title: Single institution's dosimetry and IGRT analysis of prostate SBRT.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To report single institution's IGRT and dosimetry analysis on the 37 Gy/5 fraction prostate SBRT clinical trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  The IRB (Duke University Medical Center) approved clinical trial has treated 28 patients with stage T1-T2c prostate cancer with a regimen of 37 Gy in 5 fractions using IMRT and IGRT protocols since 2009. The clinical trial protocol requires CT/MRI imaging for the prostate delineation; a margin of 3 mm in posterior direction and 5 mm elsewhere for planning target volume (PTV); and strict dose constraints for primary organs-at-risks (OARs) including the bladder, the rectum, and the femoral heads. Rigid IGRT process is also an essential part of the protocol. Precise patient and prostate positioning and dynamic tracking of prostate motion are performed with electromagnetic localization device (Calypso) and on-board imaging (OBI) system. Initial patient and target alignment is performed based on fiducials with OBI imaging system and Calypso system. Prior to treatment, cone-beam CT (CBCT) is performed for soft tissue alignment verification. During treatment, per-beam corrections for target motion using translational couch movements is performed before irradiating each field, based on electromagnetic localization or on-board imaging localization. Dosimetric analysis on target coverage and OAR sparing is performed based on key DVH parameters corresponding to protocol guidance. IGRT analysis is focused on the average frequency and magnitude of corrections during treatment, and overall intra-fractional target drift. A margin value is derived using actual target motion data and the margin recipe from Van Herk et al., and is compared to the current one in practice. In addition, cumulative doses with and without per-beam IGRT corrections are compared to assess the benefit of online IGRT.
  
  
  RESULTS
  1. No deviation has been found in 10 of 14 dosimetric constraints, with minor deviations in the rest 4 constraints.2. Online IGRT techniques including Calypso, OBI and CBCT supplement each other to create an effective and reliable system on tracking target and correcting intra-fractional motion.3. On average ½ corrections have been performed per fraction, with magnitude of (0.22 ± 0.11) cm. Average target drift magnitude is (0.7 ± 1.3) mm in one direction during each fraction.4. Benefit from per-beam correction in overall review is small: most differences from no correction are < 0.1 Gy for PTV D1cc/Dmean and < 1%/1.5 cc for OAR parameters. Up to 1.5 Gy reduction was seen in PTV D99% without online correction. Largest differences for OARs are -4.1 cc and +1.6 cc in the V50% for the bladder and the rectum, respectively. However, online IGRT helps to catch unexpected significant target motion.5. Margin derived from actual target motion is 2.5 mm isotropic, consist with current practice.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Clinical experience of the 37 Gy/5-fraction prostate SBRT from a single institution is reported. Dosimetric analysis demonstrated excellent target coverage and OAR sparing for our first 28 patients in this trial. Online IGRT techniques implemented are both effective and reliable. Per-beam correction in general provides a small benefit in dosimetry. Target motion measured by online localization devices confirms that current margin selection is adequate.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3295, Durham, NC 27710, USA. jackie.wu@duke.edu.
authors.forename: Q Jackie
authors.initials: QJ
authors.lastname: Wu
authors.forename: Taoran
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Lulin
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Yuan
authors.forename: Fang-Fang
authors.initials: FF
authors.lastname: Yin
authors.forename: W Robert
authors.initials: WR
authors.lastname: Lee
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D058958:Organs at Risk; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D011874:Radiometry; D016634:Radiosurgery; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; D050397:Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
references.citation: Radiat Oncol. 2013 Jul 08;8:171
references.pmid: 23835141
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 May 1;47(2):291-8
references.pmid: 10802351
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Mar 15;67(4):1099-105
references.pmid: 17336216
references.citation: BMC Urol. 2010 Feb 01;10:1
references.pmid: 20122161
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Feb 1;64(2):333-42
references.pmid: 16414369
references.citation: Radiat Oncol. 2011 Jan 10;6:3
references.pmid: 21219625
references.citation: Semin Radiat Oncol. 2008 Jan;18(1):41-7
references.pmid: 18082587
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Jul 15;56(4):1093-104
references.pmid: 12829147
references.citation: Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2012 Oct;84(1):101-8
references.pmid: 22257653
references.citation: Semin Radiat Oncol. 2004 Jan;14(1):52-64
references.pmid: 14752733
references.citation: Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Oct;9(5):473-7
references.pmid: 20815418
references.citation: Acta Oncol. 2005;44(3):265-76
references.pmid: 16076699
references.citation: J Neurosurg. 2000 Dec;93 Suppl 3:219-22
references.pmid: 11143252