Stereotactic radiotherapy of extracranial targets: CT-simulation and accuracy of treatment in the stereotactic body frame.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Evaluation of set-up accuracy and analysis of target reproducibility in the stereotactic body frame (SBF), designed by Blomgren and Lax from Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm. Different types of targets were analyzed for the risk of target deviation. The correlation of target deviation to bony structures was analyzed to evaluate the value of bones as reference structures for isocenter verification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with 32 targets were treated in the SBF for primary or metastatic peripheral lung cancer, liver metastases, abdominal and pelvic tumor recurrences or bone metastases. Set-up accuracy and target mobility were evaluated by CT-simulation and port films. The contours of the target at isocenter level, bony structures and body outline were compared by matching the CT-slices for treatment planning and simulation using the stereotactic coordinates of the SBF as external reference system. The matching procedure was performed by using a 3D treatment planning program. RESULTS: Set-up accuracy represented by bony structures revealed standard deviations (SD) of 3.5 mm in longitudinal, 2.2 mm in anterior-posterior and 3.9 mm in lateral directions. Target reproducibility showed a SD of 4.4 mm in longitudinal, 3.4 mm ap and 3.3 mm in lateral direction prior to correction. Correlation of target deviation to bones ranged from 33% (soft tissue targets) to 100% (bones). CONCLUSION: A security margin of 5 mm for PTV definition is sufficient, if CT simulation is performed prior to each treatment to correct larger target deviations or set-up errors. Isocenter verification relative to bony structures is only safe for bony targets but not for soft tissue targets.     

Geometric accuracy of field alignment in fractionated stereotactic conformal radiotherapy of brain tumors

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of field alignment in patients undergoing three-dimensional (3D) conformal radiotherapy of brain tumors, and to evaluate the impact on the definition of planning target volume and control procedures. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Geometric accuracy was analyzed in 20 patients undergoing fractionated stereotactic conformal radiotherapy for brain tumors. Rigid head fixation was achieved by using cast material. Transfer of stereotactic coordinates was performed by an external positioning device. The accuracy during treatment planning was quantitatively assessed by using repeated computed tomography (CT) examinations in treatment position (reproducibility of isocenter). Linear discrepancies were measured between treatment plan and CT examination. In addition, for each patient, a series of 20 verifications were taken in orthogonal projections. Linear discrepancies were measured between first and all subsequent verifications (accuracy during treatment delivery). RESULTS: For the total group of patients, the distribution of deviations during treatment setup showed mean values between -0.3-1.2 mm, with standard deviations (SD) of 1.3-2.0 mm. During treatment delivery, the distribution of deviations revealed mean values between 0.7-0.8 mm, with SDs of 0.5-0.6 mm, respectively. For all patients, deviations for the transition to the treatment machine were similar to deviations during subsequent treatment delivery, with 95% of all absolute deviations between less than 2.8 and 4.6 mm. CONCLUSION: Random fluctuations of field displacements during treatment planning and delivery prevail. Therefore, our quantitative data should be considered when prescribing the safety margins of the planning target volume. Repeated CT examination are useful to detect operator errors and large random or systematic deviations before start of treatment. Control procedures during treatment delivery appear to be of limited importance. In addition, our findings should help to determine "cut-off points" for corrective actions in stereotactic conformal radiotherapy of brain tumors.     

The TALON removable head frame system for stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy: measurement of the repositioning accuracy

PURPOSE: To present the TALON removable head frame system as an immobilization device for single-fraction intensity-modulated stereotactic radiosurgery (IMRS) and fractionated stereotactic intensity-modulated radiotherapy (FS-IMRT); and to evaluate the repositioning accuracy by measurement of anatomic landmark coordinates in repeated computed tomography (CT) examinations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Nine patients treated by fractionated stereotactic intensity-modulated radiotherapy underwent repeated CTs during their treatment courses. We evaluated anatomic landmark coordinates in a total of 26 repeat CT data sets and respective x, y, and z shifts relative to their positions in the nine treatment-planning reference CTs. An iterative optimization algorithm was employed using a root mean square scoring function to determine the best-fit orientation of subsequent sets of anatomic landmark measurements relative to the original image set. This allowed for the calculation of the x, y, and z components of translation of the target isocenter for each repeat CT. In addition to absolute target isocenter translation, the magnitude (sum vector) of isocenter motion and the patient/target rotation about the three principal axes were calculated. RESULTS: Anatomic landmark analysis over a treatment course of 6 weeks revealed a mean target isocenter translation of 0.95 +/- 0.55, 0.58 +/- 0.46, and 0.51 +/- 0.38 mm in x, y, and z directions, respectively. The mean magnitude of isocenter translation was 1.38 +/- 0.48 mm. The 95% confidence interval ([CI], mean translation plus two standard deviations) for repeated isocenter setup accuracy over the 6-week period was 2.34 mm. Average rotations about the x, y, and z axes were 0.41 +/- 0.36, 0.29 +/- 0.25, and 0.18 +/- 0.15 degrees, respectively. Analysis of the accuracy of the first repeated setup control, representative of single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery situations, resulted in a mean target isocenter translation in the x, y, and z directions of 0.52 +/- 0.38, 0.56 +/- 0.30, and 0.46 +/- 0.25 mm, respectively. The mean magnitude of isocenter translation was 0.99 +/- 0.28 mm. The 95% confidence interval for these radiosurgery situations was 1.55 mm. Average rotations at first repeated setup control about the x, y, and z axes were 0.24 +/- 0.19, 0.19 +/- 0.17, and 0.19 +/- 0.12 degrees, respectively. CONCLUSION: The TALON relocatable head frame was seen to be well suited for immobilization and repositioning of single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery treatments. Because of its unique removable design, the system was also seen to provide excellent repeat immobilization and alignment for fractionated stereotactic applications. The exceptional accuracy for the single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgical application of the system was seen to deteriorate only slightly over a 6-week fractionated stereotactic treatment course.     

Assessment of the accuracy of a conventional simulation for radiotherapy of head and skull base tumors

In this prospective study we investigated the absolute accuracy of the conventional simulation in head and skull base tumors. 41 isocenters in 40 consecutive patients with tumors of the head and skull base were included. In all cases a rigid stereotactic mask system was used for non-invasive fixation. The stereotactic ("calculated") coordinates of the isocenter were defined by the treatment planning computer. Each patient underwent a physical simulation using exclusively anatomical reference points to define the "preliminary" isocenter. The displacement between its coordinates and those of the stereotactic target point was recorded in X-, Y- and Z-direction with help of the targeting device, and the spatial error was calculated. Additionally, the patients were stratified by basal or calvarial tumor site to estimate the importance of the basal bone structures in the simulation accuracy. The influence of the learning effect on simulation accuracy was also determined. The results showed an accuracy of set-up at the linac within 1 mm in all three directions as calculated from orthogonal portal films. Mean shift of the isocenter coordinates obtained from physical simulation compared to the calculated stereotactic coordinates was 2.15 mm, 2.54 mm, and 2.69 mm for X-, Y-, and Z-direction, respectively. Mean spatial displacement amounted 5.06 mm, and the median was 4.50 mm. No significant difference could be noted between basal and calvarial location of the isocenter. A significant "learning effect" was observed with a decrease in spatial shift with increasing patient numbers. This effect was stronger in basal lesions, whereas calvarial lesions showed only a minor, insignificant effect. In conclusion, a physical simulation requires a safety margin of 5 mm in PTV definition in addition to other factors, e.g. organ movement.     

Reliability of the bony anatomy in image-guided stereotactic radiotherapy of brain metastases

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether the position of brain metastases remains stable between planning and treatment in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighteen patients with 20 brain metastases were treated with single-fraction (17 lesions) or hypofractionated (3 lesions) image-guided SRT. Median time interval between planning and treatment was 8 days. Before treatment a cone-beam CT (CBCT) and a conventional CT after application of i.v. contrast were acquired. Setup errors using automatic bone registration (CBCT) and manual soft-tissue registration of the brain metastases (conventional CT) were compared. RESULTS: Tumor size was not significantly different between planning and treatment. The three-dimensional setup error (mean +/- SD) was 4.0 +/- 2.1 mm and 3.5 +/- 2.2 mm according to the bony anatomy and the lesion itself, respectively. A highly significant correlation between automatic bone match and soft-tissue registration was seen in all three directions (r >/= 0.88). The three-dimensional distance between the isocenter according to bone match and soft-tissue registration was 1.7 +/- 0.7 mm, maximum 2.8 mm. Treatment of intracranial pressure with steroids did not influence the position of the lesion relative to the bony anatomy. CONCLUSION: With a time interval of approximately 1 week between planning and treatment, the bony anatomy of the skull proved to be an excellent surrogate for the target position in image-guided SRT.     

Image localization for frameless stereotactic radiotherapy

Purpose: Infrared light-emitting diodes (IRLEDs) have been used for optic-guided stereotactic radiotherapy localization at the University of Florida since 1995. The current paradigm requires stereotactic head ring placement for the patient’s first fraction. The stereotactic coordinates and treatment plan are determined relative to this head ring. The IRLEDs are attached to the patient via a maxillary bite plate, and the position of the IRLEDs relative to linac isocenter is saved to file. These positions are then recalled for each subsequent treatment to position the patient for fractionated therapy. The purpose of this article was to report a method of predicting the desired IRLED locations without need for the invasive head ring.

Methods and Materials: To achieve the goal of frameless optic-guided radiotherapy, a method is required for direct localization of the IRLED positions from a CT scan. Because it is difficult to localize the exact point of light emission from a CT scan of an IRLED, a new bite plate was designed that contains eight aluminum fiducial markers along with the six IRLEDs. After a calibration procedure to establish the spatial relationship of the IRLEDs to the aluminum fiducial markers, the stereotactic coordinates of the IRLED light emission points are determined by localizing the aluminum fiducial markers in a stereotactic CT scan.

Results: To test the accuracy of direct CT determination of the IRLED positions, phantom tests were performed. The average accuracy of isocenter localization using the IRLED bite plate was 0.65 ± 0.17 mm for these phantom tests. In addition, the optic-guided system has a unique compatibility with the stereotactic head ring. Therefore, the isocentric localization capability was clinically tested using the stereotactic head ring as the absolute standard. The ongoing clinical trial has shown the frameless system to provide a patient localization accuracy of 1.11 ± 0.3 mm compared with the head ring.

Conclusion: Optic-guided radiotherapy using IRLEDs provides a mechanism through which setup accuracy may be improved over conventional techniques. To date, this optic-guided therapy has been used only as a hybrid system that requires use of the stereotactic head ring for the first fraction. This has limited its use in the routine clinical setting. Computation of the desired IRLED positions eliminates the need for the invasive head ring for the first fraction. This allows application of optic-guided therapy to a larger cohort of patients, and also facilitates the initiation of extracranial optic-guided radiotherapy.     

The accuracy of frameless stereotactic intracranial radiosurgery

Purpose

To determine the accuracy of frameless stereotactic radiosurgery using the BrainLAB ExacTrac system and robotic couch by measuring the individual contributions such as the accuracy of the imaging and couch correction system, the linkage between this system and the linac isocenter and the possible intrafraction motion of the patient in the frameless mask.

Materials and methods

An Alderson head phantom with hidden marker was randomly positioned 31 times. Automated 6D couch shifts were performed according to ExacTrac and the deviation with respect to the linac isocenter was measured using the hidden marker. ExacTrac-based set-up was performed for 46 patients undergoing hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for 135 fractions, followed by verification X-rays. Forty-three of these patients received post-treatment X-ray verification for 79 fractions to determine the intrafraction motion.

Results

The hidden target test revealed a systematic error of 1.5 mm in one direction, which was corrected after replacement of the system calibration phantom. The accuracy of the ExacTrac positioning is approximately 0.3 mm in each direction, 1 standard deviation. The intrafraction motion was 0.35 ± 0.21 mm, maximum 1.15 mm.

Conclusion

Intrafraction motion in the BrainLAB frameless mask is very small. Users are strongly advised to perform an independent verification of the ExacTrac isocenter in order to avoid systematic deviations.     

Initial clinical experience with frameless stereotactic radiosurgery: analysis of accuracy and feasibility.

PURPOSE: To report on preliminary clinical experience with a novel image-guided frameless stereotactic radiosurgery system. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen patients ranging in age from 14 to 81 received radiosurgery using a commercially available frameless stereotactic radiosurgery system. Pathologic diagnoses included metastases (12), recurrent primary intracranial sarcoma (1), recurrent central nervous system (CNS) lymphoma (1), and medulloblastoma with supratentorial seeding (1). Treatment accuracy was assessed from image localization of the stereotactic reference array and reproducibility of biteplate reseating. We chose 0.3 mm vector translation error and 0.3 degree rotation about each axis as the maximum tolerated misalignment before treating each arc. RESULTS: The biteplates were found on average to reseat with a reproducibility of 0.24 mm. The mean registration error from CT localization was found to be 0.5 mm, which predicts that the average error at isocenter was 0.82 mm. No patient treatment was delivered beyond the maximum tolerated misalignment. The radiosurgery treatment was delivered in approximately 25 min per patient. CONCLUSION: Our initial clinical experience with stereotactic radiotherapy using the infrared camera guidance system was promising, demonstrating clinical feasibility and accuracy comparable to many frame-based systems.     

Repositioning accuracy of a commercially available double-vacuum whole body immobilization system for stereotactic body radiation therapy

We evaluated the repositioning accuracy of a commercially available stereotactic whole body immobilization system (BodyFIX, Medical Intelligence, Schwabmuenchen, Germany) in 36 patients treated by hypofractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy. CT data were acquired for positional control of patient and tumor before each fraction of the treatment course. Those control CT datasets were compared with the original treatment planning CT simulation and analyzed with respect to positional misalignment of bony patient anatomy, and the respective position of the treated small lung or liver lesions. We assessed the stereotactic coordinates of distinct bony anatomical landmarks in the original CT and each control dataset. In addition, the target isocenter was recorded in the planning CT simulation dataset. An iterative optimization algorithm was implemented, utilizing a root mean square scoring function to determine the best-fit orientation of subsequent sets of anatomical landmark measurements relative to the original treatment planning CT data set. This allowed for the calculation of the x, y and z-components of translation of the patient's body and the target's center-of-mass for each control CT study, as well as rotation about the principal room axes in the respective CT data sets. In addition to absolute patient/target translation, the total magnitude vector of patient and target misalignment was calculated. A clinical assessment determined whether or not the assigned planning target volume safety margins would have provided the desired target coverage. To this end, each control CT study was co-registered with the original treatment planning study using immobilization system related fiducial markers, and the computed isodose calculation was superimposed. In 109 control setup CT scans available for comparison with their respective treatment planning CT simulation study (2-5 per patient, median 3), anatomical landmark analysis revealed a mean bony landmark translation of -0.4 +/- 3.9 (mean +/- SD), -0.1 +/- 1.6 and 0.3 +/- 3.6 mm in x, y and z-directions, respectively. Bony landmark setup deviations along one or more principal axis larger than 5 mm were observed in 32 control CT studies (29.4%). Body rotations about the x-, y- and z-axis were 0.9 +/- 0.7, 0.8 +/- 0.7 and 1.8 +/- 1.6 degrees, respectively. Assuming a rigid body relationship of target and bony anatomy, the mean computed absolute target translation was 2.9 +/- 3.3, 2.3 +/- 2.5 and 3.2 +/- 2.7 mm in x, y and z-directions, respectively. The median and mean magnitude vector of target isocenter displacement was computed to be 4.9 mm, and 5.7 +/- 3.7 mm. Clinical assessment of PTV/target volume coverage revealed 72 (66.1%), 23 (21.1%), and 14 (12.8%), of excellent (100% isodose coverage), good (>90% isodose coverage), and poor GTV/isodose alignment quality (less than 90% isodose coverage to some aspect of the GTV), respectively. Loss of target volume dose coverage was correlated with translations >5 mm along one or more axes (p<0.0001), rotations >3 degrees about the z-axis (p=0.0007) and body mass index >30 (p<0.0001). The analyzed BodyFIX whole body immobilization system performed favorably compared with other stereotactic body immobilization systems for which peer-reviewed repositioning data exist. While the measured variability in patient and target setup provided clinically acceptable setup accuracy in the vast majority of cases, larger setup deviations were occasional observed. Such deviations constitute a potential for partial target underdosing warranting, in our opinion, a pre-delivery positional assessment procedure (e.g., pre-treatment control CT scan).     

The measurement of linear accelerator isocenter motion using a three-micrometer device and an adjustable pointer

PURPOSE: The small motions of the major axes of a linear accelerator observed during gantry and treatment table rotation were measured to improve beam-target alignment during stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Measurements of gantry isocenter motion and table rotational axis wobble were performed with an adjustable front pointer and a three-micrometer device. Nominal gantry and table isocenters were specified. The gantry motion path and table isocenter coordinates were then applied to offset simulated treatment target coordinates so as to compensate for gantry sag. Target simulation films were examined to document improvement of beam-target alignment. RESULTS: The overall precision of the measurement of gantry and table isocenter coordinates was 0.2 mm. Over gantry rotation of 0 to 360 degrees, the gantry isocenter was found to follow a pinched loop with a maximum point to point distance of 1 mm. Table axis motion was found to be negligible relative to the reproducibility of gantry isocenter motion. Thus, a table isocenter was defined that was invariant to table rotation. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that the three-micrometer device and adjustable front pointer are useful tools for three-dimensional (3D) mapping of gantry, collimator and table isocenters and their motions. It is suggested that such measurements may be useful in the quality assurance of linear accelerators, particularly to improve beam-target alignment during SRS and other high dose external beam therapy.     

Commissioning and clinical results utilizing the Gildenberg-Laitinen Adapter Device for X-ray in fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy

BACKGROUND: The Gildenberg-Laitinen Adapter Device for X-Ray (GLAD-X/LS) frame is a positioning device that allows the use of the same fiducial points as the Brown-Robert-Wells (BRW) system. Thus it permits treatment planning to be accomplished by the Radionics X-knife Radiosurgery Program. We investigated the commissioning and clinical benefits of the GLAD-X/LS for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) in patients who were unable to tolerate the Gill-Thomas-Cosman (GTC) frame. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Commissioning of the GLAD-X/LS system was done via use of a Rando Phantom. A target volume of 2 x 2 x 2 cm was drilled into the phantom head. An ion chamber and thermoluminescence dosimetric chips (TLDs) were implanted in the target. A simulated treatment course consisting of 5 stereotactic radiotherapy fractions (300 cGy, 30 mm collimator) was delivered to the phantom head. A total of 27 patients who could not tolerate the GTC frame were treated using the GLAD-X/LS system. A total of 35 isocenters were used; the median number of treatment fractions was eight. Reproducibility of the x, y, and z coordinates was examined and correlated to the same determined using orthogonal port films. Relocation accuracy and reproducibility were further assessed comparing the x, y, and z coordinates of the target center with multiplanar reconstructed coronal and sagittal images. Patient tolerance of the device was also evaluated daily throughout the treatment. RESULTS: The measured TLD and ion chamber doses were within 3% of the prescribed dose at the isocenter. The same dose accuracy was also found at incremental distances of 5 mm, 10 mm, and 15 mm from the isocenter. All patients tolerated the treatment and the device well. Six patients experienced mild ear canal pain, and softer or smaller earpieces were substituted. The mean relocation accuracy was 1.5 mm +/- 0.8. CONCLUSIONS: The GLAD-X/LS system has excellent accuracy and reproducibility with the mean relocation accuracy of 1.5 mm +/- 0.8. The device is well-tolerated by patients, with no significant complications. Larger scale studies are necessary before routine use can be recommended for the administration of FSRT.     

Accuracy and conformity of stereotactically guided interstitial brain tumour therapy using I-125 seeds.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the stereotactic implantation procedure of catheters containing I-125 seeds in brain tumours and investigate the effect of catheter deviations on the dose distribution in patients. METHODS: A randomised sample (n = 37) of all patients treated with I-125 seeds in our department between 6/1994 and 2/2002 was examined. Intraoperative X-ray images were used to measure deviations of implanted I-125 seed catheters from their planned positions and the influence on dose conformity, tumour surface dose and dose burden of surrounding healthy brain tissue was determined. RESULTS: The mean spatial target point deviation was 2.0 mm (maximum 4.1 mm, SD 0.9 mm) and in 54.1% of the cases, reduction of the planned dose was greater than 5%. Target point deviations less than 1.5 mm have only minor influence on surface dose and conformity. Results indicated that in 10.8% of the cases the realized dose distribution showed a 'slight deviation', according to the guideline criteria for external radiosurgery of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. In 89.2% of the patients the applied dose conformed to the target volume. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactically guided interstitial irradiation with I-125 seeds can be used to treat brain tumours and metastases with high conformity comparable to radiosurgery. The observed deviations of the stereotactically implanted I-125 seed catheters from their planned target points were smaller when compared to frameless procedures. In order to maintain the required spatial accuracy of 1.5 mm in interstitial therapy using I-125 seeds, it appears necessary to optimise stereotactic instruments further.     

Initial clinical results of stereotactic radiotherapy for the treatment of craniopharyngiomas

The efficacy and toxicity of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) for the treatment of craniopharyngioma has been retrospectively evaluated in 16 patients. The median tumor diameter was 2.8 cm (range 1.5-6.1) and the median tumor volume was 7.7 cc (range 0.7-62.8). SRT was delivered to a single isocenter using a dedicated 6 MV linear accelerator to patients immobilized with a relocatable stereotactic head frame. The three-year actuarial overall survival was 93% and the rate of survival free of any imaging evidence of progressive disease was 75%. The three-year actuarial survival rates free of solid tumor growth or cyst enlargement were 94% and 81% respectively. Our results suggest that SRT is a safe and effective treatment approach for patients with craniopharyngioma. Long-term follow-up is required to determine whether the normal tissue-sparing inherent with SRT results in reduction of the neurocognitive effects of conventional radiotherapy for craniopharyngioma. SRT can be delivered to craniopharyngioma that may be difficult to treat with stereotactic radiosurgery due to proximity of the optic chiasm. Further clinical experience is necessary to determine the clinical utility of beam shaping in the setting of SRT.     

Reduction of radiation pneumonitis by V20-constraints in breast cancer

Background

To assess the accuracy of fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) using a stereotactic mask fixation system.

Patients and Methods

Sixteen patients treated with FSRT were involved in the study. A commercial stereotactic mask fixation system (BrainLAB AG) was used for patient immobilization. Serial CT scans obtained before and during FSRT were used to assess the accuracy of patient immobilization by comparing the isocenter position. Daily portal imaging were acquired to establish day to day patient position variation. Displacement errors along the different directions were calculated as combination of systematic and random errors.

Results

The mean isocenter displacements based on localization and verification CT imaging were 0.1 mm (SD 0.3 mm) in the lateral direction, 0.1 mm (SD 0.4 mm) in the anteroposterior, and 0.3 mm (SD 0.4 mm) in craniocaudal direction. The mean 3D displacement was 0.5 mm (SD 0.4 mm), being maximum 1.4 mm. No significant differences were found during the treatment (P = 0.4). The overall isocenter displacement as calculated by 456 anterior and lateral portal images were 0.3 mm (SD 0.9 mm) in the mediolateral direction, -0.2 mm (SD 1 mm) in the anteroposterior direction, and 0.2 mm (SD 1.1 mm) in the craniocaudal direction. The largest displacement of 2.7 mm was seen in the cranio-caudal direction, with 95% of displacements < 2 mm in any direction.

Conclusions

The results indicate that the setup error of the presented mask system evaluated by CT verification scans and portal imaging are minimal. Reproducibility of the isocenter position is in the best range of positioning reproducibility reported for other stereotactic systems.     

Polymergeldosimetrie in der konformalen Strahlentherapie mit einem Mikro-Multileaf-Kollimator (mMLC)

Conformal stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and radiotherapy (SRT) using a linear accelerator and a micro-multileaf collimator (mMLC) with fixed gantry angles enables the irradiation of highly irregularly shaped target volumes. This requires a three-dimensional verification with high spatial resolution of the planned dose distribution. Dose distributions of several planning target volumes were investigated in polymer gel phantoms. The radiation induced change of the relaxation rate R₂ is measured by MRI. The distributions were compared using image processing tools. Using the therapy-planning software BrainSCAN 3.53 and the mMLC m3 deviations between the planned and measured 90 % isodoses in the isocenter plane of about 2 mm were registered.     

Intrafractional tumor position stability during computed tomography (CT)-guided frameless stereotactic radiation therapy for lung or liver cancers with a fusion of CT and linear accelerator (FOCAL) unit

PURPOSE: To evaluate intrafractional tumor position stability during computed tomography (CT)-guided frameless stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) for lung or liver cancers, we checked repeated CT scanning, with a fusion of CT and linear accelerator (FOCAL) unit. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The FOCAL unit is a combination of a linear accelerator (Linac), CT scanner, X-ray simulator (X-S), and carbon table, and is designed to achieve CT-guided SRT with daily CT positioning followed by immediate irradiation while patients keep reduced shallow respirations. To evaluate intrafractional tumor position stability, 50 lung or liver lesions in 20 patients were checked by repeated CT scanning just before and after irradiation, and the obtained images were compared. RESULTS: There was no case with the intrafractional error judged to be greater than 10 mm. In 68% of cases, the intrafractional positioning errors were negligible (0-5 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Using the FOCAL unit, SRT for lung or liver cancers could be performed with intrafractional positioning errors not greater than 10 mm.     

Preliminary experience with frameless stereotactic radiotherapy

Purpose: To report initial clinical experience with a novel high-precision stereotactic radiotherapy system.Methods and Materials: Sixty patients ranging in age from 2 to 82 years received a total of 1426 treatments with the University of Florida frameless stereotactic radiotherapy system. Of the total, 39 (65%) were treated with stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) alone, and 21 (35%) received SRT as a component of radiotherapy. Pathologic diagnoses included meningiomas (15 patients), low-grade astrocytomas (11 patients), germinomas (9 patients), and craniopharyngiomas (5 patients). The technique was used as means of dose escalation in 11 patients (18%) with aggressive tumors. Treatment reproducibility was measured by comparing bite plate positioning registered by infrared light-emitting diodes (IRLEDs) with the stereotactic radiosurgery reference system, and with measurements from each treatment arc for the 1426 daily treatments (5808 positions). We chose 0.3 mm vector translation error and 0.3° rotation about each axis as the maximum tolerated misalignment before treating each arc.Results: With a mean follow-up of 11 months, 3 patients had recurrence of malignant disease. Acute side effects were minimal. Of 11 patients with low grade astrocytomas, 4 (36%) had cerebral edema and increased enhancement on MR scans in the first year, and 2 required steroids. All had resolution and marked tumor involution on follow-up imaging. Bite plate reproducibility was as follows. Translational errors: anterior-posterior, 0.01 ± 0.10; lateral, 0.02 ± 0.07; axial, 0.01 ± 0.10. Rotational errors (degrees): anterior-posterior, 0.00 ± 0.03; lateral, 0.00 ± 0.06; axial, 0.01 ± 0.04. No patient treatment was delivered beyond the maximum tolerated misalignment. Daily treatment was delivered in approximately 15 min per patient.Conclusion: Our initial experience with stereotactic radiotherapy using the infrared camera guidance system was good. Patient selection and treatment strategies are evolving rapidly. Treatment accuracy was the best reported, and the treatment approach was practical.     

Three-dimensional accuracy and interfractional reproducibility of patient fixation and positioning using a stereotactic head mask system

Purpose: Conformal radiotherapy in the head and neck region requires precise and reproducible patient setup. The definition of safety margins around the clinical target volume has to take into account uncertainties of fixation and positioning. Data are presented to quantify the involved uncertainties for the system used.

Methods and Materials: Interfractional reproducibility of fixation and positioning of a target point in the brain was evaluated by biplanar films. 118 film pairs obtained at 52 fractions in 4 patients were analyzed. The setup was verified at the actual treatment table position by diagnostic X-ray units aligned to the isocenter and by a stereotactic X-ray localization technique. The stereotactic coordinates of the treated isocenter, of fiducials on the mask, and of implanted internal markers within the patient were measured to determine systematic and random errors. The data are corrected for uncertainty of the localization method.

Results: Displacements in target point positioning were 0.35 ± 0.41 mm, 1.22 ± 0.25 mm, and −0.74 ± 0.32 mm in the x, y, and z direction, respectively. The reproducibility of the fixation of the patient’s head within the mask was 0.48 mm (x), 0.67 mm (y), and 0.72 mm (z). Rotational uncertainties around an axis parallel to the x, y, and z axis were 0.72°, 0.43°, and 0.70°, respectively. A simulation, based on the acquired data, yields a typical radial overall uncertainty for positioning and fixation of 1.80 ± 0.60 mm.

Conclusions: The applied setup technique showed to be highly reproducible. The data suggest that for the applied technique, a safety margin between clinical and planning target volume of 1–2 mm along one axis is sufficient for a target at the base of skull.     

Comparison of two methods for anterior–posterior isocenter localization in pelvic radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging

Purpose: The two setup methods commonly used to determine the anterior–posterior isocenter location in pelvic radiotherapy are to align lateral localization lasers with lateral skin tattoos on the patient, or to set the couch height so that the isocenter is at a fixed height (determined during simulation or treatment planning) above the couch top. This study was implemented to determine which technique gives more accurate patient treatment by comparison of the anterior–posterior setup variation measured with electronic portal imaging.

Methods and Materials: Eleven supine prostate patients were treated with tattoo localization and 159 left-lateral portal images were taken during the treatments. The field displacements were then determined by template matching. These patients were compared to nine patients (205 images) set up to a fixed isocenter height. Similarly, eight prone rectal patients (136 right-lateral images) set up to tattoos were compared to six patients (108 images) set up to a fixed height. The patients were not immobilized and were all treated with three field techniques on a hard couch top. The overall mean treatment position deviation and the standard deviation of the displacements (total setup variation) were calculated for each patient group along with the systematic (simulator-to-treatment) and the random (treatment-to-treatment) setup variation.

Results: The mean treatment position deviations were 3.3 mm anterior and 5.2 mm posterior with the tattoo method for the prostate and rectal patients, respectively. These mean position deviations were 0.4/0.1 mm anterior with the fixed height technique. The total setup variations were 4.6/5.2 mm (1 SD) with tattoo localization and 1.7/1.5 mm (1 SD) with the fixed height method. Similarly, random variation was 2.3/3.3 mm (1 SD) with the tattoo method compared to 1.3/1.2 mm (1 SD) with the fixed height method. Systematic variation was 3.7/4.5 mm (1 SD) compared to 1.2/1.1 mm (1 SD).

Conclusion: The fixed height technique gives much more accurate localization of the anterior–posterior isocenter in pelvic radiotherapy than lateral skin tattoos.     

System validation and work practice efficiency gains of a new localization method for stereotactic radiotherapy

The increased procedural demands of stereotactic localization techniques when compared with conventional treatment practices reduces machine efficiency, an outcome likely to be greatly magnified by the introduction of fractionation to stereotactic techniques. Currently in Australia and New Zealand there are no guidelines for the definition of efficiency. We sought to devise a system to simultaneously validate the accuracy and efficiency of the technique. The frameless relocation methods employed in the Medtronic Sofamor Danek (MSD) stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) system were studied in the clinical setting. Accuracy has been determined according to the accumulation of errors throughout the planning and treatment process. The clinical demands of the system (staffing and resources) were analysed relative to conventional treatment approaches. Timing studies indicate a mean time of 19.7 min for treatment of a daily SRT fraction (4–5 arcs, single isocentre). Cost and staffing requirements are similar to those for conventional radiotherapy. It is concluded that with the system used, SRT is efficient for routine clinical implementation, with the level of efficiency increasing with increasing patient numbers. It is recommended that a common acceptance standard be developed to allow cross‐institutional comparison of the clinical efficiency of new treatment techniques.