Ben J. Mijnheer

Set-up verification using portal imaging; review of current clinical practice

In this review of current clinical practice of set-up error verification by means of portal imaging, we firstly define the various types of set-up errors using a consistent nomenclature. The different causes of set-up errors are then summarized. Next, the results of a large number of studies regarding patient set-up verification are presented for treatments of patients with head and neck, prostate, pelvis, lung and breast cancer, as well as for mantle field/total body treatments. This review focuses on the more recent studies in order to assess the criteria for good clinical practice in patient positioning. The reported set-up accuracy varies widely, depending on the treatment site, method of immobilization and institution. The standard deviation (1 SD, mm) of the systematic and random errors for currently applied treatment techniques, separately measured along the three principle axes, ranges from 1.6-4.6 and 1.1-2.5 (head and neck), 1.0-3.8 and 1.2-3.5 (prostate), 1.1-4.7 and 1.1-4.9 (pelvis), 1.8-5.1 and 2.2-5.4 (lung), and 1.0-4.7 and 1.7-14.4 (breast), respectively. Recommendations for procedures to quantify, report and reduce patient set-up errors are given based on the studies described in this review. Using these recommendations, the systematic and random set-up errors that can be achieved in routine clinical practice can be less than 2.0 mm (1 SD) for head and neck, 2.5 mm (1 SD) for prostate, 3.0 mm (1 SD) for general pelvic and 3.5 mm (1 SD) for lung cancer treatment techniques.

A literature review of electronic portal imaging for radiotherapy dosimetry

Electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) have been the preferred tools for verification of patient positioning for radiotherapy in recent decades. Since EPID images contain dose information, many groups have investigated their use for radiotherapy dose measurement. With the introduction of the amorphous-silicon EPIDs, the interest in EPID dosimetry has been accelerated because of the favourable characteristics such as fast image acquisition, high resolution, digital format, and potential for in vivo measurements and 3D dose verification. As a result, the number of publications dealing with EPID dosimetry has increased considerably over the past approximately 15 years. The purpose of this paper was to review the information provided in these publications. Information available in the literature included dosimetric characteristics and calibration procedures of various types of EPIDs, strategies to use EPIDs for dose verification, clinical approaches to EPID dosimetry, ranging from point dose to full 3D dose distribution verification, and current clinical experience. Quality control of a linear accelerator, pre-treatment dose verification and in vivo dosimetry using EPIDs are now routinely used in a growing number of clinics. The use of EPIDs for dosimetry purposes has matured and is now a reliable and accurate dose verification method that can be used in a large number of situations. Methods to integrate 3D in vivo dosimetry and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) procedures, such as the use of kV or MV cone-beam CT, are under development. It has been shown that EPID dosimetry can play an integral role in the total chain of verification procedures that are implemented in a radiotherapy department. It provides a safety net for simple to advanced treatments, as well as a full account of the dose delivered. Despite these favourable characteristics and the vast range of publications on the subject, there is still a lack of commercially available solutions for EPID dosimetry. As strategies evolve and commercial products become available, EPID dosimetry has the potential to become an accurate and efficient means of large-scale patient-specific IMRT dose verification for any radiotherapy department.

What degree of accuracy is required and can be achieved in photon and neutron therapy

In this paper an attempt is made to formulate criteria for the accuracy in the delivery of absorbed dose to a patient during photon or neutron therapy. These requirements are mainly based on the relative steepness of dose-effect curves for local tumour control and normal tissue damage. A review of these dose-effect curves after photon irradiation shows a great variety in steepness; the curves for normal tissue complications in general may be steeper than those for local tumour control. From these data a standard requirement for the combined uncertainty of type A (random) and type B (systematic), given as one relative standard deviation, in the absorbed dose delivery of 3.5% is proposed, even though it is known that in many cases larger values are acceptable and in a few special cases an even smaller value should be aimed at. From the available radiobiological and clinical data it can be concluded that no statistically significant difference can be observed in the relative steepness of dose-effect curves after photon or neutron irradiation. Similar limits will thus be requested in neutron therapy. The uncertainties in the various steps involved in the delivery of an absorbed dose to a point in a patient have been analysed for a treatment with two parallel-opposed beams. The results of this analysis showed that even for these simple treatment conditions, the required accuracy in the delivery of the absorbed dose cannot completely be obtained in photon therapy, and not nearly in neutron therapy. The uncertainties in physical, radiobiological and clinical approaches for weighting of the biological effectiveness of neutron radiation have been compared. The uncertainty in the RBE ratio will replace the type B uncertainty in the absorbed dose during patient treatment if the same dosimetry protocol is applied during biological and clinical procedures.

Tolerances for the accuracy of photon beam dose calculations of treatment planning systems

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To design a consistent set of criteria for acceptability of photon beam dose calculations of treatment planning systems. The set should be applicable in combination with a test package used for evaluation of a treatment planning system, such as the ones proposed by the AAPM Task Group 23 or by the Netherlands Commission on Radiation Dosimetry. RESULTS Tolerances have been defined for the accuracy with which a treatment planning system should be able to calculate the dose in different parts of a photon beam: the central beam axis and regions with large and small dose gradients. For increasing complexity of the geometry, wider tolerances are allowed, varying between 2 and 5%. For the evaluation of a large number of data points an additional quantity, the confidence limit, has been introduced, which combines the influence of systematic and random deviations. The proposed tolerances have been compared with other recommendations for a number of clinically relevant examples, showing considerable differences, which are partly due to the way the complexity of the geometry is taken into account. Furthermore differences occur if criteria for acceptability of dose calculations are related either to the local dose value or to a normalized dose value. CONCLUSIONS Although it is acknowledged that the general aim must be to have good agreement between dose calculation and the actual dose value, e.g. within 2% or 2 mm, current day algorithms and their implementation into commercial treatment planning systems result often in larger deviations. A high accuracy can at present only be achieved in relatively simple cases. The new set of tolerances and the quantity confidence limit have proven to be useful tools for the acceptance of photon beam dose calculation algorithms of treatment planning systems.

Reduction of cardiac and lung complication probabilities after breast irradiation using conformal radiotherapy with or without intensity modulation

PURPOSE The main purpose of this work is to reduce the cardiac and lung dose by applying conformal tangential beam irradiation of the intact left breast with and without intensity modulation, instead of rectangular tangential treatment fields. The extension of the applicability of the maximum heart distance (MHD) to conformal tangential fields as a simple patient selection criterion, identifying patients for which rectangular and conformal tangential fields without intensity modulation will result in unacceptable normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) values for late cardiac mortality (e.g. >2%), was also investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS Three-dimensional treatment planning was performed for 17 left-sided breast cancer patients. Three different tangential beam techniques were compared: (1) optimized wedges without blocks, (2) optimized wedges with conformal blocks and (3) intensity modulation. Plans were evaluated using dose-volume histograms (DVHs) for the planning target volume (PTV), the heart and the lungs. NTCPs for radiation pneumonitis and late cardiac mortality were calculated using the DVH data. The MHD was measured for all rectangular (MHD(rectangular)) and conformal (MHD(conformal)) treatment plans. RESULTS For all patients, on average, part of the PTV receiving a dose between 95 and 107% of the prescribed dose of 50Gy in 25 fractions of 2Gy was 90.8% (standard deviation (SD): 5.0%), 92.8% (SD: 3.5%) and 92.8% (SD: 3.6%) for the intensity modulation radiation therapy (IMRT), conformal and rectangular field treatment techniques, respectively. The NTCP for radiation pneumonitis was 0.3% (SD: 0.1%), 0.4% (SD: 0.4%) and 0.5% (SD: 0.6%) for the IMRT, conformal and rectangular field techniques, respectively. The NTCP for late cardiac mortality was 5.9% (SD: 2.2%) for the rectangular field technique. This value was reduced to 4.0% (SD: 2.3%) with the conformal technique. A further reduction to 2.0% (SD: 1.1%) could be accomplished with the IMRT technique. The NTCP for late cardiac mortality could be described as a second order polynomial function of the MHD. This function could be described with a high accuracy and was independent of the technique for which the MHD was determined (r(2)=0.88). In order to achieve a NTCP value for late cardiac mortality below 1, 2 or 3%, the MHD should be equal to or smaller than 11, 17 or 23 mm, respectively. If such a maximum complication probability cannot be accomplished, a treatment using the IMRT technique should be considered. CONCLUSIONS The use of conformal tangential fields decreases the NTCP for late cardiac toxicity on average by 30% compared to using rectangular fields, while the tangential IMRT technique can further reduce this value by an additional 50%. The MHD can be used to estimate the NTCP for late cardiac mortality if rectangular or conformal tangential treatment fields are used.

Cardiac and lung complication probabilities after breast cancer irradiation

PURPOSE To assess for locoregional irradiation of breast cancer patients, the dependence of cardiac (cardiac mortality) and lung (radiation pneumonitis) complications on treatment technique and individual patient anatomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Three-dimensional treatment planning was performed for 30 patients with left-sided breast cancer and various breast sizes. Two locoregional techniques (Techniques A and B) and a tangential field technique, including only the breast in the target volume, were planned and evaluated for each patient. In both locoregional techniques tangential photon fields were used to irradiate the breast. The internal mammary (IM)-medial supraclavicular (MS) lymph nodes were treated with an anterior mixed electron/photon field (Technique A) or with an obliquely incident mixed electron/photon IM field and an anterior electron/photon MS field (Technique B). The optimal IM and MS electron field dimensions and energies were chosen on the basis of the IM-MS lymph node target volume as delineated on CT-slices. The position of the tangential fields was adapted to match the IM-MS fields. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) for the heart and lung were compared for the three techniques. In the beams eye view of the medial tangential fields the maximum distance of the heart contour to the posterior field border was measured; this value was scored as the Maximum Heart Distance. RESULTS The lymph node target volume receiving more than 85% of the prescribed dose was on average 99% for both locoregional irradiation techniques. The breast PTV receiving more than 95% of the prescribed dose was generally smaller using Technique A (mean: 90%, range: 69-99%) than using Technique B (mean: 98%, range: 82-100%) or for the tangential field technique (mean: 98%, range: 91-100%). NTCP values for excess cardiac mortality due to acute myocardial ischemia varied considerably between patients, with minimum and maximum values of 0.1 and 7.5% (Technique A), 0.1 and 5.8% (Technique B) and 0.0 and 6.1% (tangential tech.). The NTCP values were on average significantly higher (P<0.001) by 1.7% (Technique A) and 1.0% (Technique B) when locoregional breast irradiation was given, compared with irradiation of the left breast only. The NTCP values for the tangential field technique could be estimated using the Maximum Heart Distance. NTCP values for radiation pneumonitis were very low for all techniques; between 0.0 and 1.0%. CONCLUSIONS Technique B results in a good coverage of the breast and locoregional lymph nodes, while Technique A sometimes results in an underdosage of part of the target volume. Both techniques result in a higher probability of heart complications compared with tangential irradiation of the breast only. Irradiation toxicity for the lung is low in all techniques. The Maximum Heart Distance is a simple and useful parameter to estimate the NTCP values for cardiac mortality for tangential breast irradiation.

Accurate two-dimensional IMRT verification using a back-projection EPID dosimetry method

The use of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) is a promising method for the dosimetric verification of external beam, megavoltage radiation therapy-both pretreatment and in vivo. In this study, a previously developed EPID back-projection algorithm was modified for IMRT techniques and applied to an amorphous silicon EPID. By using this back-projection algorithm, two-dimensional dose distributions inside a phantom or patient are reconstructed from portal images. The model requires the primary dose component at the position of the EPID. A parametrized description of the lateral scatter within the imager was obtained from measurements with an ionization chamber in a miniphantom. In addition to point dose measurements on the central axis of square fields of different size, we also used dose profiles of those fields as reference input data for our model. This yielded a better description of the lateral scatter within the EPID, which resulted in a higher accuracy in the back-projected, two-dimensional dose distributions. The accuracy of our approach was tested for pretreatment verification of a five-field IMRT plan for the treatment of prostate cancer. Each field had between six and eight segments and was evaluated by comparing the back-projected, two-dimensional EPID dose distribution with a film measurement inside a homogeneous slab phantom. For this purpose, the y-evaluation method was used with a dose-difference criterion of 2% of dose maximum and a distance-to-agreement criterion of 2 mm. Excellent agreement was found between EPID and film measurements for each field, both in the central part of the beam and in the penumbra and low-dose regions. It can be concluded that our modified algorithm is able to accurately predict the dose in the midplane of a homogeneous slab phantom. For pretreatment IMRT plan verification, EPID dosimetry is a reliable and potentially fast tool to check the absolute dose in two dimensions inside a phantom for individual IMRT fields. Film measurements inside a phantom can therefore be replaced by EPID measurements.

Variability in target volume delineation on CT scans of the breast

PURPOSE To determine the intra- and interobserver variation in delineation of the target volume of breast tumors on computed tomography (CT) scans in order to perform conformal radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS The clinical target volume (CTV) of the breast was delineated in CT slices by four radiation oncologists on our clinically used delineation system. The palpable glandular breast tissue was marked with a lead wire on 6 patients before CT scanning, whereas 4 patients were scanned without a lead wire. The CTV was drawn by each observer on three separate occasions. Planning target volumes (PTVs) were constructed by expanding the CTV by 7 mm in each direction, except toward the skin. The deviation in the PTV extent from the average extent was quantified in each orthogonal direction for each patient to find a possible directional dependence in the observer variations. In addition, the standard deviation of the intra- and interobserver variation in the PTV volume was quantified. For each patient, the common volumes delineated by all observers and the smallest volume encompassing all PTVs were also calculated. RESULTS The patient-averaged deviations in PTV extent were larger in the posterior (42 mm), cranial (28 mm), and medial (24 mm) directions than in the anterior (6 mm), caudal (15 mm), and lateral (8 mm) directions. The mean intraobserver variation in volume percentage (5.5%, 1 SD) was much smaller than the interobserver variation (17.5%, 1 SD). The average ratio between the common and encompassing volume for the four observers separately was 0.82, 0.74, 0.82, and 0.80. A much lower combined average ratio of 0.43 was found because of the large interobserver variations. For the observer who placed the lead wire, the intraobserver variation in volume was decreased by a factor of 4 on scans made with a lead wire in comparison to scans made without a lead wire. For the other observers, no improvement was seen. Based on these results, an improved delineation protocol was designed. CONCLUSIONS Intra- and especially interobserver variation in the delineation of breast target volume on CT scans can be rather large. A detailed delineation protocol making use of CT scans with lead wires placed on the skin around the palpable breast by the delineating observer reduces the intraobserver variation. To reduce the interobserver variation, better imaging techniques and pathology studies relating glandular breast tissue to imaging may be needed to provide more information on the extent of the clinical target volume.

Dosimetric considerations for patients with HIP prostheses undergoing pelvic irradiation. Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 63.

This document is the report of a task group of the Radiation Therapy Committee of the AAPM and has been prepared primarily to advise hospital physicists involved in external beam treatment of patients with pelvic malignancies who have high atomic number (Z) hip prostheses. The purpose of the report is to make the radiation oncology community aware of the problems arising from the presence of these devices in the radiation beam, to quantify the dose perturbations they cause, and, finally, to provide recommendations for treatment planning and delivery. Some of the data and recommendations are also applicable to patients having implanted high-Z prosthetic devices such as pins, humeral head replacements. The scientific understanding and methodology of clinical dosimetry for these situations is still incomplete. This report is intended to reflect the current state of scientific understanding and technical methodology in clinical dosimetry for radiation oncology patients with high-Z hip prostheses.

Margins for geometric uncertainty around organs at risk in radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE ICRU Report 62 suggests drawing margins around organs at risk (ORs) to produce planning organ at risk volumes (PRVs) to account for geometric uncertainty in the radiotherapy treatment process. This paper proposes an algorithm for drawing such margins, and compares the recommended margin widths with examples from clinical practice and discusses the limitations of the approach. METHOD The use of the PRV defined in this way is that, despite the geometric uncertainties, the dose calculated within the PRV by the treatment planning system can be used to represent the dose in the OR with a certain confidence level. A suitable level is where, in the majority of cases (90%), the dose-volume histogram of the PRV will not under-represent the high-dose components in the OR. In order to provide guidelines on how to do this in clinical practice, this paper distinguishes types of OR in terms of the tolerance doses relative to the prescription dose and suggests appropriate margins for serial-structure and parallel-structure ORs. RESULTS In some instances of large and parallel ORs, the clinician may judge that the complication risk in omitting a margin is acceptable. Otherwise, for all types of OR, systematic, treatment preparation uncertainties may be accommodated by an OR-->PRV margin width of 1.3Sigma. Here, Sigma is the standard deviation of the combined systematic (treatment preparation) uncertainties. In the case of serial ORs or small, parallel ORs, the effects of blurring caused by daily treatment execution errors (set-up and organ motion) should be taken into account. Near a region of high dose, blurring tends to shift the isodoses away from the unblurred edge as shown on the treatment planning system by an amount that may be represented by 0.5sigma. This margin may be used either to increase or to decrease the margin already calculated for systematic uncertainties, depending upon the size of the tolerance dose relative to the detailed planned dose distribution. Where the detailed distribution is unknown before the OR is delineated, then the overall margin for serial or small parallel ORs should be 1.3Sigma+0.5sigma. Examples are given where the application of this algorithm leads to margin widths around ORs similar to those in use clinically. CONCLUSIONS Using PRVs is appropriate both for forward and inverse planning. Dose-volume histograms of PRVs for serial- and parallel-structure ORs require careful interpretation. Nevertheless, use of the proposed algorithms for drawing margins around both serial and parallel ORs can alert the dosimetrist/radiation oncologist to the possibility of high-dose complications in individual treatment plans, which might be missed if no such margins were drawn.