Analytical setup margin for spinal stereotactic body radiotherapy based on measured errors

Background No consensus currently exists about the correct margin size to use for spinal SBRT. Margins have been proposed to account for various errors individually, but not with all errors combined to result in a single margin value. The purpose of this work was to determine a setup margin for five-fraction spinal SBRT based on known errors during radiotherapy to achieve at least 90% coverage of the clinical target volume with the prescription dose for at least 90% of patients and not exceed a 30 Gy point dose or 23 Gy to 10% of the spinal cord subvolume. Methods The random and systematic error components of intrafraction motion, residual setup error, and end-to-end system accuracy were measured. The patient’s surface displacement was measured to quantify intrafraction motion, the residual setup error was quantified by re-registering accepted daily cone beam computed tomography setup images, and the displacement between measured and planned dose profiles in a phantom quantified the end-to-end system accuracy. These errors and parameters were used to identify the minimum acceptable margin size. The margin recommendation was validated by assessing dose delivery across 140 simulated patient plans suffering from various random shifts representative of the measured errors. Results The errors were quantified in three dimensions and the analytical margin generated was 2.4 mm. With this margin applied in the superior/inferior direction only, at least 90% of the CTV was covered with the prescription dose for 96% of the 140 patients simulated with minimal negative effect on the spinal cord dose levels. Conclusions The findings of this work support that a 2.4 mm margin applied in the superior/inferior direction can achieve at least 90% coverage of the CTV for at least 90% of dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy spinal SBRT patients in the presence of errors when immobilized with vacuum bags.

Intra-fractional patient setup error during fractionated intracranial stereotactic irradiation treatment of patients wearing medical masks: comparison with and without bite block during COVID-19 pandemic

The immobilization of patients with a bite block (BB) carries the risk of interpersonal infection, particularly in the context of pandemics such as COVID-19. Here, we compared the intra-fractional patient setup error (intra-SE) with and without a BB during fractionated intracranial stereotactic irradiation (STI). Fifteen patients with brain metastases were immobilized using a BB without a medical mask, while 15 patients were immobilized without using a BB and with a medical mask. The intra-SEs in six directions (anterior–posterior (AP), superior–inferior (SI), left–right (LR), pitch, roll, and yaw) were calculated by using cone-beam computed tomography images acquired before and after the treatments. We analyzed a total of 53 and 67 treatment sessions for the with- and without-BB groups, respectively. A comparable absolute mean translational and rotational intra-SE was observed (P > 0.05) in the AP (0.19 vs 0.23 mm with- and without-BB, respectively), SI (0.30 vs 0.29 mm), LR (0.20 vs 0.29 mm), pitch (0.18 vs 0.27°), roll (0.23 vs 0.23°) and yaw (0.27 vs 22°) directions. The resultant planning target volume (PTV) margin to compensate for intra-SE was <1 mm. No statistically significant correlation was observed between the intra-SE and treatment times. A PTV margin of <1 mm was achieved even when patients were immobilized without a BB during STI dose delivery.

Comparison of prostate verification with implanted gold markers in tissue surrounding the prostate and pelvic bony anatomy for external beam radiation therapy following low-dose-rate brachytherapy: a prospective clinical trial

We aimed to investigate whether gold marker implantation in the tissue surrounding the prostate could accurately monitor setup errors during external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) following low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy. Thirty-eight patients had confirmed intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer and received EBRT following LDR brachytherapy. In >175 computed tomography imaging sessions, the average values of the weekly setup error during EBRT to the prostate centroid at the time of gold marker matching in the surrounding tissue of the prostate and pelvic bone matching were measured and then compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Gold marker matching in the surrounding tissue of the prostate estimated setup errors better than those estimated by bone matching (3D displacement = 2.7 ± 2.0 vs 3.8 ± 2.6 mm, P < 0.01). Overall, the standard deviation of systematic (Σ) and random (σ) setup error was lower with gold marker matching than with bone matching (3D displacement = 1.8 and 1.1 mm vs 2.1 and 1.6 mm, respectively). With gold marker matching, the setup error of the position of the prostate centroid was smaller, and the optimal setup margin was lower than that with bone matching (2Σ + 0.7σ and 2.5Σ + 0.7σ of 3D displacement = 4.3 and 5.2 mm vs 5.3 and 6.4 mm, respectively). This high-precision radiotherapy approach placing gold markers in the surrounding tissue of the prostate can allow more accurate setup during EBRT following LDR brachytherapy.

Evaluation of the effect of random setup errors on dose delivery in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy

Aim: To conduct a study on the effect of random setup errors inpatient for dose delivery in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy plans using Octavius 4D phantom.Materials and methods: 11 patients with cancer of H&N were selected for this study. An IMRT plan was created for each patient. The IMRT quality assurance plans were transferred to Mosaiq workstation in a linear accelerator. These plans were delivered at the reference treatment position. Subsequently, the QA plans were delivered on the Octavius 4D phantom after introducing errors in various translational and rotational directions. The setup inaccuracies introduced varied from 1 mm to 5 mm along X, Y. These setup uncertainties were then introduced along X and Y direction simultaneously in equal measures. Similarly, IMRT plans were delivered also after introducing roll and yaw rotation of 1, 2 and 3 degrees in phantom. The deviation of gamma indices at all these positions was analyzed with respect to the reference setup position.Results: The percentage of points passing the gamma acceptance criterion decrease as we increase the setup error. The change is found to be very insignificant with setup error up to 2 mm along X, Y or XY direction. Similarly, the rotational error of up to 3 degrees is found to be acceptable.Conclusions: Small setup (< 2 mm) correction in patients may not adversely affect the dose delivery. But an error of similar magnitude in 2 directions simultaneously has a much greater impact on IMRT dose delivery.

Effect of Surgical Mask on Setup Error in Head and Neck Radiotherapy

Purpose: With the widespread prevalence of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), cancer patients are suggested to wear a surgical mask during radiation treatment. In this study, cone beam CT (CBCT) was used to investigate the effect of surgical mask on setup errors in head and neck radiotherapy. Methods: A total of 91 patients with head and neck tumors were selected. CBCT was performed to localize target volume after patient set up. The images obtained by CBCT before treatment were automatically registered with CT images and manually fine-tuned. The setup errors of patients in 6 directions of Vrt, Lng, Lat, Pitch, Roll and Rotation were recorded. The patients were divided into groups according to whether they wore the surgical mask, the type of immobilization mask used and the location of the isocenter. The setup errors of patients were calculated. A t-test was performed to detect whether it was statistically significant. Results: In the 4 groups, the standard deviation in the directions of Lng and Pitch of the with surgical mask group were all higher than that in the without surgical mask group. In the head-neck-shoulder mask group, the mean in the Lng direction of the with surgical mask group was larger than that of the without surgical mask group. In the lateral isocenter group, the mean in the Lng and Pitch directions of the with surgical mask group were larger than that of the without surgical mask group. The t-test results showed that there was significant difference in the setup error between the 2 groups ( p = 0.043 and p = 0.013, respectively) only in the Lng and Pitch directions of the head-neck-shoulder mask group. In addition, the setup error of 6 patients with immobilization open masks exhibited no distinguished difference from that of the patients with regular immobilization masks. Conclusion: In the head and neck radiotherapy patients, the setup error was affected by wearing surgical mask. It is recommended that the immobilization open mask should be used when the patient cannot finish the whole treatment with a surgical mask.