Literature DB >> 23266161

Dosimetric influences of rotational setup errors on head and neck carcinoma intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatments.

Weihua Fu1, Yong Yang, Ning J Yue, Dwight E Heron, M Saiful Huq.   

Abstract

The purpose of this work is to investigate the dosimetric influence of the residual rotational setup errors on head and neck carcinoma (HNC) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with routine 3 translational setup corrections and the adequacy of this routine correction. A total of 66 kV cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image sets were acquired on the first day of treatment and weekly thereafter for 10 patients with HNC and were registered with the corresponding planning CT images, using 2 3-dimensional (3D) rigid registration methods. Method 1 determines the translational setup errors only, and method 2 determines 6-degree (6D) setup errors, i.e., both rotational and translational setup errors. The 6D setup errors determined by method 2 were simulated in the treatment planning system and were then corrected using the corresponding translational data determined by method 1. For each patient, dose distributions for 6 to 7 fractions with various setup uncertainties were generated, and a plan sum was created to determine the total dose distribution through an entire course and was compared with the original treatment plan. The average rotational setup errors were 0.7°± 1.0°, 0.1°±1.9°, and 0.3°±0.7° around left-right (LR), anterior-posterior (AP), and superior-inferior (SI) axes, respectively. With translational corrections determined by method 1 alone, the dose deviation could be large from fraction to fraction. For a certain fraction, the decrease in prescription dose coverage (Vp) and the dose that covers 95% of target volume (D95) could be up to 15.8% and 13.2% for planning target volume (PTV), and the decrease in Vp and the dose that covers 98% of target volume (D98) could be up to 9.8% and 5.5% for the clinical target volume (CTV). However, for the entire treatment course, for PTV, the plan sum showed that the average Vp was decreased by 4.2% and D95 was decreased by 1.2 Gy for the first phase of IMRT with a prescription dose of 50 Gy. For CTV, the plan sum showed that the average Vp was decreased by 0.8% and D98, relative to prescription dose, was not decreased. Among these 10 patients, the plan sum showed that the dose to 1-cm(3) spinal cord (D(1 cm(3))) increased no more than 1 Gy for 7 patients and more than 2 Gy for 2 patients. The average increase in D(1 cm(3)) was 1.2 Gy. The study shows that, with translational setup error correction, the overall CTV Vp has a minor decrease with a 5-mm margin from CTV to PTV. For the spinal cord, a noticeable dose increase was observed for some patients. So to decide whether the routine clinical translational setup error correction is adequate for this HNC IMRT technique, the dosimetric influence of rotational setup errors should be evaluated carefully from case to case when organs at risk are in close proximity to the target.
Copyright © 2013 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23266161     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2012.09.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  9 in total

1.  Impact of pitch angle setup error and setup error correction on dose distribution in volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Akihiro Takemura; Kumiko Togawa; Tomohiro Yokoi; Shinichi Ueda; Kimiya Noto; Hironori Kojima; Naoki Isomura; Tomoyasu Kumano
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-02-12

2.  Dosimetric impact of rotational setup errors in volumetric modulated arc therapy for postoperative cervical cancer.

Authors:  Katsutomo Tsujii; Yoshihiro Ueda; Masaru Isono; Masayoshi Miyazaki; Teruki Teshima; Masahiko Koizumi
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2021-07-10       Impact factor: 2.724

3.  MRI-based Assessment of 3D Intrafractional Motion of Head and Neck Cancer for Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Oliver J Gurney-Champion; Dualta McQuaid; Alex Dunlop; Kee H Wong; Liam C Welsh; Angela M Riddell; Dow-Mu Koh; Uwe Oelfke; Martin O Leach; Christopher M Nutting; Shreerang A Bhide; Kevin J Harrington; Rafal Panek; Kate L Newbold
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Analysis of which local set-up errors can be covered by a 5-mm margin for cone beam CT-guided radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Renming Zhong; Ying Song; Yuying Yan; Xuetao Wang; Shuai Li; Jidan Zhou; Xiaoyu Li; Sen Bai
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Single Fraction Frameless Stereotactic Radiosurgery on the Gamma Knife Icon for Patients With Brain Metastases: Time to Abandon the Frame?

Authors:  Rodney E Wegner; Zachary D Horne; Yun Liang; Matthew Goss; Alexander Yu; Jonathan Pace; Richard W Williamson; Jody Leonardo; Stephen M Karlovits; Russel Fuhrer
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-06-06

6.  Is Halcyon feasible for single thoracic or lumbar vertebral segment SBRT?

Authors:  Fang Li; Jeonghoon Park; Ron Lalonde; Si Young Jang; Maria Stefania diMayorca; John C Flickinger; Andrew Keller; Mohammed Saiful Huq
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Dosimetric impact of setup errors in head and neck cancer patients treated by image-guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Inderjit Kaur; Sheh Rawat; Parveen Ahlawat; Anjali Kakria; Gourav Gupta; Upasna Saxena; Manindra Bhushan Mishra
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun

8.  Set-up error and dosimetric analysis of HexaPOD evo RT 6D couch combined with cone beam CT image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy for primary malignant tumor of the cervical spine.

Authors:  Ping Jiang; Xile Zhang; Shuhua Wei; Tiandi Zhao; Junjie Wang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-03-14       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Head and neck cancer patient positioning using synthetic CT data in MRI-only radiation therapy.

Authors:  Emilia Palmér; Fredrik Nordström; Anna Karlsson; Karin Petruson; Maria Ljungberg; Maja Sohlin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 2.102

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.