Development of patient and catheter specific error thresholds for high dose rate prostate brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND: In-vivo source tracking has been an active topic of research in the field of high-dose rate brachytherapy in recent years to verify accuracy in treatment delivery. Although detection systems for source tracking are being developed, the allowable threshold of treatment error is still unknown and is likely patient-specific due to anatomy and planning variation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine patient and catheter-specific shift error thresholds for in-vivo source tracking during high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT). METHODS: A module was developed in the previously described graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm. The module generates systematic catheter shift errors retrospectively into HDRPBT treatment plans, performed on 50 patients. The catheter shift model iterates through the number of catheters shifted in the plan (from 1 to all catheters), the direction of shift (superior, inferior, medial, lateral, cranial, and caudal), and the magnitude of catheter shift (1-6 mm). For each combination of these parameters, 200 error plans were generated, randomly selecting the catheters in the plan to shift. After shifts were applied, dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters were re-calculated. Catheter shift thresholds were then derived based on plans where DVH parameters were clinically unacceptable (prostate V100 < 95%, urethra D0.1cc > 118%, and rectum Dmax > 80%). Catheter thresholds were also Pearson correlated to catheter robustness values. RESULTS: Patient-specific thresholds varied between 1 to 6 mm for all organs, in all shift directions. Overall, patient-specific thresholds typically decrease with an increasing number of catheters shifted. Anterior and inferior directions were less sensitive than other directions. Pearson's correlation test showed a strong correlation between catheter robustness and catheter thresholds for the rectum and urethra, with correlation values of -0.81 and -0.74, respectively (p < 0.01), but no correlation was found for the prostate. CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to determine thresholds for each patient, with thresholds showing dependence on shift direction, and number of catheters shifted. Not every catheter combination is explorable, however, this study shows the feasibility to determine patient-specific thresholds for clinical application. The correlation of patient-specific thresholds with the equivalent robustness value indicated the need for robustness consideration during plan optimization and treatment planning.

Catheters and dose optimization using a modified CVT algorithm and multi-criteria optimization in prostate HDR brachytherapy.

PURPOSE: Currently, in high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy planning, the catheter's positions are often selected by the planner, which involves the planner's experience. The catheters are then inserted using a template that helps to guide the catheters. For certain applications, it is of interest to choose the optimal location and number of catheters needed for dose coverage and potential decrease of the treatment's toxicity. Hence, it is of great importance to develop patient-specific algorithms for catheters and dose optimization. METHODS: A modified Centroidal Voronoi tessellation (CVT) algorithm is implemented and merged with a graphics processing unit (GPU)-based multi-criteria optimization algorithm (gMCO). The CVT algorithm optimizes the catheters' positions, and the gMCO algorithm optimizes the dwell times and dwell positions. The CVT algorithm can be used simultaneously for insertion with or without a template. Some improvements to the CVT algorithm are presented such as a new way of considering the area that needs to be covered. One hundred eight previously treated prostates HDR cases using real-time ultrasound are used to evaluate the different optimization procedures. The plan robustness is evaluated using two types of errors: deviations (random) in the insertion and deviation (systematic) in the reconstruction of the catheters. RESULTS: Using gMCO on clinically inserted catheter increases the acceptance rate by 37% for Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria. Our results show that all the patients respect RTOG criteria with 11 catheters using CVT+gMCO with a template of 5 mm. The number of catheters needed for all patients to respect RTOG criteria with the freehand technique is 10 catheters using CVT+gMCO. When deviations are introduced, using a template, the acceptance rate goes to 85% with 3 mm deviations using 11 catheters. This decrease is less significant when the number of catheters is higher, decreasing by less than 5% with a 3 mm deviation using 13 catheters or more. In conclusion, it is feasible to decrease the number of catheters needed to treat most patients. CONCLUSIONS: Some cases still need a high number of catheters to reach the plan's criteria. Using gMCO allows an increase in the plan quality, while using CVT reduces the number of catheters. A higher number of catheters equates to plans that are more robust to deviations.