Commissioning an Anthropomorphic Spine and Lung Phantom for Remote Dose Verification of Institutions Participating in RTOG 0631

The RPC developed a new phantom to ensure comparable and consistent radiation administration in spinal radiosurgery clinical trials. This study assessed the phantom’s dosimetric and anatomic utility. The ‘spine phantom’ is a water filled thorax with anatomy encountered in spinal radiosurgery: target volume, vertebral column, spinal canal, esophagus, heart, and lungs. The dose to the target volume was measured with axial and sagittal planes of radiochromic film and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD). The dose distributions were measured with the radiochromic film calibrated to the absolute dose measured by the TLD. Four irradiations were administered: a four angle box plan, a seven angle conformal plan, a seven angle IMRT plan, and a nine angle IMRT plan (denoted as IMRT plan #1 and plan #2, respectively). In each plan, at least 95% of the defined tumor volume received 8 Gy. For each irradiation the planned and administered dose distributions were registered via pinpricks, and compared using point dose measurements, dose profiles, isodose distributions, and gamma analyses. Based on previous experience at the RPC, a gamma analysis was considering passing if greater than 95% of pixels passed the criteria of 5% dose difference and 3 mm distance-to-agreement. Each irradiation showed acceptable agreement in the qualitative assessments and exceeded the 95% passing rate at the 5% / 3 mm criteria, except IMRT plan #1, which was determined to have been poorly localized during treatment administration. The measured and planned dose distributions demonstrated acceptable agreement at the 5% / 3 mm criteria, and the spine phantom was determined to be a useful tool for the remote assessment of an institution’s treatment planning and dose delivery regimen.

DUAL ENERGY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR PROTON THERAPY TREATMENT PLANNING

Proton radiation therapy is gaining popularity because of the unique characteristics of its dose distribution, e.g., high dose-gradient at the distal end of the percentage-depth-dose curve (known as the Bragg peak). The high dose-gradient offers the possibility of delivering high dose to the target while still sparing critical organs distal to the target. However, the high dose-gradient is a double-edged sword: a small shift of the highly conformal high-dose area can cause the target to be substantially under-dosed or the critical organs to be substantially over-dosed. Because of that, large margins are required in treatment planning to ensure adequate dose coverage of the target, which prevents us from realizing the full potential of proton beams. Therefore, it is critical to reduce uncertainties in the proton radiation therapy. One major uncertainty in a proton treatment is the range uncertainty related to the estimation of proton stopping power ratio (SPR) distribution inside a patient. The SPR distribution inside a patient is required to account for tissue heterogeneities when calculating dose distribution inside the patient. In current clinical practice, the SPR distribution inside a patient is estimated from the patient’s treatment planning computed tomography (CT) images based on the CT number-to-SPR calibration curve. The SPR derived from a single CT number carries large uncertainties in the presence of human tissue composition variations, which is the major drawback of the current SPR estimation method. We propose to solve this problem by using dual energy CT (DECT) and hypothesize that the range uncertainty can be reduced by a factor of two from currently used value of 3.5%. A MATLAB program was developed to calculate the electron density ratio (EDR) and effective atomic number (EAN) from two CT measurements of the same object. An empirical relationship was discovered between mean excitation energies and EANs existing in human body tissues. With the MATLAB program and the empirical relationship, a DECT-based method was successfully developed to derive SPRs for human body tissues (the DECT method). The DECT method is more robust against the uncertainties in human tissues compositions than the current single-CT-based method, because the DECT method incorporated both density and elemental composition information in the SPR estimation. Furthermore, we studied practical limitations of the DECT method. We found that the accuracy of the DECT method using conventional kV-kV x-ray pair is susceptible to CT number variations, which compromises the theoretical advantage of the DECT method. Our solution to this problem is to use a different x-ray pair for the DECT. The accuracy of the DECT method using different combinations of x-ray energies, i.e., the kV-kV, kV-MV and MV-MV pair, was compared using the measured imaging uncertainties for each case. The kV-MV DECT was found to be the most robust against CT number variations. In addition, we studied how uncertainties propagate through the DECT calculation, and found general principles of selecting x-ray pairs for the DECT method to minimize its sensitivity to CT number variations. The uncertainties in SPRs estimated using the kV-MV DECT were analyzed further and compared to those using the stoichiometric method. The uncertainties in SPR estimation can be divided into five categories according to their origins: the inherent uncertainty, the DECT modeling uncertainty, the CT imaging uncertainty, the uncertainty in the mean excitation energy, and SPR variation with proton energy. Additionally, human body tissues were divided into three tissue groups – low density (lung) tissues, soft tissues and bone tissues. The uncertainties were estimated separately because their uncertainties were different under each condition. An estimate of the composite range uncertainty (2s) was determined for three tumor sites – prostate, lung, and head-and-neck, by combining the uncertainty estimates of all three tissue groups, weighted by their proportions along typical beam path for each treatment site. In conclusion, the DECT method holds theoretical advantages in estimating SPRs for human tissues over the current single-CT-based method. Using existing imaging techniques, the kV-MV DECT approach was capable of reducing the range uncertainty from the currently used value of 3.5% to 1.9%-2.3%, but it is short to reach our original goal of reducing the range uncertainty by a factor of two. The dominant source of uncertainties in the kV-MV DECT was the uncertainties in CT imaging, especially in MV CT imaging. Further reduction in beam hardening effect, the impact of scatter, out-of-field object etc. would reduce the Hounsfeld Unit variations in CT imaging. The kV-MV DECT still has the potential to reduce the range uncertainty further.

EVALUATION OF INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY (IMRT) DELIVERY ERROR DUE TO IMRT TREATMENT PLAN COMPLEXITY AND IMPROPERLY MATCHED DOSIMETRY DATA

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a technique that delivers a highly conformal dose distribution to a target volume while attempting to maximally spare the surrounding normal tissues. IMRT is a common treatment modality used for treating head and neck (H&N) cancers, and the presence of many critical structures in this region requires accurate treatment delivery. The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) acts as both a remote and on-site quality assurance agency that credentials institutions participating in clinical trials. To date, about 30% of all IMRT participants have failed the RPC’s remote audit using the IMRT H&N phantom. The purpose of this project is to evaluate possible causes of H&N IMRT delivery errors observed by the RPC, specifically IMRT treatment plan complexity and the use of improper dosimetry data from machines that were thought to be matched but in reality were not. Eight H&N IMRT plans with a range of complexity defined by total MU (1460-3466), number of segments (54-225), and modulation complexity scores (MCS) (0.181-0.609) were created in Pinnacle v.8m. These plans were delivered to the RPC’s H&N phantom on a single Varian Clinac. One of the IMRT plans (1851 MU, 88 segments, and MCS=0.469) was equivalent to the median H&N plan from 130 previous RPC H&N phantom irradiations. This average IMRT plan was also delivered on four matched Varian Clinac machines and the dose distribution calculated using a different 6MV beam model. Radiochromic film and TLD within the phantom were used to analyze the dose profiles and absolute doses, respectively. The measured and calculated were compared to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy. All deliveries met the RPC acceptance criteria of ±7% absolute dose difference and 4 mm distance-to-agreement (DTA). Additionally, gamma index analysis was performed for all deliveries using a ±7%/4mm and ±5%/3mm criteria. Increasing the treatment plan complexity by varying the MU, number of segments, or varying the MCS resulted in no clear trend toward an increase in dosimetric error determined by the absolute dose difference, DTA, or gamma index. Varying the delivery machines as well as the beam model (use of a Clinac 6EX 6MV beam model vs. Clinac 21EX 6MV model), also did not show any clear trend towards an increased dosimetric error using the same criteria indicated above.

Improving Cervical Cancer Nodal Boost Radiation Therapy by Quantifying Uncertainties and Exploring Advanced Radiation Therapy Modalities

Radiation therapy for patients with intact cervical cancer is frequently delivered using primary external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) followed by two fractions of intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT). Although the tumor is the primary radiation target, controlling microscopic disease in the lymph nodes is just as critical to patient treatment outcome. In patients where gross lymphadenopathy is discovered, an extra EBRT boost course is delivered between the two ICBT fractions. Since the nodal boost is an addendum to primary EBRT and ICBT, the prescription and delivery must be performed considering previously delivered dose. This project aims to address the major issues of this complex process for the purpose of improving treatment accuracy while increasing dose sparing to the surrounding normal tissues. Because external beam boosts to involved lymph nodes are given prior to the completion of ICBT, assumptions must be made about dose to positive lymph nodes from future implants. The first aim of this project was to quantify differences in nodal dose contribution between independent ICBT fractions. We retrospectively evaluated differences in the ICBT dose contribution to positive pelvic nodes for ten patients who had previously received external beam nodal boost. Our results indicate that the mean dose to the pelvic nodes differed by up to 1.9 Gy between independent ICBT fractions. The second aim is to develop and validate a volumetric method for summing dose of the normal tissues during prescription of nodal boost. The traditional method of dose summation uses the maximum point dose from each modality, which often only represents the worst case scenario. However, the worst case is often an exaggeration when highly conformal therapy methods such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) are used. We used deformable image registration algorithms to volumetrically sum dose for the bladder and rectum and created a voxel-by-voxel validation method. The mean error in deformable image registration results of all voxels within the bladder and rectum were 5 and 6 mm, respectively. Finally, the third aim explored the potential use of proton therapy to reduce normal tissue dose. A major physical advantage of protons over photons is that protons stop after delivering dose in the tumor. Although theoretically superior to photons, proton beams are more sensitive to uncertainties caused by interfractional anatomical variations, and must be accounted for during treatment planning to ensure complete target coverage. We have demonstrated a systematic approach to determine population-based anatomical margin requirements for proton therapy. The observed optimal treatment angles for common iliac nodes were 90° (left lateral) and 180° (posterior-anterior [PA]) with additional 0.8 cm and 0.9 cm margins, respectively. For external iliac nodes, lateral and PA beams required additional 0.4 cm and 0.9 cm margins, respectively. Through this project, we have provided radiation oncologists with additional information about potential differences in nodal dose between independent ICBT insertions and volumetric total dose distribution in the bladder and rectum. We have also determined the margins needed for safe delivery of proton therapy when delivering nodal boosts to patients with cervical cancer.

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Evaluation with the Radiological Physics Center Head and Neck Phantom

Validation of treatment plan quality and dose calculation accuracy is essential for new radiotherapy techniques, including volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). VMAT delivers intensity modulated radiotherapy treatments while simultaneously rotating the gantry, adding an additional level of complexity to both the dose calculation and delivery of VMAT treatments compared to static gantry IMRT. The purpose of this project was to compare two VMAT systems, Elekta VMAT and Varian RapidArc, to the current standard of care, IMRT, in terms of both treatment plan quality and dosimetric delivery accuracy using the Radiological Physics Center (RPC) head and neck (H&N) phantom. Clinically relevant treatment plans were created for the phantom using typical prescription and dose constraints for Elekta VMAT (planned with Pinnacle3 Smart Arc) and RapidArc and IMRT (both planned with Eclipse). The treatment plans were evaluated to determine if they were clinically comparable using several dosimetric criteria, including ability to meet dose objectives, hot spots, conformity index, and homogeneity index. The planned treatments were delivered to the phantom and absolute doses and relative dose distributions were measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and radiochromic film, respectively. The measured and calculated doses of each treatment were compared to determine if they were clinically acceptable based upon RPC criteria of ±7% dose difference and 4 mm distance-to-agreement. Gamma analysis was used to assess dosimetric accuracy, as well. All treatment plans were able to meet the dosimetric objectives set by the RPC and had similar hot spots in the normal tissue. The Elekta VMAT plan was more homogenous but less conformal than the RapidArc and IMRT plans. When comparing the measured and calculated doses, all plans met the RPC ±7%/4 mm criteria. The percent of points passing the gamma analysis for each treatment delivery was acceptable. Treatment plan quality of the Elekta VMAT, RapidArc and IMRT treatments were comparable for consistent dose prescriptions and constraints. Additionally, the dosimetric accuracy of the Elekta VMAT and RapidArc treatments was verified to be within acceptable tolerances.