Target position uncertainty during visually guided deep-inspiration breath-hold radiotherapy in locally advanced lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the uncertainty in voluntary deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. METHODS: Perpendicular fluoroscopic movies were acquired in free breathing (FB) and DIBH during a course of visually guided DIBH radiotherapy of nine patients with NSCLC. Patients had liquid markers injected in mediastinal lymph nodes and primary tumours. Excursion, systematic- and random errors, and inter-breath-hold position uncertainty were investigated using an image based tracking algorithm. RESULTS: A mean reduction of 2-6mm in marker excursion in DIBH versus FB was seen in the anterior-posterior (AP), left-right (LR) and cranio-caudal (CC) directions. Lymph node motion during DIBH originated from cardiac motion. The systematic- (standard deviation (SD) of all the mean marker positions) and random errors (root-mean-square of the intra-BH SD) during DIBH were 0.5 and 0.3mm (AP), 0.5 and 0.3mm (LR), 0.8 and 0.4mm (CC), respectively. The mean inter-breath-hold shifts were -0.3mm (AP), -0.2mm (LR), and -0.2mm (CC). CONCLUSION: Intra- and inter-breath-hold uncertainty of tumours and lymph nodes were small in visually guided breath-hold radiotherapy of NSCLC. Target motion could be substantially reduced, but not eliminated, using visually guided DIBH.

Liquid fiducial marker applicability in proton therapy of locally advanced lung cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We investigated the clinical applicability of a novel liquid fiducial marker (LFM) for image-guided pencil beam scanned (PBS) proton therapy (PBSPT) of locally advanced lung cancer (LALC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The relative proton stopping power (RSP) of the LFM was calculated and measured. Dose perturbations of the LFM and three solid markers, in a phantom, were measured. PBSPT treatment planning on computer tomography scans of five patients with LALC with the LFM implanted was performed with 1-3 fields. RESULTS: The RSP was experimentally determined to be 1.164 for the LFM. Phantom measurements revealed a maximum relative deviation in dose of 4.8% for the LFM in the spread-out Bragg Peak, compared to 12-67% for the solid markers. Using the experimentally determined RSP, the maximum proton range error introduced by the LFM is about 1mm. If the marker was displaced at PBSPT, the maximum dosimetric error was limited to 2 percentage points for 3-field plans. CONCLUSION: The dose perturbations introduced by the LFM were considerably smaller than the solid markers investigated. The RSP of the fiducial marker should be corrected in the treatment planning system to avoid errors. The investigated LFM introduced clinically acceptable dose perturbations for image-guided PBSPT of LALC.