Evaluation of Interfractional Setup Uncertainties and Calculation of Adequate CTV-PTV Margin for Head and Neck Radiotherapy using Electronic Portal Imaging Device.

Elham Ahmadi, Azam Eskandari, Mohammad Mohammadi, Maryam Naji, Shahrokh Naseri, Hamid Gholamhosseinian
Author Information
  1. Elham Ahmadi: Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
  2. Azam Eskandari: Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
  3. Mohammad Mohammadi: Royal Adelaide Hospital, Department of Medical Physics, Adelaide, Australia.
  4. Maryam Naji: Department of Radiation Oncology, Imam Reza Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
  5. Shahrokh Naseri: Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
  6. Hamid Gholamhosseinian: Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Background: The evaluation of treatment-associated errors is important in the radiotherapy process, particularly those resulting related to patient setup.
Objective: This research aimed to assess the interfractional setup errors and determine the Clinical Target Volume to Planning Target Volume (CTV to PTV) margin in patients undergoing 3-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy (3DCRT) for head and neck cancer by means of electronic portal imaging device.
Material and Methods: In this analytical study, 300 portal images were acquired from 50 patients undergoing 3DCRT for head and neck cancer. Using the portal images of Lateral (LAT) and Antero-Posterior (AP) fields, population systematic (∑) and random (σ) errors were obtained in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions. Finally, based on the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Report 62's, Stroom's and Van Herk's methods, Planning target volume margins were determined.
Results: The translational shift ranges were 0-8.1 mm in the ML, 0-9 mm in the SI (AP), 0-8.8 mm in the SI (LAT), and 0-10 mm in the AP directions. The population systematic and random errors were respectively 3.230, 2.753, and 2.997 mm, and 1.476, 1.853, and 1.715 mm in X, Y, and Z directions. The calculated PTV margins using the ICRU-62, Stroom's, and Van Herk's formulae were ranging from 3.236-3.551, 6.605-7.493, and 7.932-9.108 mm, respectively.
Conclusion: A PTV margin of 7.5-9.5 mm seems safe for ensuring adequate treatment volume coverage. In addition, the EPID is an effective equipment for verifying patient positioning and reducing treatment setup errors.

Keywords

References

  1. Glob J Health Sci. 2015 May 17;8(1):189-93 [PMID: 26234980]
  2. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Jan;74(1):37-44 [PMID: 15683667]
  3. Radiother Oncol. 2001 Dec;61(3):299-308 [PMID: 11731000]
  4. Radiother Oncol. 2001 Feb;58(2):155-62 [PMID: 11166866]
  5. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Mar 15;79(4):1266-74 [PMID: 20605345]
  6. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Dec 1;33(5):1239-45 [PMID: 7493848]
  7. Radiat Oncol. 2007 Dec 14;2:44 [PMID: 18081927]
  8. Med Phys. 2001 May;28(5):712-37 [PMID: 11393467]
  9. Radiother Oncol. 1995 Jan;34(1):69-72 [PMID: 7792401]
  10. Head Neck. 2020 Mar;42(3):456-466 [PMID: 31750595]
  11. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2008 Jun 23;9(3):26-33 [PMID: 18716586]
  12. Acta Oncol. 2009;48(3):440-5 [PMID: 19031160]
  13. Cancer Epidemiol. 2016 Sep;44 Suppl 1:S43-S52 [PMID: 27678322]
  14. Radiother Oncol. 2005 Oct;77(1):39-44 [PMID: 16154217]
  15. Phys Med. 2013 Sep;29(5):531-6 [PMID: 23290565]
  16. Radiother Oncol. 2006 Mar;78(3):283-90 [PMID: 16564594]
  17. J Cancer Res Ther. 2008 Apr-Jun;4(2):70-6 [PMID: 18688122]
  18. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2000 Spring;1(2):38-57 [PMID: 11674818]
  19. Radiother Oncol. 2002 Jul;64(1):75-83 [PMID: 12208578]
  20. Phys Med. 2015 Dec;31(8):1015-1021 [PMID: 26459318]
  21. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Apr 1;64(5):1559-69 [PMID: 16580505]
  22. PLoS One. 2016 Mar 01;11(3):e0150326 [PMID: 26930196]
  23. Radiother Oncol. 2001 Feb;58(2):105-20 [PMID: 11166861]
  24. Radiat Oncol J. 2018 Mar;36(1):54-62 [PMID: 29621873]
  25. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1997 Jul 1;38(4):867-73 [PMID: 9240656]
  26. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2011 Jun;23(2):55-60 [PMID: 22099961]
  27. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Jul 1;47(4):1121-35 [PMID: 10863086]
  28. Neoplasia. 2018 Mar;20(3):227-232 [PMID: 29448084]
  29. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999 Mar 1;43(4):905-19 [PMID: 10098447]
  30. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Dec;75(12):2562-2572 [PMID: 28618252]
  31. Radiother Oncol. 2000 Jul;56(1):97-108 [PMID: 10869760]
  32. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011 Feb 02;12(2):3350 [PMID: 21587179]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0mmerrors1setupPTVportalAPdirectionspatientTargetVolumePlanningmarginpatientsundergoingRadiation3DCRTheadneckcancerimagesLATpopulationsystematicrandomStroom'sVanHerk'svolumemargins0-8SIrespectively32using7treatmentSetupHeadNeckRadiotherapyBackground:evaluationtreatment-associatedimportantradiotherapyprocessparticularlyresultingrelatedObjective:researchaimedassessinterfractionaldetermineClinicalCTV3-DimensionalConformalTherapymeanselectronicimagingdeviceMaterialMethods:analyticalstudy300acquired50UsingLateralAntero-PosteriorfieldsσobtainedlaterallongitudinalverticalFinallybasedInternationalCommissionUnitsMeasurementsICRUReport62'smethodstargetdeterminedResults:translationalshiftrangesML0-980-10230753997476853715XYZcalculatedICRU-62formulaeranging236-35516605-7493932-9108Conclusion:5-95seemssafeensuringadequatecoverageadditionEPIDeffectiveequipmentverifyingpositioningreducingEvaluationInterfractionalUncertaintiesCalculationAdequateCTV-PTVMarginElectronicPortalImagingDeviceCancerPatientPositioningErrorsSystematicError

Similar Articles

Cited By