Nicholas J Lowther1,2, Steven H Marsh2, Robert J W Louwe1. 1. Wellington Blood and Cancer Centre, Department of Radiation Oncology, Wellington, New Zealand. 2. University of Canterbury, School of Physical and Chemical Sciences, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Literature has reported reduced treatment toxicity in head-and-neck radiotherapy (HNRT) when reducing the planning target volume (PTV) margin from 5 to 3 mm but loco-regional control was not always preserved. This study used deformable image registration (DIR)-facilitated dose accumulation to assess clinical target volume (CTV) coverage in the presence of anatomical changes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: VMAT plans for 12 patients were optimized using 3 or 5 mm PTV and planning risk volume (PRV) margins. The planning computed tomography (pCT) scan was registered to each daily cone beam CT (CBCT) using DIR. The inverse registration was used to reconstruct and accumulate dose ( D acc ). CTV coverage was assessed using the dose-volume histogram (DVH) metric D 99 % acc and by individual voxel analysis. Both approaches included an uncertainty estimate using the 95% level of confidence. RESULTS: D 99 % acc was less than 95% of the prescribed dose D presc for three cases including only one case where this was at the 95% level of confidence. However for many patients, the accumulated dose included a substantial volume of voxels receiving less than 95% D presc independent of margin expansion, which predominantly occurred in the subdermal region. Loss in target coverage was very patient specific but tightness of target volume coverage at planning was a common factor leading to underdosage. CONCLUSION: This study agrees with previous literature that PTV/PRV margin reduction did not significantly reduce CTV coverage during treatment, but also highlighted that tight coverage of target volumes at planning increases the risk of clinically unacceptable dose delivery. Patient-specific verification of dose delivery to assess the dose delivered to each voxel is recommended.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Literature has reported reduced treatment toxicity in head-and-neck radiotherapy (HNRT) when reducing the planning target volume (PTV) margin from 5 to 3 mm but loco-regional control was not always preserved. This study used deformable image registration (DIR)-facilitated dose accumulation to assess clinical target volume (CTV) coverage in the presence of anatomical changes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: VMAT plans for 12 patients were optimized using 3 or 5 mm PTV and planning risk volume (PRV) margins. The planning computed tomography (pCT) scan was registered to each daily cone beam CT (CBCT) using DIR. The inverse registration was used to reconstruct and accumulate dose ( D acc ). CTV coverage was assessed using the dose-volume histogram (DVH) metric D 99 % acc and by individual voxel analysis. Both approaches included an uncertainty estimate using the 95% level of confidence. RESULTS: D 99 % acc was less than 95% of the prescribed dose D presc for three cases including only one case where this was at the 95% level of confidence. However for many patients, the accumulated dose included a substantial volume of voxels receiving less than 95% D presc independent of margin expansion, which predominantly occurred in the subdermal region. Loss in target coverage was very patient specific but tightness of target volume coverage at planning was a common factor leading to underdosage. CONCLUSION: This study agrees with previous literature that PTV/PRV margin reduction did not significantly reduce CTV coverage during treatment, but also highlighted that tight coverage of target volumes at planning increases the risk of clinically unacceptable dose delivery. Patient-specific verification of dose delivery to assess the dose delivered to each voxel is recommended.
Authors: Charlotte L Brouwer; Roel J H M Steenbakkers; Jean Bourhis; Wilfried Budach; Cai Grau; Vincent Grégoire; Marcel van Herk; Anne Lee; Philippe Maingon; Chris Nutting; Brian O'Sullivan; Sandro V Porceddu; David I Rosenthal; Nanna M Sijtsema; Johannes A Langendijk Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Vincent Grégoire; Mererid Evans; Quynh-Thu Le; Jean Bourhis; Volker Budach; Amy Chen; Abraham Eisbruch; Mei Feng; Jordi Giralt; Tejpal Gupta; Marc Hamoir; Juliana K Helito; Chaosu Hu; Keith Hunter; Jorgen Johansen; Johannes Kaanders; Sarbani Ghosh Laskar; Anne Lee; Philippe Maingon; Antti Mäkitie; Francesco Micciche'; Piero Nicolai; Brian O'Sullivan; Adela Poitevin; Sandro Porceddu; Krzysztof Składowski; Silke Tribius; John Waldron; Joseph Wee; Min Yao; Sue S Yom; Frank Zimmermann; Cai Grau Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Smith Apisarnthanarax; Danielle D Elliott; Adel K El-Naggar; Joshua A Asper; Angel Blanco; K Kian Ang; Adam S Garden; William H Morrison; David Rosenthal; Randal S Weber; K S Clifford Chao Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-10-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Joana Caldas-Magalhaes; Nina Kooij; Hans Ligtenberg; Elise A Jager; Tim Schakel; Nicolien Kasperts; Frank A Pameijer; Chris H J Terhaard; Luuk M Janssen; Paul J van Diest; Marielle E P Philippens; Cornelis P J Raaijmakers Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2015-03-03 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: Sorcha Campbell; Ian Poon; Dan Markel; Dan Vena; Kevin Higgins; Dan Enepekides; Simon Rapheal; John Wong; Ghassan Allo; Eric Morgen; Nader Khaoum; Ben Smith; Judith Balogh; Robert MacKenzie; Jean Davidson; Dan Wang; Martin Yaffe Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-02-05 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Tim Dijkema; Cornelis P J Raaijmakers; Randall K Ten Haken; Judith M Roesink; Pètra M Braam; Anette C Houweling; Marinus A Moerland; Avraham Eisbruch; Chris H J Terhaard Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-01-07 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jerry L Barker; Adam S Garden; K Kian Ang; Jennifer C O'Daniel; He Wang; Laurence E Court; William H Morrison; David I Rosenthal; K S Clifford Chao; Susan L Tucker; Radhe Mohan; Lei Dong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038