Search

BACKGROUND: Hypofractionation in prostate radiotherapy is of increasing interest. Steep dose gradients and a large weight on each individual fraction emphasize the need for motion management. Real-time motion management techniques such as multileaf collimator (MLC) tracking or couch tracking typically adjust for translational motion while rotations remain uncompensated with unknown dosimetric impact. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to demonstrate and validate dynamic real-time rotation-including dose reconstruction during radiotherapy experiments with and without MLC and couch tracking. METHODS: Real-time dose reconstruction was performed using the in-house developed software DoseTracker. DoseTracker receives streamed target positions and accelerator parameters during treatment delivery and uses a pencil beam algorithm with water density assumption to reconstruct the dose in a moving target. DoseTracker's ability to reconstruct motion-induced dose errors in a dynamically rotating and translating target was investigated during three different scenarios: (1) no motion compensation and translational motion correction with (2) MLC tracking and (3) couch tracking. In each scenario, dose reconstruction was performed online and in real time during delivery of two dual-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy prostate plans with a prescribed fraction dose of 7 Gy to the prostate and simultaneous intraprostatic lesion boosts with doses of at least 8 Gy, but up to 10 Gy as long as the organs at risk dose constraints were fulfilled. The plans were delivered to a pelvis phantom that replicated three patient-measured motion traces using a rotational insert with 21 layers of EBT3 film spaced 2.5 mm apart. DoseTracker repeatedly calculated the actual motion-including dose increment and the planned static dose increment since the last calculation in 84 500 points in the film stack. The experiments were performed with a TrueBeam accelerator with MLC and couch tracking based on electromagnetic transponders embedded in the film stack. The motion-induced dose error was quantified as the difference between the final cumulative dose with motion and without motion using the 2D 2%/2 mm γ-failure rate and the difference in dose to 95% of the clinical target volume (CTV ΔD95% ) and the gross target volume (GTV ΔD95% ) as well as the difference in dose to 0.1 cm3 of the urethra, bladder, and rectum (ΔD0.1CC ). The motion-induced errors were compared between dose reconstructions and film measurements. RESULTS: The dose was reconstructed in all calculation points at a mean frequency of 4.7 Hz. The root-mean-square difference between real-time reconstructed and film-measured motion-induced errors was 3.1%-points (γ-failure rate), 0.13 Gy (CTV ΔD95% ), 0.23 Gy (GTV ΔD95% ), 0.19 Gy (urethra ΔD0.1CC ), 0.09 Gy (bladder ΔD0.1CC ), and 0.07 Gy (rectum ΔD0.1CC ). CONCLUSIONS: In a series of phantom experiments, online real-time rotation-including dose reconstruction was performed for the first time. The calculated motion-induced errors agreed well with film measurements. The dose reconstruction provides a valuable tool for monitoring dose delivery and investigating the efficacy of advanced motion-compensation techniques in the presence of translational and rotational motion. ispartof: MEDICAL PHYSICS vol:49 issue:6 pages:3574-3584 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Purpose: Couch and MLC tracking are two promising methods for real-time motion compensation during radiation therapy. So far, couch and MLC tracking experiments have mainly been performed by different research groups, and no direct comparison of couch and MLC tracking of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans has been published. The Varian TrueBeam 2.0 accelerator includes a prototype tracking system with selectable couch or MLC compensation. This study provides a direct comparison of the two tracking types with an otherwise identical setup. Methods: Several experiments were performed to characterize the geometric and dosimetric performance of electromagnetic guided couch and MLC tracking on a TrueBeam accelerator equipped with a Millennium MLC. The tracking system latency was determined without motion prediction as the time lag between sinusoidal target motion and the compensating motion of the couch or MLC as recorded by continuous MV portal imaging. The geometric and dosimetric tracking accuracies were measured in tracking experiments with motion phantoms that reproduced four prostate and four lung tumor trajectories. The geometric tracking error in beam's eye view was determined as the distance between an embedded gold marker and a circular MLC aperture in continuous MV images. The dosimetric tracking error was quantified as the measured 2%/2 mm gamma failure rate of a low and a high modulation VMAT plan delivered with the eight motion trajectories using a static dose distribution as reference. Results: The MLC tracking latency was approximately 146 ms for all sinusoidal period lengths while the couch tracking latency increased from 187 to 246 ms with decreasing period length due to limitations in the couch acceleration. The mean root-mean-square geometric error was 0.80 mm (couch tracking), 0.52 mm (MLC tracking), and 2.75 mm (no tracking) parallel to the MLC leaves and 0.66 mm (couch), 1.14 mm (MLC), and 2.41 mm (no tracking) perpendicular to the leaves. The motion-induced gamma failure rate was in mean 0.1% (couch tracking), 8.1% (MLC tracking), and 30.4% (no tracking) for prostate motion and 2.9% (couch), 2.4% (MLC), and 41.2% (no tracking) for lung tumor motion. The residual tracking errors were mainly caused by inadequate adaptation to fast lung tumor motion for couch tracking and to prostate motion perpendicular to the MLC leaves for MLC tracking. Conclusions: Couch and MLC tracking markedly improved the geometric and dosimetric accuracies of VMAT delivery. However, the two tracking types have different strengths and weaknesses. While couch tracking can correct perfectly for slowly moving targets such as the prostate, MLC tracking may have considerably larger dose errors for persistent target shift perpendicular to the MLC leaves. Advantages of MLC tracking include faster dynamics with better adaptation to fast moving targets, the avoidance of moving the patient, and the potential to track target rotations and deformations.

Purpose: The highly conformal doses delivered by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) may be compromised by intrafraction target motion. Although dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC) tracking can mitigate the dosimetric impact of motion on the accumulated dose, residual errors still exist. The purpose of this study was to investigate the temporal evolution of dose errors throughout VMAT treatments delivered with and without DMLC tracking.Methods: Tracking experiments were performed on a linear accelerator connected to prototype DMLC tracking software. A three-axis motion stage reproduced representative clinical trajectories of four lung tumors and four prostates. For each trajectory, two VMAT treatment plans (low and high modulation) were delivered with and without DMLC tracking as well as to a static phantom for reference. Dose distributions were measured continuously at 72 Hz using a dosimeter with biplanar diode arrays. During tracking, the MLC leaves were continuously refitted to the 3D target position measured by an electromagnetic transponder at 30 Hz. The dosimetric errors caused in the 32 motion experiments were quantified by a time-resolved 3%∕3 mm γ-test. The erroneously exposed areas in treatment beam's eye view (BEV) caused by inadequate real-time MLC adaptation were calculated and compared with the time-resolved γ failure rates.Results: The transient γ failure rate was on average 16.8% without tracking and 5.3% with tracking. The γ failure rate correlated well with the erroneously exposed areas in BEV (mean of Pearson r = 0.83, p

Tumor motion during radiotherapy delivery can substantially deteriorate the target dose distribution. A promising method to overcome this problem is dynamic multi-leaf collimator (DMLC) tracking. The purpose of this phantom study was to integrate a wired electromagnetic (EM) transponder localization system with DMLC tracking and to investigate the geometric accuracy of the integrated system.