PURPOSE: Most linear accelerators purchased today are equipped with a gantry-mounted kilovoltage X-ray imager which is typically used for patient imaging prior to therapy. A novel application of the X-ray system is kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring (KIM), in which the 3-dimensional (3D) tumor position is determined during treatment. In this paper, we report on the first use of KIM in a prospective clinical study of prostate cancer patients undergoing intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten prostate cancer patients with implanted fiducial markers undergoing conventionally fractionated IMAT (RapidArc) were enrolled in an ethics-approved study of KIM. KIM involves acquiring kV images as the gantry rotates around the patient during treatment. Post-treatment, markers in these images were segmented to obtain 2D positions. From the 2D positions, a maximum likelihood estimation of a probability density function was used to obtain 3D prostate trajectories. The trajectories were analyzed to determine the motion type and the percentage of time the prostate was displaced ≥ 3, 5, 7, and 10 mm. Independent verification of KIM positional accuracy was performed using kV/MV triangulation. RESULTS: KIM was performed for 268 fractions. Various prostate trajectories were observed (ie, continuous target drift, transient excursion, stable target position, persistent excursion, high-frequency excursions, and erratic behavior). For all patients, 3D displacements of ≥ 3, 5, 7, and 10 mm were observed 5.6%, 2.2%, 0.7% and 0.4% of the time, respectively. The average systematic accuracy of KIM was measured at 0.46 mm. CONCLUSIONS: KIM for prostate IMAT was successfully implemented clinically for the first time. Key advantages of this method are (1) submillimeter accuracy, (2) widespread applicability, and (3) a low barrier to clinical implementation. A disadvantage is that KIM delivers additional imaging dose to the patient.
PURPOSE: Most linear accelerators purchased today are equipped with a gantry-mounted kilovoltage X-ray imager which is typically used for patient imaging prior to therapy. A novel application of the X-ray system is kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring (KIM), in which the 3-dimensional (3D) tumor position is determined during treatment. In this paper, we report on the first use of KIM in a prospective clinical study of prostate cancerpatients undergoing intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten prostate cancerpatients with implanted fiducial markers undergoing conventionally fractionated IMAT (RapidArc) were enrolled in an ethics-approved study of KIM. KIM involves acquiring kV images as the gantry rotates around the patient during treatment. Post-treatment, markers in these images were segmented to obtain 2D positions. From the 2D positions, a maximum likelihood estimation of a probability density function was used to obtain 3D prostate trajectories. The trajectories were analyzed to determine the motion type and the percentage of time the prostate was displaced ≥ 3, 5, 7, and 10 mm. Independent verification of KIM positional accuracy was performed using kV/MV triangulation. RESULTS: KIM was performed for 268 fractions. Various prostate trajectories were observed (ie, continuous target drift, transient excursion, stable target position, persistent excursion, high-frequency excursions, and erratic behavior). For all patients, 3D displacements of ≥ 3, 5, 7, and 10 mm were observed 5.6%, 2.2%, 0.7% and 0.4% of the time, respectively. The average systematic accuracy of KIM was measured at 0.46 mm. CONCLUSIONS: KIM for prostate IMAT was successfully implemented clinically for the first time. Key advantages of this method are (1) submillimeter accuracy, (2) widespread applicability, and (3) a low barrier to clinical implementation. A disadvantage is that KIM delivers additional imaging dose to the patient.
Authors: Thomas N Eade; Linxin Guo; Elizabeth Forde; Ken Vaux; Justin Vass; Peter Hunt; Andrew Kneebone Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Howard M Sandler; Ping-Yu Liu; Rodney L Dunn; David C Khan; Scott E Tropper; Martin G Sanda; Constantine A Mantz Journal: Urology Date: 2010-02-13 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Per Rugaard Poulsen; Byungchul Cho; Dan Ruan; Amit Sawant; Paul J Keall Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-02-03 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Katja M Langen; Twyla R Willoughby; Sanford L Meeks; Anand Santhanam; Alexis Cunningham; Lisa Levine; Patrick A Kupelian Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-02-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: S A Yoganathan; K J Maria Das; K Maria Midunvaleja; D Gowtham Raj; Arpita Agarwal; J Velmurugan; Shaleen Kumar Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Chun-Chien Shieh; Vincent Caillet; Michelle Dunbar; Paul J Keall; Jeremy T Booth; Nicholas Hardcastle; Carol Haddad; Thomas Eade; Ilana Feain Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2017-03-21 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Wei Zhao; Bin Han; Yong Yang; Mark Buyyounouski; Steven L Hancock; Hilary Bagshaw; Lei Xing Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Juan Diego Azcona; Ruijiang Li; Edward Mok; Steven Hancock; Lei Xing Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2013-04-19 Impact factor: 7.038