Radiobiological model comparison of 3D conformal radiotherapy and IMRT plans for the treatment of prostate cancer

The main aim of radiotherapy is to deliver a dose of radiation that is high enough to destroy the tumour cells while at the same time minimising the damage to normal healthy tissues. Clinically, this has been achieved by assigning a prescription dose to the tumour volume and a set of dose constraints on critical structures. Once an optimal treatment plan has been achieved the dosimetry is assessed using the physical parameters of dose and volume. There has been an interest in using radiobiological parameters to evaluate and predict the outcome of a treatment plan in terms of both a tumour control probability (TCP) and a normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). In this study, simple radiobiological models that are available in a commercial treatment planning system were used to compare three dimensional conformal radiotherapy treatments (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatments of the prostate. Initially both 3D-CRT and IMRT were planned for 2 Gy/fraction to a total dose of 60 Gy to the prostate. The sensitivity of the TCP and the NTCP to both conventional dose escalation and hypo-fractionation was investigated. The biological responses were calculated using the Källman S-model. The complication free tumour control probability (P+) is generated from the combined NTCP and TCP response values. It has been suggested that the alpha/beta ratio for prostate carcinoma cells may be lower than for most other tumour cell types. The effect of this on the modelled biological response for the different fractionation schedules was also investigated.

A pre-treatment verification tool for IMRT based on EPID measurements and a GEANT4 back projection application

The aim of this work is to develop software that is capable of back projecting primary fluence images obtained from EPID measurements through phantom and patient geometries in order to calculate 3D dose distributions. In the first instance, we aim to develop a tool for pretreatment verification in IMRT. In our approach, a Geant4 application is used to back project primary fluence values from each EPID pixel towards the source. Each beam is considered to be polyenergetic, with a spectrum obtained from Monte Carlo calculations for the LINAC in question. At each step of the ray tracing process, the energy differential fluence is corrected for attenuation and beam divergence. Subsequently, the TERMA is calculated and accumulated to an energy differential 3D TERMA distribution. This distribution is then convolved with monoenergetic point spread kernels, thus generating energy differential 3D dose distributions. The resulting dose distributions are accumulated to yield the total dose distribution, which can then be used for pre-treatment verification of IMRT plans. Preliminary results were obtained for a test EPID image comprised of 100 9 100 pixels of unity fluence. Back projection of this field into a 30 cm9 30 cm 9 30 cm water phantom was performed, with TERMA distributions obtained in approximately 10 min (running on a single core of a 3 GHz processor). Point spread kernels for monoenergetic photons in water were calculated using a separate Geant4 application. Following convolution and summation, the resulting 3D dose distribution produced familiar build-up and penumbral features. In order to validate the dose model we will use EPID images recorded without any attenuating material in the beam for a number of MLC defined square fields. The dose distributions in water will be calculated and compared to TPS predictions.

Verification of patient position and delivery of IMRT by electronic portal imaging

Background and purpose: The purpose of the work presented in this paper was to determine whether patient positioning and delivery errors could be detected using electronic portal images of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Patients and methods: We carried out a series of controlled experiments delivering an IMRT beam to a humanoid phantom using both the dynamic and multiple static field method of delivery. The beams were imaged, the images calibrated to remove the IMRT fluence variation and then compared with calibrated images of the reference beams without any delivery or position errors. The first set of experiments involved translating the position of the phantom both laterally and in a superior/inferior direction a distance of 1, 2, 5 and 10 mm. The phantom was also rotated 1 and 28. For the second set of measurements the phantom position was kept fixed and delivery errors were introduced to the beam. The delivery errors took the form of leaf position and segment intensity errors. Results: The method was able to detect shifts in the phantom position of 1 mm, leaf position errors of 2 mm, and dosimetry errors of 10% on a single segment of a 15 segment IMRT step and shoot delivery (significantly less than 1% of the total dose). Conclusions: The results of this work have shown that the method of imaging the IMRT beam and calibrating the images to remove the intensity modulations could be a useful tool in verifying both the patient position and the delivery of the beam.

Verification of patient position and delivery of IMRT by electronic Portal Imaging

We have taken a new method of calibrating portal images of IMRT beams and used this to measure patient set-up accuracy and delivery errors, such as leaf errors and segment intensity errors during treatment. A calibration technique was used to remove the intensity modulations from the images leaving equivalent open field images that show patient anatomy that can be used for verification of the patient position. The images of the treatment beam can also be used to verify the delivery of the beam in terms of multileaf collimator leaf position and dosimetric errors. A series of controlled experiments delivering an IMRT anterior beam to the head and neck of a humanoid phantom were undertaken. A 2mm translation in the position of the phantom could be detected. With intentional introduction of delivery errors into the beam this method allowed us to detect leaf positioning errors of 2mm and variation in monitor units of 1%. The method was then applied to the case of a patient who received IMRT treatment to the larynx and cervical nodes. The anterior IMRT beam was imaged during four fractions and the images calibrated and investigated for the characteristic signs of patient position error and delivery error that were shown in the control experiments. No significant errors were seen. The method of imaging the IMRT beam and calibrating the images to remove the intensity modulations can be a useful tool in verifying both the patient position and the delivery of the beam.

Treatment plan complexity metrics for predicting IMRT pre-treatment quality assurance results

The planning of IMRT treatments requires a compromise between dose conformity (complexity) and deliverability. This study investigates established and novel treatment complexity metrics for 122 IMRT beams from prostate treatment plans. The Treatment and Dose Assessor software was used to extract the necessary data from exported treatment plan files and calculate the metrics. For most of the metrics, there was strong overlap between the calculated values for plans that passed and failed their quality assurance (QA) tests. However, statistically significant variation between plans that passed and failed QA measurements was found for the established modulation index and for a novel metric describing the proportion of small apertures in each beam. The ‘small aperture score’ provided threshold values which successfully distinguished deliverable treatment plans from plans that did not pass QA, with a low false negative rate.

Effects of small field output factors on IMRT optimisation and dose calculation

Introduction Given the known challenges of obtaining accurate measurements of small radiation fields, and the increasing use of small field segments in IMRT beams, this study examined the possible effects of referencing inaccurate field output factors in the planning of IMRT treatments. Methods This study used the Brainlab iPlan treatment planning system to devise IMRT treatment plans for delivery using the Brainlab m3 microMLC (Brainlab, Feldkirchen, Germany). Four pairs of sample IMRT treatments were planned using volumes, beams and prescriptions that were based on a set of test plans described in AAPM TG 119’s recommendations for the commissioning of IMRT treatment planning systems [1]: • C1, a set of three 4 cm volumes with different prescription doses, was modified to reduce the size of the PTV to 2 cm across and to include an OAR dose constraint for one of the other volumes. • C2, a prostate treatment, was planned as described by the TG 119 report [1]. • C3, a head-and-neck treatment with a PTV larger than 10 cm across, was excluded from the study. • C4, an 8 cm long C-shaped PTV surrounding a cylindrical OAR, was planned as described in the TG 119 report [1] and then replanned with the length of the PTV reduced to 4 cm. Both plans in each pair used the same beam angles, collimator angles, dose reference points, prescriptions and constraints. However, one of each pair of plans had its beam modulation optimisation and dose calculation completed with reference to existing iPlan beam data and the other had its beam modulation optimisation and dose calculation completed with reference to revised beam data. The beam data revisions consisted of increasing the field output factor for a 0.6 9 0.6 cm2 field by 17 % and increasing the field output factor for a 1.2 9 1.2 cm2 field by 3 %. Results The use of different beam data resulted in different optimisation results with different microMLC apertures and segment weightings between the two plans for each treatment, which led to large differences (up to 30 % with an average of 5 %) between reference point doses in each pair of plans. These point dose differences are more indicative of the modulation of the plans than of any clinically relevant changes to the overall PTV or OAR doses. By contrast, the maximum, minimum and mean doses to the PTVs and OARs were smaller (less than 1 %, for all beams in three out of four pairs of treatment plans) but are more clinically important. Of the four test cases, only the shortened (4 cm) version of TG 119’s C4 plan showed substantial differences between the overall doses calculated in the volumes of interest using the different sets of beam data and thereby suggested that treatment doses could be affected by changes to small field output factors. An analysis of the complexity of this pair of plans, using Crowe et al.’s TADA code [2], indicated that iPlan’s optimiser had produced IMRT segments comprised of larger numbers of small microMLC leaf separations than in the other three test cases. Conclusion: The use of altered small field output factors can result in substantially altered doses when large numbers of small leaf apertures are used to modulate the beams, even when treating relatively large volumes.

Sensitivity of an Elekta iView GT a-Si EPID model to delivery errors for pre-treatment verification of IMRT fields

A Monte Carlo model of an Elekta iViewGT amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device (a-Si EPID) has been validated for pre-treatment verification of clinical IMRT treatment plans. The simulations involved the use of the BEAMnrc and DOSXYZnrc Monte Carlo codes to predict the response of the iViewGT a-Si EPID model. The predicted EPID images were compared to the measured images obtained from the experiment. The measured EPID images were obtained by delivering a photon beam from an Elekta Synergy linac to the Elekta iViewGT a-Si EPID. The a-Si EPID was used with no additional build-up material. Frame averaged EPID images were acquired and processed using in-house software. The agreement between the predicted and measured images was analyzed using the gamma analysis technique with acceptance criteria of 3% / 3 mm. The results show that the predicted EPID images for four clinical IMRT treatment plans have a good agreement with the measured EPID signal. Three prostate IMRT plans were found to have an average gamma pass rate of more than 95.0 % and a spinal IMRT plan has the average gamma pass rate of 94.3 %. During the period of performing this work a routine MLC calibration was performed and one of the IMRT treatments re-measured with the EPID. A change in the gamma pass rate for one field was observed. This was the motivation for a series of experiments to investigate the sensitivity of the method by introducing delivery errors, MLC position and dosimetric overshoot, into the simulated EPID images. The method was found to be sensitive to 1 mm leaf position errors and 10% overshoot errors.

Experienced-based management of IMRT quality assurance

This study uses the detailed, bulk analyses of a set of treatment planning and quality assurance data from one radiotherapy centre to provide an illuminating example of the provision evidence-based advice on the management, and potential reduction, of an IMRT quality assurance workload.

Examination of the properties of IMRT and VMAT beams and evaluation against pre-treatment quality assurance results

This study aimed to provide a detailed evaluation and comparison of a range of modulated beam evaluation metrics, in terms of their correlation with QA testing results and their variation between treatment sites, for a large number of treatments. Ten metrics including the modulation index (MI), fluence map complexity (FMC), modulation complexity score (MCS), mean aperture displacement (MAD) and small aperture score (SAS) were evaluated for 546 beams from 122 IMRT and VMAT treatment plans targeting the anus, rectum, endometrium, brain, head and neck and prostate. The calculated sets of metrics were evaluated in terms of their relationships to each other and their correlation with the results of electronic portal imaging based quality assurance (QA) evaluations of the treatment beams. Evaluation of the MI, MAD and SAS suggested that beams used in treatments of the anus, rectum, head and neck were more complex than the prostate and brain treatment beams. Seven of the ten beam complexity metrics were found to be strongly correlated with the results from QA testing of the IMRT beams (p < 0.00008). For example, Values of SAS (with MLC apertures narrower than 10 mm defined as “small”) less than 0.2 also identified QA passing IMRT beams with 100% specificity. However, few of the metrics are correlated with the results from QA testing of the VMAT beams, whether they were evaluated as whole 360◦ arcs or as 60◦ sub-arcs. Select evaluation of beam complexity metrics (at least MI, MCS and SAS) is therefore recommended, as an intermediate step in the IMRT QA chain. Such evaluation may also be useful as a means of periodically reviewing VMAT planning or optimiser performance.

Suitability of diodes for point dose measurements in IMRT/VMAT beams

This study investigated a potential source of inaccuracy for diode measurements in modulated beams; the effect of diode housing asymmetry on measurement results. The possible effects of diode housing asymmetry on the measurement of steep dose gradients were evaluated by measuring 5x5 cm2 beam profiles, with three cylindrical diodes and two commonly used ionization chambers, with each dosimeter positioned in a 3D scanning water tank with its stem perpendicular to the beam axis (horizontal) and parallel to the direction of scanning. The resulting profiles were used to compare the penumbrae measured with the diode stem pointing into (equivalent to a “stem-first” setup) and out of the field (equivalent to a “stem-last” setup) in order to evaluate the effects of dosimeter alignment and thereby identify the effects of dosimeter asymmetry. The stem-first and stem-last orientations resulted in differences of up to 0.2 mm in the measured 20-80% penumbra widths and differences of up to 0.4 mm in the off axis position of the 90% isodose. These differences, which are smaller than previously reported for older model dosimeters, were apparent in the profile results for both diodes and small volume ionization chambers. As an extension to this study, the practical use of all five dosimeters was exemplified by measuring point doses in IMRT test beams. These measurements showed good agreement (within 2%) between the diodes and the small volume ionization chamber, with all of these dosimeters being able to identify a region 3% under-dosage which was not identified by a larger volume (6 mm diameter) ionization chamber. The results of this work should help to remove some of the barriers to the use of diodes for modulated radiotherapy dosimetry in the future.

CBCT-guided radiotherapy for locally advanced head and cancer: dosimetric impact of weight loss on VMAT and IMRT plans for selected organs at risk structures (OARs)

Purpose: It is common for head and neck patients to be affected by time trend errors as a result of weight loss during a course of radiation treatment. The objective of this planning study was to investigate the impact of weight loss on Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) as well as Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for locally advanced head and neck cancer using automatic co-registration of the CBCT. Methods and Materials: A retrospective analysis of previously treated IMRT plans for 10 patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer patients was done. A VMAT plan was also produced for all patients. We calculated the dose–volume histograms (DVH) indices for spinal cord planning at risk volumes (PRVs), the brainstem PRVs (SC+0.5cm and BS+0.5cm, respectively) as well as mean dose to the parotid glands. Results: The results show that the mean difference in dose to the SC+0.5cm was 1.03% and 1.27% for the IMRT and VMAT plans, respectively. As for dose to the BS+0.5, the percentage difference was 0.63% for the IMRT plans and 0.61% for the VMAT plans. The analysis of the parotid gland doses shows that the percentage change in mean dose to left parotid was -8.0% whereas that of the right parotid was -6.4% for the IMRT treatment plans. In the VMAT plans, the percentages change for the left and the right parotid glands were -6.6% and -6.7% respectively. Conclusions: This study shows a clinically significant impact of weight loss on DVH indices analysed in head and neck organs at risk. It highlights the importance of adaptive radiotherapy in head and neck patients if organ at risk sparing is to be maintained.

Ototoxicity evaluation in medulloblastoma patients treated with involved field boost using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): a retrospective review

Background: Ototoxicity is a known side effect of combined radiation therapy and cisplatin chemotherapy for the treatment of medulloblastoma. the delivery of an involved field boost by intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) may reduce the dose to the inner ear when compared with conventional radiotherapy. the dose of cisplatin may also affect the risk of ototoxicity. A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the impact of involved field boost using IMRT and cisplatin dose on the rate of ototoxicity.Methods: Data from 41 medulloblastoma patients treated with IMRT were collected. Overall and disease-free survival rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method Hearing function was graded according to toxicity criteria of Pediatric Oncology Group (POG). Doses to inner ear and total cisplatin dose were correlated with hearing function by univariate and multivariate data analysis.Results: After a mean follow-up of 44 months (range: 14 to 72 months), 37 patients remained alive, with two recurrences, both in spine with CSF involvement, resulting in a disease free-survival and overall survival of 85.2% and 90.2%, respectively. Seven patients (17%) experienced POG Grade 3 or 4 toxicity. Cisplatin dose was a significant factor for hearing loss in univariate analysis (p < 0.03). in multivariate analysis, median dose to inner ear was significantly associated with hearing loss (p < 0.01). POG grade 3 and 4 toxicity were uncommon with median doses to the inner ear bellow 42 Gy (p < 0.05) and total cisplatin dose of less than 375 mg/m(2) (p < 0.01).Conclusions: IMRT leads to a low rate of severe ototoxicity. Median radiation dose to auditory apparatus should be kept below 42 Gy. Cisplatin doses should not exceed 375 mg/m(2).

Knowledge-based IMRT treatment planning for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of using a knowledge base of prior treatment plans to generate new prostate intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans. Each new case would be matched against others in the knowledge base. Once the best match is identified, that clinically approved plan is used to generate the new plan. METHODS: A database of 100 prostate IMRT treatment plans was assembled into an information-theoretic system. An algorithm based on mutual information was implemented to identify similar patient cases by matching 2D beam's eye view projections of contours. Ten randomly selected query cases were each matched with the most similar case from the database of prior clinically approved plans. Treatment parameters from the matched case were used to develop new treatment plans. A comparison of the differences in the dose-volume histograms between the new and the original treatment plans were analyzed. RESULTS: On average, the new knowledge-based plan is capable of achieving very comparable planning target volume coverage as the original plan, to within 2% as evaluated for D98, D95, and D1. Similarly, the dose to the rectum and dose to the bladder are also comparable to the original plan. For the rectum, the mean and standard deviation of the dose percentage differences for D20, D30, and D50 are 1.8% +/- 8.5%, -2.5% +/- 13.9%, and -13.9% +/- 23.6%, respectively. For the bladder, the mean and standard deviation of the dose percentage differences for D20, D30, and D50 are -5.9% +/- 10.8%, -12.2% +/- 14.6%, and -24.9% +/- 21.2%, respectively. A negative percentage difference indicates that the new plan has greater dose sparing as compared to the original plan. CONCLUSIONS: The authors demonstrate a knowledge-based approach of using prior clinically approved treatment plans to generate clinically acceptable treatment plans of high quality. This semiautomated approach has the potential to improve the efficiency of the treatment planning process while ensuring that high quality plans are developed.