Shintaro Tsuda

Availability of applying diaphragm matching with the breath-holding technique in stereotactic body radiation therapy for liver tumors

PURPOSE Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) based on bone matching can produce large target-positioning errors because of expiration breath-hold reproducibility during stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver tumors. Therefore, the feasibility of diaphragm-based 3D image matching between planning computed tomography (CT) and pretreatment cone-beam CT was investigated. METHODS In 59 liver SBRT cases, Lipiodol uptake after transarterial chemoembolization was defined as a tumor marker. Further, the relative isocenter coordinate that was obtained by Lipiodol matching was defined as the reference coordinate. The distance between the relative isocenter coordinate and reference coordinate, which was obtained from diaphragm matching and bone matching techniques, was defined as the target positioning error. Furthermore, the target positioning error between liver matching and Lipiodol matching was evaluated. RESULTS The positioning errors in all directions by the diaphragm matching were significantly smaller than those obtained by using by the bone matching technique (p < 0.05). Further, the positioning errors in the A-P and C-C directions that were obtained by using liver matching were significantly smaller than those obtained by using bone matching (p < 0.05). The estimated PTV margins calculated by the formula proposed by van Herk for diaphragm matching, liver matching, and bone matching were 5.0 mm, 5.0 mm, and 11.6 mm in the C-C direction; 3.6 mm, 2.4 mm, and 6.9 mm in the A-P direction; and 2.6 mm, 4.1 mm, and 4.6 mm in the L-R direction, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Diaphragm matching-based IGRT may be an alternative image matching technique for determining liver tumor positions in patients.

Simple quality assurance method of dynamic tumor tracking with the gimbaled linac system using a light field

We proposed a simple visual method for evaluating the dynamic tumor tracking (DTT) accuracy of a gimbal mechanism using a light field. A single photon beam was set with a field size of 30×30 mm2 at a gantry angle of 90°. The center of a cube phantom was set up at the isocenter of a motion table, and 4D modeling was performed based on the tumor and infrared (IR) marker motion. After 4D modeling, the cube phantom was replaced with a sheet of paper, which was placed perpendicularly, and a light field was projected on the sheet of paper. The light field was recorded using a web camera in a treatment room that was as dark as possible. Calculated images from each image obtained using the camera were summed to compose a total summation image. Sinusoidal motion sequences were produced by moving the phantom with a fixed amplitude of 20 mm and different breathing periods of 2, 4, 6, and 8 s. The light field was projected on the sheet of paper under three conditions: with the moving phantom and DTT based on the motion of the phantom, with the moving phantom and non‐DTT, and with a stationary phantom for comparison. The values of tracking errors using the light field were 1.12±0.72, 0.31±0.19, 0.27±0.12, and 0.15±0.09 mm for breathing periods of 2, 4, 6, and 8 s, respectively. The tracking accuracy showed dependence on the breathing period. We proposed a simple quality assurance (QA) process for the tracking accuracy of a gimbal mechanism system using a light field and web camera. Our method can assess the tracking accuracy using a light field without irradiation and clearly visualize distributions like film dosimetry. PACS number(s): 87.56 Fc, 87.55.Qr

Split-VMAT technique to control the expiratory breath-hold time in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy

PURPOSE In this study, we demonstrate the feasibility of using split-arcs in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), tailored for expiratory breath-hold in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver tumors. We compare it with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and continuous-VMAT, for ten randomly selected hepatocellular carcinoma cases. METHODS Four coplanar and four non-coplanar beams were used for the 3D-CRT plans. A pair of partial arcs, chosen using a back-and-forth rotating motion, were used for the continuous-VMAT plans. Split-VMAT plans were created using the same arc range as the continuous-VMAT plans, but were split into smaller arcs (<90°), to simulate an expiratory breath hold of <15s. The dose distribution, treatment delivery efficiency, and patient specific quality assurance of the split-VMAT, were verified to ensure that the outcomes were equal, or better than, those for 3D-CRT and continuous-VMAT. The prescription was 48Gy/4 fractions, to 95% of the PTV, using 10MV FFF X-ray beams. RESULTS The mean dose of the liver-GTV was lower in the split-VMAT compared with that of 3D-CRT. Split-VMAT was more conformal compared with 3D-CRT. The total treatment time for split-VMAT was shorter than that of 3D-CRT. Similar dosimetric indices were observed for split-VMAT and continuous-VMAT. All VMAT plans passed the gamma acceptance test. CONCLUSIONS Split-VMAT designed to accommodate an expiratory breath-hold period of 15s is a feasible and efficient use of liver SBRT, because it does not compromise the quality of the plan, when compared with 3D-CRT or continuous-VMAT.

Stability assessment of radiation isocenter with the gimbaled linac system

Purpose: We report the results of our year-long radiation isocenter accuracy verification for daily quality assurance (QA) implementation on a Vero4DRT system. Methods: The radiation isocenter was calculated using a cube phantom with a steel ball of diameter 10 mm fixed to the center of the phantom. A single photon beam was set with a field size of 100 × 100 mm 2 . Coincidence of the centroid of the steel ball at kiloVolt X-ray imaging isocenter and megaVolt beam radiation isocenter at each gantry and ring angle was tested. This procedure was performed for gantry angles of 0°, 90°, 180°, and 270°, and ring angles of 0°, 20°, and 340°. The centroid of the steel ball and the center of the radiation field were calculated to analyze the radiation isocenter error. This analysis was automatically calculated using the Daily Check tool in the Vero4DRT system. This QA was implemented between 24 August 2015 and 23 August 2016. Results: The average and standard deviation for pan and tilt directions were 0.12 ± 0.10 mm and -0.20 ± 0.13 mm, respectively. The maximum radiation isocenter accuracy error was 0.50 mm in both directions. Conclusion: The radiation isocenter alignment for the one year duration of the experiment was performed with high accuracy.

SU-E-J-140: Availability of Using Diaphragm Matching in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) at the Time in Breath-Holding SBRT for Liver Cancer.

PURPOSE IGRT based on the bone matching may produce a larger target positioning error in terms of the reproducibility of the expiration breath hold. Therefore, the feasibility of the 3D image matching between planning CT image and pretreatment CBCT image based on the diaphragm matching was investigated. METHODS In fifteen-nine liver SBRT cases, Lipiodol, uptake after TACE was outlined as the marker of the tumor. The relative coordinate of the isocenter obtained by the contrast matching was defined as the reference coordinate. The target positioning difference between diaphragm matching and bone matching were evaluated by the relative coordinate of the isocenter from the reference coordinate obtained by each matching technique. In addition, we evaluated PTV margins by van Herk setup margin formula. RESULTS The target positioning error by the diaphragm matching and the bone matching was 1.31±0.83 and 3.10±2.80 mm in the cranial-caudal(C-C) direction, 1.04±0.95 and 1.62±1.02 mm in the anterior-posterior(A-P) direction, 0.93±1.19 and 1.12±0.94 mm in the left-right(L-R) direction, respectively. The positioning error by the diaphragm matching was significantly smaller than the bone matching in the C-C direction (p<0.05). The setup margin of diaphragm matching and bone matching that we had calculated based on van Herk margin formula was 4.5mm and 6.2mm(C-C), and 3.6mm and 6.3mm(A-P), and 2.6mm and 4.5mm(L-R), respectively. CONCLUSION IGRT based on a diaphragm matching could be one alternative image matching technique for the positioning of the patients with liver tumor.