The susceptibility of IMRT dose distributions to intrafraction organ motion: an investigation into smoothing filters derived from four dimensional computed tomography data.
This study investigated the sensitivity of static planning of intensity-modulated beams (IMBs) to intrafraction deformable organ motion and assessed whether smoothing of the IMBs at the treatment-planning stage can reduce this sensitivity. The study was performed with a 4D computed tomography (CT) data set for an IMRT treatment of a patient with liver cancer. Fluence profiles obtained from inverse-planning calculations on a standard reference CT scan were redelivered on a CT scan from the 4D data set at a different part of the breathing cycle. The use of a nonrigid registration model on the 4D data set additionally enabled detailed analysis of the overall intrafraction motion effects on the IMRT delivery during free breathing. Smoothing filters were then applied to the beam profiles within the optimization process to investigate whether this could reduce the sensitivity of IMBs to intrafraction organ motion. In addition, optimal fluence profiles from calculations on each individual phase of the breathing cycle were averaged to mimic the convolution of a static dose distribution with a motion probability kernel and assess its usefulness. Results from nonrigid registrations of the CT scan data showed a maximum liver motion of 7 mm in superior-inferior direction for this patient. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) comparison indicated a systematic shift when planning treatment on a motion-frozen, standard CT scan but delivering over a full breathing cycle. The ratio of the dose to 50% of the normal liver to 50% of the planning target volume (PTV) changed up to 28% between different phases. Smoothing beam profiles with a median-window filter did not overcome the substantial shift in dose due to a difference in breathing phase between planning and delivery of treatment. Averaging of optimal beam profiles at different phases of the breathing cycle mainly resulted in an increase in dose to the organs at risk (OAR) and did not seem beneficial to compensate for organ motion compared with using a large margin. Additionally, the results emphasized the need for 4D CT scans when aiming to reduce the internal margin (IM). Using only a single planning scan introduces a systematic shift in the dose distribution during delivery. Smoothing beam profiles either based on a single scan or over the different breathing phases was not beneficial for reducing this shift.
Coolens
Catherine
C
Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom. catherine.coolens@icr.ac.uk
Evans
Phil M
PM
Seco
Joao
J
Webb
Steve
S
Blackall
Jane M
JM
Rietzel
Eike
E
Chen
George T Y
GT
D001822:Body Burden; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Q000379:methods*; D008113:Liver Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D009068:Movement; D011874:Radiometry / Q000379:methods*; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods*; D012062:Relative Biological Effectiveness; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*; D014781:Viscera / Q000503:physiopathology*