Roel A Rozendaal1, Ben J Mijnheer2, Olga Hamming-Vrieze2, Anton Mans2, Marcel van Herk2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: r.rozendaal@nki.nl. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Target dose verification for VMAT treatments of head-and-neck (H&N) cancer using 3D in vivo EPID dosimetry is expected to be affected by daily anatomical changes. By including these anatomical changes through cone-beam CT (CBCT) information, the magnitude of this effect is investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 20 VMAT-treated H&N cancer patients, all plan-CTs (pCTs), 633 CBCTs and 1266 EPID movies were used to compare four dose distributions per fraction: treatment planning system (TPS) calculated dose and EPID reconstructed in vivo dose, both determined using the pCT and using the CBCT. D2, D50 and D98 of the planning target volume (PTV) were determined per dose distribution. RESULTS: When including daily anatomical information, D2, D50 and D98 of the PTV change on average by 0.0±0.4% according to TPS calculations; the standard deviation of the difference between EPID and TPS target dose changes from 2.5% (pCT) to 2.1% (CBCT). Small time trends are seen for both TPS and EPID dose distributions when using the pCT, which disappear when including CBCT information. CONCLUSIONS: Daily anatomical changes hardly influence the target dose distribution for H&N VMAT treatments according to TPS recalculations. Including CBCT information in EPID dose reconstructions slightly improves the agreement with TPS calculations.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Target dose verification for VMAT treatments of head-and-neck (H&N) cancer using 3D in vivo EPID dosimetry is expected to be affected by daily anatomical changes. By including these anatomical changes through cone-beam CT (CBCT) information, the magnitude of this effect is investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 20 VMAT-treated H&N cancerpatients, all plan-CTs (pCTs), 633 CBCTs and 1266 EPID movies were used to compare four dose distributions per fraction: treatment planning system (TPS) calculated dose and EPID reconstructed in vivo dose, both determined using the pCT and using the CBCT. D2, D50 and D98 of the planning target volume (PTV) were determined per dose distribution. RESULTS: When including daily anatomical information, D2, D50 and D98 of the PTV change on average by 0.0±0.4% according to TPS calculations; the standard deviation of the difference between EPID and TPS target dose changes from 2.5% (pCT) to 2.1% (CBCT). Small time trends are seen for both TPS and EPID dose distributions when using the pCT, which disappear when including CBCT information. CONCLUSIONS: Daily anatomical changes hardly influence the target dose distribution for H&N VMAT treatments according to TPS recalculations. Including CBCT information in EPID dose reconstructions slightly improves the agreement with TPS calculations.
Authors: Maria D Falco; Stefano Giancaterino; Andrea De Nicola; Nico Adorante; Ramon Gimenez De Lorenzo; Monica Di Tommaso; Annamaria Vinciguerra; Marianna Trignani; Francesca Perrotti; Albina Allajbej; Andrea Fidanzio; Francesca Greco; Mattia Grusio; Domenico Genovesi; Angelo Piermattei Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-01-01
Authors: S B Lim; C J Tsai; Y Yu; P Greer; T Fuangrod; K Hwang; S Fontenla; F Coffman; N Lee; D M Lovelock Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-01-01
Authors: Seng Boh Lim; Nancy Lee; Kaveh Zakeri; Peter Greer; Todsaporn Fuangrod; Frederick Coffman; Laura Cerviño; D Michael Lovelock Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021 Jan-Dec