K. Tsujii

Craniocaudal Safety Margin Calculation Based on Interfractional Changes in Tumor Motion in Lung SBRT Assessed With an EPID in Cine Mode

PURPOSE To evaluate setup error and interfractional changes in tumor motion magnitude using an electric portal imaging device in cine mode (EPID cine) during the course of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to calculate margins to compensate for these variations. MATERIALS AND METHODS Subjects were 28 patients with Stage I NSCLC who underwent SBRT. Respiratory-correlated four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) at simulation was binned into 10 respiratory phases, which provided average intensity projection CT data sets (AIP). On 4D-CT, peak-to-peak motion of the tumor (M-4DCT) in the craniocaudal direction was assessed and the tumor center (mean tumor position [MTP]) of the AIP (MTP-4DCT) was determined. At treatment, the tumor on cone beam CT was registered to that on AIP for patient setup. During three sessions of irradiation, peak-to-peak motion of the tumor (M-cine) and the mean tumor position (MTP-cine) were obtained using EPID cine and in-house software. Based on changes in tumor motion magnitude (∆M) and patient setup error (∆MTP), defined as differences between M-4DCT and M-cine and between MTP-4DCT and MTP-cine, a margin to compensate for these variations was calculated with Strooms formula. RESULTS The means (±standard deviation: SD) of M-4DCT and M-cine were 3.1 (±3.4) and 4.0 (±3.6) mm, respectively. The means (±SD) of ∆M and ∆MTP were 0.9 (±1.3) and 0.2 (±2.4) mm, respectively. Internal target volume-planning target volume (ITV-PTV) margins to compensate for ∆M, ∆MTP, and both combined were 3.7, 5.2, and 6.4 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION EPID cine is a useful modality for assessing interfractional variations of tumor motion. The ITV-PTV margins to compensate for these variations can be calculated.

Influence of Rotational Setup Error on Tumor Shift in Bony Anatomy Matching Measured with Pulmonary Point Registration in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Early Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVE To examine the correlation between the patient rotational error measured with pulmonary point registration and tumor shift after bony anatomy matching in stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer. METHODS Twenty-six patients with lung cancer who underwent stereotactic body radiotherapy were the subjects. On 104 cone-beam computed tomography measurements performed prior to radiation delivery, rotational setup errors were measured with point registration using pulmonary structures. Translational registration using bony anatomy matching was done and the three-dimensional vector of tumor displacement was measured retrospectively. Correlation among the three-dimensional vector and rotational error and vertebra-tumor distance was investigated quantitatively. RESULTS The median and maximum rotational errors of the roll, pitch and yaw were 0.8, 0.9 and 0.5, and 6.0, 4.5 and 2.5, respectively. Bony anatomy matching resulted in a 0.2-1.6 cm three-dimensional vector of tumor shift. The shift became larger as the vertebra-tumor distance increased. Multiple regression analysis for the three-dimensional vector indicated that in the case of bony anatomy matching, tumor shifts of 5 and 10 mm were expected for vertebra-tumor distances of 4.46 and 14.1 cm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Using pulmonary point registration, it was found that the rotational setup error influences the tumor shift. Bony anatomy matching is not appropriate for hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy with a tight margin.

A preliminary study of in-house Monte Carlo simulations: an integrated Monte Carlo verification system.

PURPOSE To develop an infrastructure for the integrated Monte Carlo verification system (MCVS) to verify the accuracy of conventional dose calculations, which often fail to accurately predict dose distributions, mainly due to inhomogeneities in the patients anatomy, for example, in lung and bone. METHODS AND MATERIALS The MCVS consists of the graphical user interface (GUI) based on a computational environment for radiotherapy research (CERR) with MATLAB language. The MCVS GUI acts as an interface between the MCVS and a commercial treatment planning system to import the treatment plan, create MC input files, and analyze MC output dose files. The MCVS consists of the EGSnrc MC codes, which include EGSnrc/BEAMnrc to simulate the treatment head and EGSnrc/DOSXYZnrc to calculate the dose distributions in the patient/phantom. In order to improve computation time without approximations, an in-house cluster system was constructed. RESULTS The phase-space data of a 6-MV photon beam from a Varian Clinac unit was developed and used to establish several benchmarks under homogeneous conditions. The MC results agreed with the ionization chamber measurements to within 1%. The MCVS GUI could import and display the radiotherapy treatment plan created by the MC method and various treatment planning systems, such as RTOG and DICOM-RT formats. Dose distributions could be analyzed by using dose profiles and dose volume histograms and compared on the same platform. With the cluster system, calculation time was improved in line with the increase in the number of central processing units (CPUs) at a computation efficiency of more than 98%. CONCLUSIONS Development of the MCVS was successful for performing MC simulations and analyzing dose distributions.

Couch height–based patient setup for abdominal radiation therapy

There are 2 methods commonly used for patient positioning in the anterior-posterior (A-P) direction: one is the skin mark patient setup method (SMPS) and the other is the couch height-based patient setup method (CHPS). This study compared the setup accuracy of these 2 methods for abdominal radiation therapy. The enrollment for this study comprised 23 patients with pancreatic cancer. For treatments (539 sessions), patients were set up by using isocenter skin marks and thereafter treatment couch was shifted so that the distance between the isocenter and the upper side of the treatment couch was equal to that indicated on the computed tomographic (CT) image. Setup deviation in the A-P direction for CHPS was measured by matching the spine of the digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) of a lateral beam at simulation with that of the corresponding time-integrated electronic portal image. For SMPS with no correction (SMPS/NC), setup deviation was calculated based on the couch-level difference between SMPS and CHPS. SMPS/NC was corrected using 2 off-line correction protocols: no action level (SMPS/NAL) and extended NAL (SMPS/eNAL) protocols. Margins to compensate for deviations were calculated using the Stroom formula. A-P deviation > 5mm was observed in 17% of SMPS/NC, 4% of SMPS/NAL, and 4% of SMPS/eNAL sessions but only in one CHPS session. For SMPS/NC, 7 patients (30%) showed deviations at an increasing rate of > 0.1mm/fraction, but for CHPS, no such trend was observed. The standard deviations (SDs) of systematic error (Σ) were 2.6, 1.4, 0.6, and 0.8mm and the root mean squares of random error (σ) were 2.1, 2.6, 2.7, and 0.9mm for SMPS/NC, SMPS/NAL, SMPS/eNAL, and CHPS, respectively. Margins to compensate for the deviations were wide for SMPS/NC (6.7mm), smaller for SMPS/NAL (4.6mm) and SMPS/eNAL (3.1mm), and smallest for CHPS (2.2mm). Achieving better setup with smaller margins, CHPS appears to be a reproducible method for abdominal patient setup.

Preliminary analysis of the sequential simultaneous integrated boost technique for intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancers

The aim of this study was to compare three strategies for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for 20 head-and-neck cancer patients. For simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), doses were 66 and 54 Gy in 30 fractions for PTVboost and PTVelective, respectively. Two-phase IMRT delivered 50 Gy in 25 fractions to PTVelective in the First Plan, and 20 Gy in 10 fractions to PTVboost in the Second Plan. Sequential SIB (SEQ-SIB) delivered 55 Gy and 50 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively, to PTVboost and PTVelective using SIB in the First Plan and 11 Gy in 5 fractions to PTVboost in the Second Plan. Conformity indexes (CIs) (mean ± SD) for PTVboost and PTVelective were 1.09 ± 0.05 and 1.34 ± 0.12 for SIB, 1.39 ± 0.14 and 1.80 ± 0.28 for two-phase IMRT, and 1.14 ± 0.07 and 1.60 ± 0.18 for SEQ-SIB, respectively. CI was significantly highest for two-phase IMRT. Maximum doses (Dmax) to the spinal cord were 42.1 ± 1.5 Gy for SIB, 43.9 ± 1.0 Gy for two-phase IMRT and 40.3 ± 1.8 Gy for SEQ-SIB. Brainstem Dmax were 50.1 ± 2.2 Gy for SIB, 50.5 ± 4.6 Gy for two-phase IMRT and 47.4 ± 3.6 Gy for SEQ-SIB. Spinal cord Dmax for the three techniques was significantly different, and brainstem Dmax was significantly lower for SEQ-SIB. The compromised conformity of two-phase IMRT can result in higher doses to organs at risk (OARs). Lower OAR doses in SEQ-SIB made SEQ-SIB an alternative to SIB, which applies unconventional doses per fraction.

Web camera を用いた高線量率小線源治療装置の品質保証システム

PURPOSE The quality assurance (QA) system that simultaneously quantifies the position and duration of an (192)Ir source (dwell position and time) was developed and the performance of this system was evaluated in high-dose-rate brachytherapy. METHODS This QA system has two functions to verify and quantify dwell position and time by using a web camera. The web camera records 30 images per second in a range from 1,425 mm to 1,505 mm. A user verifies the source position from the web camera at real time. The source position and duration were quantified with the movie using in-house software which was applied with a template-matching technique. RESULTS This QA system allowed verification of the absolute position in real time and quantification of dwell position and time simultaneously. It was evident from the verification of the system that the mean of step size errors was 0.31±0.1 mm and that of dwell time errors 0.1±0.0 s. Absolute position errors can be determined with an accuracy of 1.0 mm at all dwell points in three step sizes and dwell time errors with an accuracy of 0.1% in more than 10.0 s of the planned time. CONCLUSION This system is to provide quick verification and quantification of the dwell position and time with high accuracy at various dwell positions without depending on the step size.

Maximum Intensity Projection (MIP) and Average Intensity Projection (AIP) in Image Guided Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Lung Cancer

Maximum Intensity Projection (MIP) and Average Intensity Projection (AIP) in Image Guided Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Lung Cancer K. Shirai, K. Nishiyama, T. Katsuda, Y. Ueda, M. Miyazaki, K. Tsujii, and S. Ueyama; Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, 1-3-3, Nakamichi, Higashinari-ku, Osaka, Japan, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, 5-7-1, Fujishirodai, Suita-City, Osaka, Japan