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

Fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for skull base tumors: analysis of treatment accuracy using a stereotactic mask fixation system

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

Comparative methods for PET image segmentation in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma

Several methods have been proposed for the segmentation of ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in PET. In this study, we assessed the performance of four categories of ¹⁸F-FDG PET image segmentation techniques in pharyngolaryngeal squamous cell carcinoma using clinical studies where the surgical specimen served as the benchmark

Identification of Common Genetic Variants Influencing Spontaneous Dizygotic Twinning and Female Fertility.

Spontaneous dizygotic (DZ) twinning occurs in 1%-4% of women, with familial clustering and unknown physiological pathways and genetic origin. DZ twinning might index increased fertility and has distinct health implications for mother and child. We performed a GWAS in 1,980 mothers of spontaneous DZ twins and 12,953 control subjects. Findings were replicated in a large Icelandic cohort and tested for association across a broad range of fertility traits in women. Two SNPs were identified (rs11031006 near FSHB, p = 1.54 × 10(-9), and rs17293443 in SMAD3, p = 1.57 × 10(-8)) and replicated (p = 3 × 10(-3) and p = 1.44 × 10(-4), respectively). Based on ∼90,000 births in Iceland, the risk of a mother delivering twins increased by 18% for each copy of allele rs11031006-G and 9% for rs17293443-C. A higher polygenic risk score (PRS) for DZ twinning, calculated based on the results of the DZ twinning GWAS, was significantly associated with DZ twinning in Iceland (p = 0.001). A higher PRS was also associated with having children (p = 0.01), greater lifetime parity (p = 0.03), and earlier age at first child (p = 0.02). Allele rs11031006-G was associated with higher serum FSH levels, earlier age at menarche, earlier age at first child, higher lifetime parity, lower PCOS risk, and earlier age at menopause. Conversely, rs17293443-C was associated with later age at last child. We identified robust genetic risk variants for DZ twinning: one near FSHB and a second within SMAD3, the product of which plays an important role in gonadal responsiveness to FSH. These loci contribute to crucial aspects of reproductive capacity and health.Support for the Netherlands Twin Register was obtained from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) and The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW) grants, 904-61-193,480-04-004, 400-05-717, Addiction-31160008, 911-09-032, Biobanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure (BBMRI –NL, 184.021.007); Royal Netherlands Academy of Science Professor Award (PAH/6635) to DIB; European Research Council (ERC-230374 and ERC-284167); Rutgers University Cell and DNA Repository (NIMH U24 MH068457-06), the Avera Institute, Sioux Falls, South Dakota (USA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH R01 HD042157-01A1). Part of the genotyping was funded by the Genetic Association Information Network (GAIN) of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health and Grand Opportunity grants 1RC2 MH089951). We acknowledge support from VU Amsterdam and the Institute for Health and Care Research (EMGO+). The Berghofer Medical Research Institute (QIMR) study was supported by grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia (241944, 339462, 389927, 389875, 389891, 389892, 389938, 443036, 442915, 442981, 496610, 496739, 552485, 552498, 1050208, 1075175). Dale R. Nyholt was supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC) Future Fellowship (FT0991022), NHMRC Research Fellowship (APP0613674) Schemes and by the Visiting Professors Programme (VPP) of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW). Allan F. McRae was supported by an NRMRC Career Development Fellowship (APP1083656). Grant W. Montgomery was supported by NIH grant (HD042157, a collaborative study of the genetics of DZ twinning) and NHMRC Fellowship (GNT1078399). The Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research (MCTFR) was supported in part by USPHS Grants from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (AA09367 and AA11886), and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA05147, DA13240, and DA024417). We would like to thank also 23andMe's consented research participants for contributing data on age at menarche for the FSHB gene locus and the Twinning Gwas Consortium (TGC). Co-authors from: Finland (Anu Loukola, Juho Wedenoja, Emmi Tikkanen, Beenish Qaiser), Sweden (Nancy Pedersen, Andrea Ganna), United kingdom King's College London (Department of Twin Research & Genetic Epidemiology: Pirro Hysi, Massimo Mangino), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, Medical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre (Eva Krapohl, Andrew McMillan).This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.03.00