Comparison of patient setup accuracy for optical surface-guided and X-ray-guided imaging with respect to the impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The objective of this work is to estimate the patient positioning accuracy of a surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system using an optical surface scanner compared to an X­ray-based imaging system (IGRT) with respect to their impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS: Patient positioning data, both acquired with SGRT and IGRT systems at the same linacs, serve as a basis for determination of positioning accuracy. A total of 35 patients with two different open face masks (578 datasets) were positioned using X­ray stereoscopic imaging and the patient position inside the open face mask was recorded using SGRT. The measurement accuracy of the SGRT system (in a "standard" and an SRS mode with higher resolution) was evaluated using both IGRT and SGRT patient positioning datasets taking into account the measurement errors of the X­ray system. Based on these clinically measured datasets, the positioning accuracy was estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. The relevant evaluation criterion, as standard of practice in cranial SRT, was the 95th percentile. RESULTS: The interfractional measurement displacement vector of the SGRT system, σSGRT, in high resolution mode was estimated at 2.5 mm (68th percentile) and 5 mm (95th percentile). If the standard resolution was used, σSGRT increased by about 20%. The standard deviation of the axis-related σSGRT of the SGRT system ranged between 1.5 and 1.8 mm interfractionally and 0.5 and 1.0 mm intrafractionally. The magnitude of σSGRT is mainly due to the principle of patient surface scanning and not due to technical limitations or vendor-specific issues in software or hardware. Based on the resulting σSGRT, MC simulations served as a measure for the positioning accuracy for non-coplanar couch rotations. If an SGRT system is used as the only patient positioning device in non-coplanar fields, interfractional positioning errors of up to 6 mm and intrafractional errors of up to 5 mm cannot be ruled out. In contrast, MC simulations resulted in a positioning error of 1.6 mm (95th percentile) using the IGRT system. The cause of positioning errors in the SGRT system is mainly a change in the facial surface relative to a defined point in the brain. CONCLUSION: In order to achieve the necessary geometric accuracy in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy, use of an X­ray-based IGRT system, especially when treating with non-coplanar couch angles, is highly recommended.

Setup accuracy and margins for surface-guided radiotherapy (SGRT) of head, thorax, abdomen, and pelvic target volumes.

The goal of the study was to evaluate the inter- and intrafractional patient setup accuracy of target volumes located in the head, thoracic, abdominal, and pelvic regions when using SGRT, by comparing it with that of laser alignment using patient skin marks, and to calculate the corresponding setup margins. A total of 2303 radiotherapy fractions of 183 patients were analyzed. All patients received daily kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography scans (kV-CBCT) for online verification. From November 2019 until September 2020, patient setup was performed using laser alignment with patient skin marks, and since October 2020, using SGRT. The setup accuracy was measured by the six degrees of freedom (6DOF) corrections based on the kV-CBCT. The corresponding setup margins were calculated using the van Herk formula. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the impact of multiple factors on the setup accuracy. The inter-fractional patient setup accuracy was significantly better using SGRT compared to laser alignment with skin marks. The mean three-dimensional vector of the translational setup deviation of tumors located in the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis using SGRT was 3.6 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.3 mm to 3.9 mm) and 4.5 mm using laser alignment with skin marks (95% CI 3.9 mm to 5.2 mm; p = 0.001). Calculation of setup margins for the combined inter- and intra-fractional setup error revealed similar setup margins using SGRT and kV-CBCT once a week compared to laser alignment with skin marks and kV-CBCT every other day. Furthermore, comparable setup margins were found for open-face thermoplastic masks with AlignRT compared to closed-face thermoplastic masks with laser alignment and mask marks. SGRT opens the possibility to reduce the number of CBCTs while maintaining sufficient setup accuracy. The advantage is a reduction of imaging dose and overall treatment time. Open-face thermoplastic masks may be used instead of closed-face thermoplastic masks to increase the patient's comfort.

Quantification of six-degree-of-freedom motion during beam delivery in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy using intra-irradiation cone-beam computed tomography imaging technique.

PURPOSE: Quantifying intra-fractional six-degree-of-freedom (6DoF) residual errors or motion from approved patient setups is necessary for accurate beam delivery in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy. However, previously reported errors were not acquired during beam delivery. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the 6DoF residual errors and motions during arc beam delivery using a concurrent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging technique, intra-irradiation CBCT. METHODS: Consecutive 15 patients, 19 plans for various treatment sites, and 199 CBCT images were analyzed. Pre-irradiation CBCT was performed to verify shifts from the initial patient setup using the ExacTrac system. During beam delivery by two or three co-planar full-arc rotations, CBCT imaging was performed concurrently. Subsequently, an intra-irradiation CBCT image was reconstructed. Pre- and intra-irradiation CBCT images were rigidly registered to a planning CT image based on the bone to quantify 6DoF residual errors. RESULTS: 6DoF residual errors quantified using pre- and intra-irradiation CBCTs were within 2.0 mm/2.0°, except for one measurement. The mean elapsed time (mean ± standard deviation [min:sec]) after pre-irradiation CBCT to the end of the last arc beam delivery was 6:08 ± 1:25 and 7:54 ± 2:14 for the 2- and 3-arc plans, respectively. Root mean squares of residual errors for several directions showed significant differences; however, they were within 1.0 mm/1.0°. Time-dependent analysis revealed that the residual errors tended to increase with elapsed time. CONCLUSION: The errors represent the optimal intra-fractional error compared with those acquired using the pre-, inter-beam, and post-6DoF image guidance and can be acquired within a standard treatment timeslot.

Mask dependency of the lacrimal gland dose under whole brain radiotherapy when the six-degrees of freedom couch is not available.

BACKGROUND: Dry eye syndrome has been recently reported in patients who underwent whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). WBRT based on a couch with three-degrees of freedom (3D) can occasionally be performed in which the rotational head motion is not corrected. This study assessed the dependency of the rotational errors on the mask and the dose variation of the lens and lacrimal gland in WBRT patients. METHODS: Translational and rotational setup errors were obtained at the first treatment with cone-beam CT (CBCT) for patients under WBRT and frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) (n = 20 each) immobilized using a conventional WB mask and an SRS mask with a bite block, respectively. For the CT sets of SRS cases, WBRT plans were generated for the study. To simulate the rotational error, rotated CT images were created with each rotational error, on which initial WBRT plans were copied and doses were recalculated. The lens and lacrimal gland doses with and without rotation errors were compared. RESULTS: Despite similar translational setup errors for the two masks, the SRS mask showed a dramatic reduction in rotational errors compared to those of the WB mask. The errors varied within -2.9° to 2.9° and -1.2° to 0.7° for the WB and SRS masks, respectively. Accordingly, the SRS mask confined the change in the maximum lens dose, mean dose of the lacrimal gland, and lacrimal volume receiving 15 Gy to one-third of those using the WB mask. CONCLUSION: When the six-degrees of freedom (6D) couch is not available, the frameless SRS mask is beneficial to WBRT for the faithful treatment as it was planned.

Accumulated Dose Deviation of Rotational and Residual Setup Errors on Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Using MIM Treated by Helical Tomotherapy.

BACKGROUND: To analyze the relationship between the rotational and residual setup errors and the dose deviation on nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated by helical tomotherapy (HT). METHODS: From 25 July 2017 to 20 August 2019, 16 treated NPC patients were enrolled in the study. These patients were scanned with full target range megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) every other day. Adaptive radiotherapy function application software MIM7.1.3 were used to accumulate the actual dose. The dose deviation with the initial plan dose of the patients' target and organs at risk (OAR) were compared, and the correlation between the dose change and the setup errors (rotational setup errors and neck residual setup error) was analyzed. RESULTS: Translational setup errors increased farther away from the head. Statistically significant difference among 3 groups was achieved in the directions of left-right (P < .001) and anteroposterior (P < .001) by analysis of variance test. Compared with the initial plan dose, the actual accumulated dose of the target area decreased with the actual exposure dose of the OAR increased. However, most of the dosimetric parameters differed by less than 5%. No correlation was found between dose deviation values and the translational setup errors of target. However, sagittal rotational setup errors (pitch) had a positive relationship (P < .05) with the avearge dose of PTVnd (L) (r = 0.885), PTVnd(R) (r = 0.547) PTV1(r = 0.633) and PTV2(r = 0.584). Transverse rotational setup errors (roll) had a positive relationship (P < .05) with the avearge dose of PTVnd(R) (r = 0.593), PTV1(r = 0.505) and PTV2(r = 0.662). CONCLUSIONS: Dose deviation between the actual accumulated and initial plan is not negligible, but most indicators difference is less than 5%, NPC patients treated by HT with MVCT correction setup errors every other day did not need adaptive radiotherapy model unless got rapid tumor shrinkage or weight loss. Moreover, to minimize the dose deviation, more attention should be paid to the reduction of pitch, roll, and residual error of cervical vertebrae during body positioning.

In Silico Studies of the Impact of Rotational Errors on Translation Shifts and Dose Distribution in Image-Guided Radiotherapy.

Objective: To compare the 6-dimensional errors of different immobilization devices and body regions based on 3-dimensional cone beam computed tomography for image-guided radiotherapy and to further quantitatively evaluate the impact of rotational corrections on translational shifts and dose distribution based on anthropomorphic phantoms. Materials and Methods: Two hundred ninety patients with cone beam computed tomographies from 3835 fractions were retrospectively analyzed for brain, head & neck, chest, abdomen, pelvis, and breast cases. A phantom experiment was conducted to investigate the impact of rotational errors on translational shifts using cone beam computed tomography and the registration system. For the dosimetry study, pitch rotations were simulated by adjusting the breast bracket by ±2.5°. Roll and yaw rotations were simulated by rotating the gantry and couch in the planning system by ±3.0°, respectively. The original plan for the breast region was designed in the computed tomography image space without rotation. With the same planning parameters, the original plan was transplanted into the image space with different rotations for dose recalculation. The effect of these errors on the breast target and organs at risk was assessed by dose-volume histograms. Results: Most of the mean rotational errors in the breast region were >1°. A single uncorrected yaw of 3° caused a change of 2.9 mm in longitudinal translation. A phantom study for the breast region demonstrated that when the pitch rotations were -2.5° and 2.5° and roll and yaw were both 3°, the reductions in the planning target volumes-V50 Gy were 20.07% and 29.58% of the original values, respectively. When the pitch rotation was +2.5°, the left lung V5 Gy and heart Dmean were 7.49% and 165.76 Gy larger, respectively, than the original values. Conclusions: Uncorrected rotations may cause changes in the values and directions of translational shifts. Rotational corrections may improve the patient setup and dose distribution accuracy.

Introduce a rotational robust optimization framework for spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy.

Objective. Proton dosimetric uncertainties resulting from the patient's daily setup errors in rotational directions exist even with advanced image-guided radiotherapy techniques. Thus, we developed a new rotational robust optimization SPArc algorithm (SPArcrot) to mitigate the dosimetric impact of the rotational setup error in Raystation ver. 6.02 (RaySearch Laboratory AB, Stockholm, Sweden).Approach.The initial planning CT was rotated ±5° simulating the worst-case setup error in the roll direction. The SPArcrotuses a multi-CT robust optimization framework by taking into account of such rotational setup errors. Five cases representing different disease sites were evaluated. Both SPArcoriginaland SPArcrotplans were generated using the same translational robust optimized parameters. To quantitatively investigate the mitigation effect from the rotational setup errors, all plans were recalculated using a series of pseudo-CT with rotational setup error (±1°/±2°/±3°/±5°). Dosimetric metrics such as D98% of CTV, and 3D gamma analysis were used to assess the dose distribution changes in the target and OARs.Main results.The magnitudes of dosimetric changes in the targets due to rotational setup error were significantly reduced by the SPArcrotcompared to SPArc in all cases. The uncertainties of the max dose to the OARs, such as brainstem, spinal cord and esophagus were significantly reduced using SPArcrot. The uncertainties of the mean dose to the OARs such as liver and oral cavity, parotid were comparable between the two planning techniques. The gamma passing rate (3%/3 mm) was significantly improved for CTV of all tumor sites through SPArcrot.Significance.Rotational setup error is one of the major issues which could lead to significant dose perturbations. SPArcrotplanning approach can consider such rotational error from patient setup or gantry rotation error by effectively mitigating the dose uncertainties to the target and in the adjunct series OARs.

Comparison of setup accuracy and efficiency between the Klarity system and BodyFIX system for spine stereotactic body radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) uses highly conformal dose distributions and sharp dose gradients to cover targets in proximity to the spinal cord or cauda equina, which requires precise patient positioning and immobilization to deliver safe treatments. AIMS: Given some limitations with the BodyFIX system in our practice, we sought to evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of the Klarity SBRT patient immobilization system in comparison to the BodyFIX system. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with 26 metastatic spinal lesions (78 fractions) were enrolled in this prospective observational study with one of two systems - BodyFIX (n = 11) or Klarity (n = 12). All patients were initially set up to external marks and positioned to match bony anatomy on ExacTrac images. Table corrections given by ExacTrac during setup and intrafractional monitoring and deviations from pre- and posttreatment CBCT images were analyzed. RESULTS: For initial setup accuracy, the Klarity system showed larger differences between initial skin mark alignment and the first bony alignment on ExacTrac than BodyFIX, especially in the vertical (mean [SD] of 5.7 mm [4.1 mm] for Klarity vs. 1.9 mm [1.7 mm] for BodyFIX, p-value < 0.01) and lateral (5.4 mm [5.1 mm] for Klarity vs. 3.2 mm [3.2 mm] for BodyFIX, p-value 0.02) directions. For set-up stability, no significant differences (all p-values > 0.05) were observed in the maximum magnitude of positional deviations between the two systems. For setup efficiency, Klarity system achieved desired bony alignment with similar number of setup images and similar setup time (14.4 min vs. 15.8 min, p-value = 0.41). For geometric uncertainty, systematic and random errors were found to be slightly less with Klarity than with BodyFIX based on an analytical calculation. CONCLUSION: With image-guided correction of initial alignment by external marks, the Klarity system can provide accurate and efficient patient immobilization. It can be a promising alternative to the BodyFIX system for spine SBRT while providing potential workflow benefits depending on one's practice environment.

Surface-guided positioning eliminates the need for skin markers in radiotherapy of right sided breast cancer: A single center randomized crossover trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To prospectively investigate whether surface guided setup of right sided breast cancer patients can increase efficiency and accuracy compared to traditional skin marker/tattoo based setup. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients were included in this study. Each patient was positioned using skin marks and tattoos (procedure A) for half of the fractions and surface guidance using AlignRT (procedure B) for the other half of the fractions. The order of the two procedures was randomized. Pretreatment CBCT was acquired at every fraction for both setup procedures. A total of ten time points were recorded during every treatment session. Applied couch shifts after CBCT match were recorded and used for potential error calculations if no CBCT had been used. RESULTS: In the vertical direction procedure B showed significant smaller population based systematic (Æ©) and random (σ) errors. However, a significant larger systematic error on the individual patient level (M) was also shown. This was found to be due to patient relaxation between setup and CBCT matching. Procedure B also showed a significant smaller random error in the lateral direction, while no significant differences were seen in the longitudinal direction. No significant difference in setup time was found between the two procedures. CONCLUSION: Setup of right sided breast cancer patients using surface guidance yields higher accuracy than setup using skin marks/tattoos and lasers with the same setup time. Patient alignment for this patient group can safely be done without the use of permanent tattoos and skin marks when utilizing surface-guided patient positioning. However, CBCT should still be used as final setup verification.

Bayesian methods provide a practical real-world evidence framework for evaluating the impact of changes in radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Retrospective studies have identified a link between the average set-up error of lung cancer patients treated with image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) and survival. The IGRT protocol was subsequently changed to reduce the action threshold. In this study, we use a Bayesian approach to evaluate the clinical impact of this change to practice using routine 'real-world' patient data. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two cohorts of NSCLC patients treated with IGRT were compared: pre-protocol change (N = 780, 5 mm action threshold) and post-protocol change (N = 411, 2 mm action threshold). Survival models were fitted to each cohort and changes in the hazard ratios (HR) associated with residual set-up errors was assessed. The influence of using an uninformative and a skeptical prior in the model was investigated. RESULTS: Following the reduction of the action threshold, the HR for residual set-up error towards the heart was reduced by up to 10%. Median patient survival increased for patients with set-up errors towards the heart, and remained similar for patients with set-up errors away from the heart. Depending on the prior used, a residual hazard ratio may remain. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis found a reduced hazard of death and increased survival for patients with residual set-up errors towards versus away from the heart post-protocol change. This study demonstrates the value of a Bayesian approach in the assessment of technical changes in radiotherapy practice and supports the consideration of adopting this approach in further prospective evaluations of changes to clinical practice.

Setup uncertainties and appropriate setup margins in the head-tilted supine position of whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT).

Various applications of head-tilting techniques in whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) have been introduced. However, a study on the setup uncertainties and margins in head-tilting techniques has not been reported. This study evaluated the setup uncertainties and determined the appropriate planning target volume (PTV) margins for patients treated in the head-tilted supine (ht-SP) and conventional supine position (c-SP) in WBRT. Thirty patients who received WBRT at our institution between October 2020 and May 2021 in the c-SP and ht-SP were investigated. The DUON head mask (60124, Orfit Industries, Wijnegem, Belgium) was used in the c-SP, and a thermoplastic U-Frame Mask (R420U, Klarity Medical & Equipment Co. Ltd., Lan Yu, China) was used in the ht-SP. Daily setup verification using planning computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam CT was corrected for translational (lateral, longitudinal, and vertical) and rotational (yaw) errors. In the c-SP, the means of systematic errors were -0.80, 0.79, and 0.37 mm and random errors were 0.27, 0.54, and 0.39 mm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical translational dimensions, respectively. Whereas, for the ht-SP, the means of systematic errors were -0.07, 0.73, and -0.63 mm, and random errors were 0.75, 1.39, 1.02 mm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical translational dimensions, respectively. The PTV margins were calculated using Stroom et al.'s [2Σ+0.7σ] and van Herk et al.'s recipe [2.5Σ+0.7σ]. Appropriate PTV margins with van Herk et al.'s recipe in WBRT were <2 mm and 1.5° in the c-SP and <3 mm and 2° in the ht-SP in the translational and rotational directions, respectively. Although the head tilt in the supine position requires more margin, it can be applied as a sufficiently stable and effective position in radiotherapy.

Factors impacting on patient setup analysis and error management during breast cancer radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy is required to deliver an accurate dose to the tumor while protecting surrounding normal tissues. Breast cancer radiotherapy involves a number of factors that can influence patient setup and error management, including the immobilization device used, the verification system and the patient's treatment position. The aim of this review is to compile and discuss the setup errors that occur due to the above-mentioned factors. In view of this, a systematic search of the scientific literature in the Medline/PubMed databases was performed over the 1990-2021 time period, with 93 articles found to be relevant for the study. To be accessible to all, this study not only aims to identify factors impacting on patient setup analysis, but also seeks to evaluate the role of each verification device, board immobilization and position in influencing these errors.

Advances and potential of optical surface imaging in radiotherapy.

This article reviews the recent advancements and future potential of optical surface imaging (OSI) in clinical applications as a four-dimensional (4D) imaging modality for surface-guided radiotherapy (SGRT), including OSI systems, clinical SGRT applications, and OSI-based clinical research. The OSI is a non-ionizing radiation imaging modality, offering real-time 3D surface imaging with a large field of view (FOV), suitable for in-room interactive patient setup, and real-time motion monitoring at any couch rotation during radiotherapy. So far, most clinical SGRT applications have focused on treating superficial breast cancer or deep-seated brain cancer in rigid anatomy, because the skin surface can serve as tumor surrogates in these two clinical scenarios, and the procedures for breast treatments in free-breathing (FB) or at deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH), and for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and radiotherapy (SRT) are well developed. When using the skin surface as a body-position surrogate, SGRT promises to replace the traditional tattoo/laser-based setup. However, this requires new SGRT procedures for all anatomical sites and new workflows from treatment simulation to delivery. SGRT studies in other anatomical sites have shown slightly higher accuracy and better performance than a tattoo/laser-based setup. In addition, radiographical image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) is still necessary, especially for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). To go beyond the external body surface and infer an internal tumor motion, recent studies have shown the clinical potential of OSI-based spirometry to measure dynamic tidal volume as a tumor motion surrogate, and Cherenkov surface imaging to guide and assess treatment delivery. As OSI provides complete datasets of body position, deformation, and motion, it offers an opportunity to replace fiducial-based optical tracking systems. After all, SGRT has great potential for further clinical applications. In this review, OSI technology, applications, and potential are discussed since its first introduction to radiotherapy in 2005, including technical characterization, different commercial systems, and major clinical applications, including conventional SGRT on top of tattoo/laser-based alignment and new SGRT techniques attempting to replace tattoo/laser-based setup. The clinical research for OSI-based tumor tracking is reviewed, including OSI-based spirometry and OSI-guided tumor tracking models. Ongoing clinical research has created more SGRT opportunities for clinical applications beyond the current scope.

Comparison of setup errors of immobilization devices for thoracic radiotherapy.

Performance of thoracic radiotherapy may be assisted by the use of thoracoabdominal flat immobilization devices (TAFIDs) and integrated cervicothoracic immobilization devices (ICTIDs). This study was performed to compare setup errors of TAFIDs and ICTIDs. Forty-four patients with lung cancer were retrospectively reviewed; 22 patients were immobilized with a TAFID and 22 with an ICTID. In total, 343 cone-beam computed tomography images of these patients were collected for radiotherapy setup. The 3-dimensional setup errors and the displacement of the acromioclavicular joint against the supraclavicular region were calculated. An independent-samples t-test and rank-sum test were used for statistical analyses. The translational setup errors of the TAFID group vs ICTID group in the left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions were 0.14 ± 0.17 vs 0.14 ± 0.16 cm (p = 0.364), 0.23 ± 0.26 vs 0.15 ± 0.15 cm (p = 0.000), and 0.16 ± 0.15 vs 0.12 ± 0.14 cm (p = 0.049), respectively. The relative displacement of the acromioclavicular joint against the supraclavicular joint in the LR, SI, and AP directions were 0.10 ± 0.12 vs 0.09 ± 0.10 cm (p = 0.176), 0.13 ± 0.13 vs 0.11 ± 0.12 cm (p = 0.083), and 0.17 ± 0.16 vs 0.12 ± 0.11 cm (p = 0.001), respectively. The overall displacement of the supraclavicular region was 0.28 ± 0.19 vs 0.23 ± 0.15 cm (p < 0.001). The recommended planning target volume margins in the LR, SI, and AP directions were 0.46 vs 0.74 cm, 0.51 vs 0.47 cm, and 0.49 vs 0.41 cm, respectively. For patients with lung cancer, using an ICTID can reduce setup errors in the SI direction and displacements of the acromioclavicular joint and supraclavicular region compared with a TAFID. Therefore, an ICTID is preferred for patients with lung cancer with supraclavicular target volume.

Initial clinical experience of surface guided stereotactic radiation therapy with open-face mask immobilization for improving setup accuracy: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To propose a specific surface guided stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) treatment procedure with open-face mask immobilization and evaluate the initial clinical experience in improving setup accuracy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The treatment records of 48 SRT patients with head lesions were retrospectively analyzed. For each patient, head immobilization was achieved with a double-shell open-face mask. The anterior shell was left open to expose the forehead, nose, eyes and cheekbones. The exposed facial area was used as region-of-interest for surface tracking by AlignRT (VisionRT Inc, UK). The posterior shell provided a sturdy and personalized headrest. Patient initial setup was guided by 6DoF real-time deltas (RTD) using the reference surface obtained from the skin contour delineated on the planning CT images. The endpoint of initial setup was 1 mm in translational RTD and 1 degree in rotational RTD. CBCT guidance was performed to derive the initial setup errors, and couch shifts for setup correction were applied prior to treatment delivery. CBCT couch shifts, AlignRT RTD values, repositioning rate and setup time were analyzed. RESULTS: The absolute values of median (maximal) CBCT couch shifts were 0.4 (1.3) mm in VRT, 0.1 (2.5) mm in LNG, 0.2 (1.6) mm in LAT, 0.1(1.2) degree in YAW, 0.2 (1.4) degree in PITCH and 0.1(1.3) degree in ROLL. The couch shifts and AlignRT RTD values exhibited highly agreement except in VRT and PITCH (p value < 0.01), of which the differences were as small as negligible. We did not find any case of patient repositioning that was due to out-of-tolerance setup errors, i.e., 3 mm and 2 degree. The surface guided setup time ranged from 52 to 174 s, and the mean and median time was 97.72 s and 94 s respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed surface guided SRT procedure with open-face mask immobilization is a step forward in improving patient comfort and positioning accuracy in the same process. Minimized initial setup errors and repositioning rate had been achieved with reasonably efficiency for routine clinical practice.

Using a daily monitoring system to reduce treatment position override rates in external beam radiation therapy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To report our 7-year experience with a daily monitoring system to significantly reduce couch position overrides and errors in patient treatment positioning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Treatment couch position override data were extracted from a radiation oncology-specific electronic medical record system from 2012 to 2018. During this period, we took several actions to reduce couch position overrides, including reducing the number of tolerance tables from 18 to 6, tightening tolerance limits, enforcing time outs, documenting reasons for overrides, and timely reviewing of overrides made from previous treatment day. The tolerance tables included treatment categories for head and neck (HN) (with/without cone beam CT [CBCT]), body (with/without CBCT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and clinical setup for electron beams. For the same time period, we also reported treatment positioning-related incidents that were recorded in our departmental incident report system. To verify our tolerance limits, we further examined couch shifts after daily kilovoltage CBCT (kV-CBCT) for the patients treated from 2018 to 2021. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2018, the override rate decreased from 11.2% to 1.6%/year, whereas the number of fractions treated in the department increased by 23%. The annual patient positioning error rate was also reduced from 0.019% in 2012, to 0.004% in 2017 and 0% in 2018. For patients treated under daily kV-CBCT guidance from 2018 to 2021, the applied couch shifts after imaging registration that exceeded the tolerance limits were low, <1% for HN, <1.2% for body, and <2.6% for SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: The daily monitoring system, which enables a timely review of overrides, significantly reduced the number of treatment couch position overrides and ultimately resulted in a decrease in treatment positioning errors. For patients treated with daily kV-CBCT guidance, couch position shifts after CBCT image guidance demonstrated a low rate of exceeding the set tolerance.

Causal relation between heart irradiation and survival of lung cancer patients after radiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: In a recent study, setup uncertainties in the direction of the heart were shown to impact the overall survival of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients after radiotherapy, indicating the causal effect between heart irradiation and survival. The current study aims to externally evaluate this observation within a patient cohort treated using daily IGRT. METHOD: NSCLC patients with locally-advanced disease and daily CBCT were included. For all treatment fractions, the distance between the isocenter and the heart was evaluated based on the clinical setup registrations. The variation in heart position between planning and treatment (DeltaDistance) was estimated from these registrations. The possible impact of DeltaDistance on survival was analysed by a multivariable Cox model of overall survival, allowing for a time-dependent impact of DeltaDistance to allow for toxicity latency. RESULTS: Daily CBCT information was available for 489 patients at Odense University Hospital. The primary Cox model contained GTV volume, patient age, performance status, and DeltaDistance. DeltaDistance significantly impacted overall survival approximately 50 months after radiotherapy. Subanalyses indicated that the observed effect is mainly present among the patients with the least clinical risk factors. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm the impact of setup variations in the direction of the heart on the survival of NSCLC patients, even within a cohort using daily CBCT setup guidance. This result indicates a causal effect between heart irradiation and survival. It will be challenging to reduce the setup uncertainty even further; thus, increased focus on dose constraints on the heart seems warranted.

Evaluation of the clinical implementation of a tattoo-free positioning technique in breast cancer radiotherapy using ExacTrac.

PURPOSE: Conventionally, tattoos and temporary skin marks are used in patient positioning procedures for breast cancer radiotherapy. However, many patients dislike these marks because their daily lives are affected by them. Therefore, we developed a new positioning technique using ExacTrac (BrainLAB AG, Munich, Germany). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical implementation of a tattoo-free positioning technique for breast cancer radiotherapy using ExacTrac. METHODS: We included 35 patients with breast cancer, 14 with tattoo-based positioning and 21 with tattoo-free positioning using ExacTrac. In this ExacTrac-based positioning technique, the patients were aligned around the mamilla of the ipsilateral breast, and 6D registration was performed later at the virtual isocenter, which was placed at the spinal cord. The target displacement relative to the treatment isocenter was identified and then compensated for using robotic couch translations and rotations. The gamma index method analyzes the integrated dose images of the transmitted radiation dose through patients to investigate the irradiation accuracy of the two positioning techniques. The clinical implementation of the ExacTrac-based positioning technique was evaluated by comparing the gamma passing rate of the tattoo-based and ExacTrac-based positioning techniques. RESULTS: The mean gamma passing rates of the tattoo-based and ExacTrac-based positioning techniques were 86.0 ± 10.2% and 90.9 ± 6.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The ExacTrac-based positioning technique provided positioning comparable to that of the tattoo-based positioning technique. Consequently, the clinical implementation of the tattoo-free positioning technique in breast cancer radiotherapy using ExacTrac was demonstrated.

Detection of setup errors with a body-surface laser-scanning system for whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.

PURPOSE: We compared the setup errors determined by an optical imaging system (OSIS) in women who received breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT) with those from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) carried out routinely. METHODS: We compared 130 setup errors in 10 patients undergoing WBRT following BCS by analyzing the translational and rotational couch shifts via CBCT and OSIS. Patients were treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The patient outline extracted from the planning reference Computed tomography (CT) was used as the reference for OSIS and CBCT alignment during treatment. We detected the setup uncertainty using CBCT and OSIS at the first five fractionations of RT and then twice a week. RESULTS: The absolute translational setup error (mean ± Standard deviation (SD)) in x (lateral), y (longitudinal), and z (vertical) axes detected by the OSIS was 0.14 ± 0.18, 0.15 ± 0.14, and 0.13 ± 0.13 cm, respectively. The rotational setup error (mean ± SD) in Rx (pitch), Ry (roll), and Rz (yaw) axes was 0.77 ± 0.54, 0.76 ± 0.61, and 1.23 ± 0.95, respectively. Significant difference is observed only in one direction (Rx, p = 0.03) in the paired setup errors obtaining from OSIS and CBCT, without significant differences in five directions. CONCLUSION: OSIS is a repeatable and reliable system that can be used to detect misalignments with accuracy, which is capable of supplementing CBCT for WBRT after BCS. We believe that an OSIS may be easier to use, quicker, and reduce overall dose as this method of patient alignment does not require ionizing radiation.

Augmented reality-guided positioning system for radiotherapy patients.

In modern radiotherapy, error reduction in the patients' daily setup error is important for achieving accuracy. In our study, we proposed a new approach for the development of an assist system for the radiotherapy position setup by using augmented reality (AR). We aimed to improve the accuracy of the position setup of patients undergoing radiotherapy and to evaluate the error of the position setup of patients who were diagnosed with head and neck cancer, and that of patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer. We acquired the patient's simulation CT data for the three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the external surface and organs. The AR tracking software detected the calibration module and loaded the 3D virtual model. The calibration module was aligned with the Linac isocenter by using room lasers. And then aligned the virtual cube with the calibration module to complete the calibration of the 3D virtual model and Linac isocenter. Then, the patient position setup was carried out, and point cloud registration was performed between the patient and the 3D virtual model, such the patient's posture was consistent with the 3D virtual model. Twenty patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer and 20 patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer in the supine position setup were analyzed for the residual errors of the conventional laser and AR-guided position setup. Results show that for patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer, the difference between the two positioning methods was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). For patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer, the residual errors of the two positioning methods in the superior and inferior direction and anterior and posterior direction were statistically significant (t = -5.80, -4.98, P < 0.05). The residual errors in the three rotation directions were statistically significant (t = -2.29 to -3.22, P < 0.05). The experimental results showed that the AR technology can effectively assist in the position setup of patients undergoing radiotherapy, significantly reduce the position setup errors in patients diagnosed with chest and abdomen cancer, and improve the accuracy of radiotherapy.