Determination of clinical target volume to planning target volume margins and set up errors in image guided radiotherapy for head and neck and prostate cancer patients treated in helical tomotherapy: an institutional study

Ghritashee Bora; Smriti Goswami; Rheetwik Baruah; Kaustav Das; Bibhash C. Goswami; Moumita Paul; Manasa Penumur

doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20243711

Authors

Ghritashee Bora Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, Gauhati Medical College, Guwahati, Assam, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5710-6952
Smriti Goswami Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, Gauhati Medical College, Guwahati, Assam, India
Rheetwik Baruah Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, Gauhati Medical College, Guwahati, Assam, India https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7177-2225
Kaustav Das Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, Gauhati Medical College, Guwahati, Assam, India
Bibhash C. Goswami Department of Radiation Oncology, Health City Hospital, Guwahati, Assam, India
Moumita Paul Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, Gauhati Medical College, Guwahati, Assam, India
Manasa Penumur Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, Gauhati Medical College, Guwahati, Assam, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20243711

Keywords:

PTV margin, Image guided radiation therapy, Random error, Systematic error

Abstract

Background: Appropriate immobilization and accurate target delineation is imperative in radiotherapy planning and treatment. To achieve optimum target volume coverage with reduced dose to organs at risk, variability in set up should be minimized. This study was an attempt to determine the translational errors and corresponding planning target volume margins in head and neck and prostate cancer patients treated with helical tomotherapy.

Methods: This is a retrospective observational study of a total of 29 patients of head and neck cancer and 7 patients of prostate cancer treated in helical tomotherapy with image guided radiation therapy. The shifts in the translational directions were recorded and the systematic and random errors were calculated to obtain the corresponding clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margins using Van Herk formula.

Results: A total of 945 CBCT images were acquired for the head and neck region and 237 images for the pelvic region. The corresponding CTV-PTV margins in the X, Y and Z directions were 3.5 mm, 3.7mm and 3.4mm respectively for the head and neck region and 4.4mm,8.7mm and 5.8mm in the prostate cancer patients.

Conclusions: Image guided radiation therapy is an effective method for ensuring adequate coverage of the target in IMRT technique. Thus, proper imaging will lead to less chances of geographic miss.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Yartsev S, Bauman G. Target margins in radiotherapy of prostate cancer. Br J Radiol 2016;89(1067):20160312.

International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, ICRU‐62. Prescribing, Recording and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy (Supplement to ICRU 50). Bethesda, MD: ICRU;1999.

Kupelian PA, Lee C, Langen KM, Zeidan OA, Manőn RR, Villowghby TR and Meeks SL. Evaluation of image guidance strategies in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70(4):1151-7.

Nishimura T, Yamazaki H, Iwama K, Kotani T, Oota Y, Aibe H, et al. Assessment of planning target volume margin for a small number of vertebral metastatic lesions using image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy by helical tomotherapy. Anticancer Res. 2013;33(6):2453-6.

Van Herk M. Errors and margins in radiotherapy. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2004;14(1):52-64.

Chan P, Dinniwell R, Haider MA, Cho YB, Jaffray D, Lockwood G, et al. Inter‑ and intrafractional tumor and organ movement in patients with cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy: A cinematic‑MRI point‑of‑interest study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Apr 1;70(5):1507-15.

Rivest D, Riauka T, Murtha A, Fallone B. Dosimetric implications of two registration based patient positioning methods in prostate image guided radiation therapy (IGRT). Radiol Oncol. 2009;43(3):203-12.

McNair HA, Hansen VN, Parker CC, Evans PM, Norman A, Miles E, et al. A comparison of the use of bony anatomy and internal markers for offline verification and an evaluation of the potential benefit of online and offline verification protocols for prostate radiotherapy. Int J Radi Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(1):41-50.

Li HS, Chetty IJ, Enke CA, Foster RD, Willoughby TR, Kupellian PA, et al. Dosimetric consequences of intrafraction prostate motion. Int J Radi Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(3):801-12.

Xie Y, Djajaputra D, King CR, Hossain S, Ma L, Xing L. Intrafractional motion of the prostate during hypofractionated radiotherapy. Int J Radi Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72(1):236-46.

Iwama K, Yamazaki H, Nishimura T, Oota Y, Aibe H, Nakamura S, et al. Analysis of intrafractional organ motion for patients with prostate cancer using soft tissue matching image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy by helical tomotherapy. Anticancer Res. 2013;33(12):5675-9.

Melancon AD, O’Daniel JC, Zhang L, Kudchadker RJ, Kuban DA, Lee AK. Is a 3-mm intrafractional margin sufficient for daily image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy of prostate cancer? Radiother Oncol. 2007;85(2):251-9.

Mutanga TF, de Boer HC, van der Wielen GJ, Hoogelman ES, Incrocci L and Hejimen BJ. Margin evaluation in the presence of deformation, rotation, and translation in prostate and entire seminal vesicle irradiation with daily marker-based setup corrections. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(4):1160-7.

Zhou J, Uhl B, Dewit K, Young M, Taylor B, Fei DY, Lo YC. Analysis of daily setup variation with tomotherapy megavoltage computed tomography. Med Dosim. 2010;35(1):31-7.

Leitzen C, Wilhelm-Buchstab T, Müdder T, Heimann M, Koch D, Schmeel C, et al. Patient positioning in head and neck cancer: Setup variations and safety margins in helical tomotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol. 2018;194(5):386-391.