Impact of the frequency of online verifications on the patient set-up accuracy and set-up margins

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>The purpose of the study was to evaluate the patient set-up error of different anatomical sites, to estimate the effect of different frequencies of online verifications on the patient set-up accuracy, and to calculate margins to accommodate for the patient set-up error (ICRU set-up margin, SM).</p> <p>Methods and materials</p> <p>Alignment data of 148 patients treated with inversed planned intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) of the head and neck (n = 31), chest (n = 72), abdomen (n = 15), and pelvis (n = 30) were evaluated. The patient set-up accuracy was assessed using orthogonal megavoltage electronic portal images of 2328 fractions of 173 planning target volumes (PTV). In 25 patients, two PTVs were analyzed where the PTVs were located in different anatomical sites and treated in two different radiotherapy courses. The patient set-up error and the corresponding SM were retrospectively determined assuming no online verification, online verification once a week and online verification every other day.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The SM could be effectively reduced with increasing frequency of online verifications. However, a significant frequency of relevant set-up errors remained even after online verification every other day. For example, residual set-up errors larger than 5 mm were observed on average in 18% to 27% of all fractions of patients treated in the chest, abdomen and pelvis, and in 10% of fractions of patients treated in the head and neck after online verification every other day.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In patients where high set-up accuracy is desired, daily online verification is highly recommended.</p

Cytokine Plasma Levels: Reliable Predictors for Radiation Pneumonitis?

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy (RT) is the primary treatment modality for inoperable, locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but even with highly conformal treatment planning, radiation pneumonitis (RP) remains the most serious, dose-limiting complication. Previous clinical reports proposed that cytokine plasma levels measured during RT allow to estimate the individual risk of patients to develop RP. The identification of such cytokine risk profiles would facilitate tailoring radiotherapy to maximize treatment efficacy and to minimize radiation toxicity. However, cytokines are produced not only in normal lung tissue after irradiation, but are also over-expressed in tumour cells of NSCLC specimens. This tumour-derived cytokine production may influence circulating plasma levels in NSCLC patients. The aim of the present study was to investigate the prognostic value of TNF-alpha, IL-1beta, IL-6 and TGF-beta1 plasma levels to predict radiation pneumonitis and to evaluate the impact of tumour-derived cytokine production on circulating plasma levels in patients irradiated for NSCLC. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In 52 NSCLC patients (stage I-III) cytokine plasma levels were investigated by ELISA before and weekly during RT, during follow-up (1/3/6/9 months after RT), and at the onset of RP. Tumour biopsies were immunohistochemically stained for IL-6 and TGF-beta1, and immunoreactivity was quantified (grade 1-4). RP was evaluated according to LENT-SOMA scale. Tumour response was assessed according to RECIST criteria by chest-CT during follow-up. In our clinical study 21 out of 52 patients developed RP (grade I/II/III/IV: 11/3/6/1 patients). Unexpectedly, cytokine plasma levels measured before and during RT did not correlate with RP incidence. In most patients IL-6 and TGF-beta1 plasma levels were already elevated before RT and correlated significantly with the IL-6 and TGF-beta1 production in corresponding tumour biopsies. Moreover, IL-6 and TGF-beta1 plasma levels measured during follow-up were significantly associated with the individual tumour responses of these patients. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The results of this study did not confirm that cytokine plasma levels, neither their absolute nor any relative values, may identify patients at risk for RP. In contrast, the clear correlations of IL-6 and TGF-beta1 plasma levels with the cytokine production in corresponding tumour biopsies and with the individual tumour responses suggest that the tumour is the major source of circulating cytokines in patients receiving RT for advanced NSCLC

Real-time prostate motion assessment: image-guidance and the temporal dependence of intra-fraction motion

BACKGROUND: The rapid adoption of image-guidance in prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) results in longer treatment times, which may result in larger intrafraction motion, thereby negating the advantage of image-guidance. This study aims to qualify and quantify the contribution of image-guidance to the temporal dependence of intrafraction motion during prostate IMRT. METHODS: One-hundred and forty-three patients who underwent conventional IMRT (n=67) or intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT/RapidArc, n=76) for localized prostate cancer were evaluated. Intrafraction motion assessment was based on continuous RL (lateral), SI (longitudinal), and AP (vertical) positional detection of electromagnetic transponders at 10 Hz. Daily motion amplitudes were reported as session mean, median, and root-mean-square (RMS) displacements. Temporal effect was evaluated by categorizing treatment sessions into 4 different classes: IMRT(c) (transponder only localization), IMRT(cc) (transponder + CBCT localization), IMAT(c) (transponder only localization), or IMAT(cc) (transponder + CBCT localization). RESULTS: Mean/median session times were 4.15/3.99 min (IMAT(c)), 12.74/12.19 min (IMAT(cc)), 5.99/5.77 min (IMRT(c)), and 12.98/12.39 min (IMRT(cc)), with significant pair-wise difference (p<0.0001) between all category combinations except for IMRT(cc) vs. IMAT(cc) (p>0.05). Median intrafraction motion difference between CBCT and non-CBCT categories strongly correlated with time for RMS (t-value=17.29; p<0.0001), SI (t-value=−4.25; p<0.0001), and AP (t-value=2.76; p<0.0066), with a weak correlation for RL (t-value=1.67; p=0.0971). Treatment time reduction with non-CBCT treatment categories showed reductions in the observed intrafraction motion: systematic error (Σ)<0.6 mm and random error (σ)<1.2 mm compared with ≤0.8 mm and <1.6 mm, respectively, for CBCT-involved treatment categories. CONCLUSIONS: For treatment durations >4-6 minutes, and without any intrafraction motion mitigation protocol in place, patient repositioning is recommended, with at least the acquisition of the lateral component of an orthogonal image pair in the absence of volumetric imaging