Cargando…
Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy
A surface imaging system, Catalyst (C‐Rad), was compared with laser‐based positioning and daily mega voltage computed tomography (MVCT) setup for breast patients with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy. Catalyst‐based positioning performed better than laser‐based positioning. The respe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5874112/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27685103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6041 |
_version_ | 1783310107133607936 |
---|---|
author | Crop, Frederik Pasquier, David Baczkiewic, Amandine Doré, Julie Bequet, Lena Steux, Emeline Gadroy, Anne Bouillon, Jacqueline Florence, Clement Muszynski, Laurence Lacour, Mathilde Lartigau, Eric |
author_facet | Crop, Frederik Pasquier, David Baczkiewic, Amandine Doré, Julie Bequet, Lena Steux, Emeline Gadroy, Anne Bouillon, Jacqueline Florence, Clement Muszynski, Laurence Lacour, Mathilde Lartigau, Eric |
author_sort | Crop, Frederik |
collection | PubMed |
description | A surface imaging system, Catalyst (C‐Rad), was compared with laser‐based positioning and daily mega voltage computed tomography (MVCT) setup for breast patients with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy. Catalyst‐based positioning performed better than laser‐based positioning. The respective modalities resulted in a standard deviation (SD), 68% confidence interval (CI) of positioning of left–right, craniocaudal, anterior–posterior, roll: 2.4 mm, 2.7 mm, 2.4 mm, 0.9° for Catalyst positioning, and 6.1 mm, 3.8 mm, 4.9 mm, 1.1° for laser‐based positioning, respectively. MVCT‐based precision is a combination of the interoperator variability for MVCT fusion and the patient movement during the time it takes for MVCT and fusion. The MVCT fusion interoperator variability for breast patients was evaluated at one SD left–right, craniocaudal, ant–post, roll as: 1.4 mm, 1.8 mm, 1.3 mm, 1.0°. There was no statistically significant difference between the automatic MVCT registration result and the manual adjustment; the automatic fusion results were within the 95% CI of the mean result of 10 users, except for one specific case where the patient was positioned with large yaw. We found that users add variability to the roll correction as the automatic registration was more consistent. The patient position uncertainty confidence interval was evaluated as 1.9 mm, 2.2 mm, 1.6 mm, 0.9° after 4 min, and 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.2 mm, 1° after 10 min. The combination of this patient movement with MVCT fusion interoperator variability results in total standard deviations of patient position when treatment starts 4 or 10 min after initial positioning of, respectively: 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.0 mm, 1.3° and 2.7 mm, 3.3 mm, 2.6 mm, 1.4°. Surface based positioning arrives at the same precision when taking into account the time required for MVCT imaging and fusion. These results can be used on a patient‐per‐patient basis to decide which positioning system performs the best after the first 5 fractions and when daily MVCT can be omitted. Ideally, real‐time monitoring is required to reduce important intrafraction movement. PACS number(s): 87.53.Jw, 87.53.Kn, 87.56.Da, 87.63.L‐, 81.70.Tx |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5874112 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58741122018-04-02 Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy Crop, Frederik Pasquier, David Baczkiewic, Amandine Doré, Julie Bequet, Lena Steux, Emeline Gadroy, Anne Bouillon, Jacqueline Florence, Clement Muszynski, Laurence Lacour, Mathilde Lartigau, Eric J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics A surface imaging system, Catalyst (C‐Rad), was compared with laser‐based positioning and daily mega voltage computed tomography (MVCT) setup for breast patients with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy. Catalyst‐based positioning performed better than laser‐based positioning. The respective modalities resulted in a standard deviation (SD), 68% confidence interval (CI) of positioning of left–right, craniocaudal, anterior–posterior, roll: 2.4 mm, 2.7 mm, 2.4 mm, 0.9° for Catalyst positioning, and 6.1 mm, 3.8 mm, 4.9 mm, 1.1° for laser‐based positioning, respectively. MVCT‐based precision is a combination of the interoperator variability for MVCT fusion and the patient movement during the time it takes for MVCT and fusion. The MVCT fusion interoperator variability for breast patients was evaluated at one SD left–right, craniocaudal, ant–post, roll as: 1.4 mm, 1.8 mm, 1.3 mm, 1.0°. There was no statistically significant difference between the automatic MVCT registration result and the manual adjustment; the automatic fusion results were within the 95% CI of the mean result of 10 users, except for one specific case where the patient was positioned with large yaw. We found that users add variability to the roll correction as the automatic registration was more consistent. The patient position uncertainty confidence interval was evaluated as 1.9 mm, 2.2 mm, 1.6 mm, 0.9° after 4 min, and 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.2 mm, 1° after 10 min. The combination of this patient movement with MVCT fusion interoperator variability results in total standard deviations of patient position when treatment starts 4 or 10 min after initial positioning of, respectively: 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.0 mm, 1.3° and 2.7 mm, 3.3 mm, 2.6 mm, 1.4°. Surface based positioning arrives at the same precision when taking into account the time required for MVCT imaging and fusion. These results can be used on a patient‐per‐patient basis to decide which positioning system performs the best after the first 5 fractions and when daily MVCT can be omitted. Ideally, real‐time monitoring is required to reduce important intrafraction movement. PACS number(s): 87.53.Jw, 87.53.Kn, 87.56.Da, 87.63.L‐, 81.70.Tx John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5874112/ /pubmed/27685103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6041 Text en © 2016 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Crop, Frederik Pasquier, David Baczkiewic, Amandine Doré, Julie Bequet, Lena Steux, Emeline Gadroy, Anne Bouillon, Jacqueline Florence, Clement Muszynski, Laurence Lacour, Mathilde Lartigau, Eric Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy |
title | Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy |
title_full | Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy |
title_fullStr | Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy |
title_full_unstemmed | Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy |
title_short | Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy |
title_sort | surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical tomotherapy |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5874112/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27685103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i5.6041 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cropfrederik surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT pasquierdavid surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT baczkiewicamandine surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT dorejulie surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT bequetlena surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT steuxemeline surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT gadroyanne surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT bouillonjacqueline surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT florenceclement surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT muszynskilaurence surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT lacourmathilde surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy AT lartigaueric surfaceimaginglaserpositioningorvolumetricimagingforbreastcancerwithnodalinvolvementtreatedbyhelicaltomotherapy |