F-T-316: A Model to Deal with Dosimetric and Delivery Uncertainties in Radiotherapy Treatment Planning},
author = {Haering, P and Lang, C and Splinter, M},
abstractNote = {Purpose The conventional way of dealing with uncertainties resulting from dose calculation or beam delivery in IMRT, is to do verification measurements for the plan in question. Here we present an alternative based on recommendations given in the AAPM 142 report and treatment specific parameters that model the uncertainties for the plan delivery. Methods Basis of the model is the assignment of uncertainty parameters to all segment fields or control point sequences of a plan. The given field shape is analyzed for complexity, dose rate, number of MU, field size related output as well as factors for in/out field position and penumbra regions. Together with depth related uncertainties, a 3D matrix is generated by a projection algorithm. Patient anatomy is included as uncertainty CT data set as well. Therefore, object density is classified in 4 categories close to water, lung, bone and gradient regions with additional uncertainties. The result is then exported as a DICOM dose file by the software tool (written in IDL, Exelis), having the given resolution and target point. Results Uncertainty matrixes for several patient cases have been calculated and compared side by side in the planning system. The result is not quite always intuitive but it clearly indicates high and low uncertainties related to OARs and target volumes as well as to measured gamma distributions.ConclusionThe imported uncertainty datasets may help the treatment planner to understand the complexity of the treatment plan. He then might decide to change the plan to produce a more suited uncertainty distribution, e.g. by changing the beam angles the high uncertainty spots can be influenced or try to use another treatment setup, resulting in a plan with lower uncertainties. A next step could be to include such a model into the optimization algorithm to add a new dose uncertainty constraint.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956501},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • This study aimed to assess the dosimetric impact of setup errors during the delivery of radiotherapy to the breast, and use this information to make recommendations on intervention tolerances for portal imaging of breast treatments. Translational and rotational setup errors were simulated for 10 recent breast patients using an Oncentra MasterPlan treatment planning system. The effect of these errors on the breast and tumor bed target volumes receiving 95% and 107% of the prescribed dose were assessed. For the majority of patients, shifts of up to 10 mm or a 4 deg. patient rotation about the cranio-caudal axis had nomore » significant effect on the dose distribution. Changes in dosimetry were more likely if the reference plan contained large hot or cold spots. For a typical patient, it is estimated that a shift of 5 mm in any one direction, or a 2 deg. patient rotation would not cause more than a 5% change in the target volume receiving between 95% and 107% of the prescribed dose. If combinations of errors occur, greater dosimetric changes would be expected. It is concluded that individual patient shifts of up to 5 mm or rotations about the cranio-caudal axis of 2 deg. or less are unlikely to affect dose-volume histogram parameters by an amount judged as clinically significant. Setup errors exceeding these values may cause large dosimetric changes for some patients, particularly those with larger hot or cold regions in the dose distribution, and intervention is therefore recommended.« less
  • Purpose: Dosimetry for targeted radionuclide therapy (TRT) is moving away from conventional model-based methods towards patient-specific approaches. To address this need, a Monte Carlo (MC) dosimetry platform was developed to estimate patient-specific therapeutic 3D dose distributions based on pre-treatment imaging. However, because a standard practice for patient-specific internal dosimetry has not yet been established, there are many sources of dosimetric uncertainties. The goal of this work was to quantify the sensitivity of various parameters on MC dose estimations. Methods: The ‘diapeutic’ agent, CLR1404, was used as a proof-of-principle compound in this work. CLR1404 can be radiolabeled with either {sup 124}Imore » for PET imaging or {sup 131}I for radiotherapy or SPECT imaging. PET/CT images of 5 mice were acquired out to 240 hrs post-injection of {sup 124}I-CLR1404. The therapeutic {sup 131}I-CLR1404 absorbed dose (AD) distribution was calculated using a Geant4-based MC dosimetry platform. A series of sensitivity studies were performed. The variables that were investigated included the PET/CT voxel resolution, partial volume corrections (PVC), material segmentation, inter-observer contouring variability, and the pre-treatment image acquisition frequency. Results: Resampling the PET/CT voxel size between 0.2–0.8 mm resulted in up to a 13% variation in the mean AD. Application of the PVC increased the mean AD by 0.5–11.2%. Less than 1% differences in ROI mean AD were observed between the tissue segmentation schemes using 4 and 27 different material compositions. Inter-observer contouring variability led to up to a 20% CoV (stdev/mean) in the mean AD between the users. Varying the number and frequency of pre-treatment images used resulted in changes in mean AD up to 176% compared to the case using all 12 images. Conclusion: Voxel resolution, contour segmentation, the image acquisition protocol most significantly impacted patient-specific TRT dosimetry. Further work is needed to develop a standard protocol that optimizes accuracy and efficiency for patient-specific internal dosimetry. BT and JG are affiliated with Cellectar Biosciences which owns the licensing rights to CLR1404 and related compounds.« less
  • Purpose: To perform a comparison of two pelvic lymph node volume delineation strategies used in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for high risk prostate cancer and to determine the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods and Materials: Eighteen consecutive patients accrued to an ongoing clinical trial were identified according to either the nodal contouring strategy as described based on lymphotropic nanoparticle-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging technology (9 patients) or the current Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) consensus guidelines (9 patients). Radiation consisted of 45 Gy to prostate, seminal vesicles, and lymph nodes, with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate alone,more » to a total dose of 67.5 Gy delivered in 25 fractions. Prospective acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were compared at baseline, during radiotherapy, and 3 months after radiotherapy. Each patient was retrospectively replanned using the opposite method of nodal contouring, and plans were normalized for dosimetric comparison. VMAT plans were also generated according to the RTOG method for comparison. Results: RTOG plans resulted in a significantly lower rate of genitourinary frequency 3 months after treatment. The dosimetric comparison showed that the RTOG plans resulted in both favorable planning target volume (PTV) coverage and lower organs at risk (OARs) and integral (ID) doses. VMAT required two to three arcs to achieve adequate treatment plans, we did not observe consistent dosimetric benefits to either the PTV or the OARs, and a higher ID was observed. However, treatment times were significantly shorter with VMAT. Conclusion: The RTOG guidelines for pelvic nodal volume delineation results in favorable dosimetry and acceptable acute toxicities for both the target and OARs. We are unable to conclude that VMAT provides a benefit compared with IMRT.« less
  • Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatments have high-dose gradients and even slight patient misalignment from the simulation to treatment could lead to target underdosing or organ at risk (OAR) overdosing. Daily real-time SBRT treatment planning could minimize the risk of geographic miss. As an initial step toward determining the clinical feasibility of developing real-time SBRT treatment planning, we determined the calculation time of helical TomoTherapy-based STAT radiation therapy (RT) treatment plans for simple liver, lung, and spine SBRT treatments to assess whether the planning process was fast enough for practical clinical implementation. Representative SBRT planning target volumes for hypothetical liver,more » peripheral lung, and thoracic spine lesions and adjacent OARs were contoured onto a planning computed tomography scan (CT) of an anthropomorphic phantom. Treatment plans were generated using both STAT RT 'full scatter' and conventional helical TomoTherapy 'beamlet' algorithms. Optimized plans were compared with respect to conformality index (CI), heterogeneity index (HI), and maximum dose to regional OARs to determine clinical equivalence and the number of required STAT RT optimization iterations and calculation times were determined. The liver and lung dosimetry for the STAT RT and standard planning algorithms were clinically and statistically equivalent. For the liver lesions, 'full scatter' and 'beamlet' algorithms showed a CI of 1.04 and 1.04 and HI of 1.03 and 1.03, respectively. For the lung lesions, 'full scatter' and 'beamlet' algorithms showed a CI of 1.05 and 1.03 and HI of 1.05and 1.05, respectively. For spine lesions, 'full scatter' and 'beamlet' algorithms showed a CI of 1.15 and 1.14 and HI of 1.22 and 1.14, respectively. There was no difference between treatment algorithms with respect to maximum doses to the OARs. The STAT RT iteration time with current treatment planning systems is 45 sec, and the treatment planning required 3 iterations or 135 sec for STAT RT liver and lung SBRT plans and 7 iterations or 315 sec for STAT RT spine SBRT plans. Helical TomoTherapy-based STAT RT treatment planning with the 'full scatter' algorithm provides levels of dosimetric conformality, heterogeneity, and OAR avoidance for SBRT treatments that are clinically equivalent to those generated with the Helical TomoTherapy 'beamlet' algorithm. STAT RT calculation times for simple SBRT treatments are fast enough to warrant further investigation into their potential incorporation into an SBRT program with daily real-time planning. Development of methods for accurate target and OAR determination on megavoltage computed tomography scans incorporating high-resolution diagnostic image co-registration software and CT detector-based exit dose measurement for quality assurance are necessary to build a real-time SBRT planning and delivery program.« less
  • Purpose: To develop treatment planning workflow for rapid radiotherapy delivered with very-high energy electron (VHEE) scanning beam. Methods: VHEE radiotherapy treatment planning was performed by linking Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculations with inverse optimization in a research version of RayStation. In order to study a number of treatment parameters, a Matlab graphical user interface (GUI) for calculation of VHEE beamlet dose was developed. Through the GUI, EGSnrc MC simulations were run for a number of beam energies, number of beams, beamlet spot and grid sizes, and machine bore sizes. VHEE plans for a pediatric patient with a 4.3 cm{sup 3}more » brain target optimized with spot-scanning algorithm in RayStation were compared to the clinically delivered 6 MV VMAT plan. Results and Discussion: VHEE beam energy had the largest effect on the quality of dose distributions. For the same target dose, the mean doses to critical organs decreased by 10–15% when planned with 100 MeV compared to 60 MeV. VHEE plans calculated with 36 beams outperformed plans calculated with 13 and 17 beams. While beamlet spacing and bore size had a small effect on VHEE dose distributions, 0.1-3mm beamlet sizes resulted in identical dose distributions. Critical organ doses were by up to 70% lower in the best VHEE plan compared to the clinical 6 MV VMAT plan. Conclusions: We have developed a GUI for MC beamlet generation for treatment planning of VHEE radiotherapy. We have demonstrated that pediatric VHEE plans resulted in significant critical organ dose sparing compared to the clinical VMAT plan.« less