Cherenkov imaging method for rapid optimization of clinical treatment geometry in total skin electron beam therapy.

PURPOSE: A method was developed utilizing Cherenkov imaging for rapid and thorough determination of the two gantry angles that produce the most uniform treatment plane during dual-field total skin electron beam therapy (TSET).
METHODS: Cherenkov imaging was implemented to gather 2D measurements of relative surface dose from 6 MeV electron beams on a white polyethylene sheet. An intensified charge-coupled device camera time-gated to the Linac was used for Cherenkov emission imaging at sixty-two different gantry angles (1° increments, from 239.5° to 300.5°). Following a modified Stanford TSET technique, which uses two fields per patient position for full body coverage, composite images were created as the sum of two beam images on the sheet; each angle pair was evaluated for minimum variation across the patient region of interest. Cherenkov versus dose correlation was verified with ionization chamber measurements. The process was repeated at source to surface distance (SSD) = 441, 370.5, and 300 cm to determine optimal angle spread for varying room geometries. In addition, three patients receiving TSET using a modified Stanford six-dual field technique with 6 MeV electron beams at SSD = 441 cm were imaged during treatment.
RESULTS: As in previous studies, Cherenkov intensity was shown to directly correlate with dose for homogenous flat phantoms (R(2) = 0.93), making Cherenkov imaging an appropriate candidate to assess and optimize TSET setup geometry. This method provided dense 2D images allowing 1891 possible treatment geometries to be comprehensively analyzed from one data set of 62 single images. Gantry angles historically used for TSET at their institution were 255.5° and 284.5° at SSD = 441 cm; however, the angles optimized for maximum homogeneity were found to be 252.5° and 287.5° (+6° increase in angle spread). Ionization chamber measurements confirmed improvement in dose homogeneity across the treatment field from a range of 24.4% at the initial angles, to only 9.8% with the angles optimized. A linear relationship between angle spread and SSD was observed, ranging from 35° at 441 cm, to 39° at 300 cm, with no significant variation in percent-depth dose at midline (R(2) = 0.998). For patient studies, factors influencing in vivo correlation between Cherenkov intensity and measured surface dose are still being investigated.
CONCLUSIONS: Cherenkov intensity correlates to relative dose measured at depth of maximum dose in a uniform, flat phantom. Imaging of phantoms can thus be used to analyze and optimize TSET treatment geometry more extensively and rapidly than thermoluminescent dosimeters or ionization chambers. This work suggests that there could be an expanded role for Cherenkov imaging as a tool to efficiently improve treatment protocols and as a potential verification tool for routine monitoring of unique patient treatments.