Cargando…

Analysis of intra-fraction prostate motion and derivation of duration-dependent margins for radiotherapy using real-time 4D ultrasound

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During radiotherapy, prostate motion changes over time. Quantifying and accounting for this motion is essential. This study aimed to assess intra-fraction prostate motion and derive duration-dependent planning margins for two treatment techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A four...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pang, Eric Pei Ping, Knight, Kellie, Fan, Qiao, Tan, Sheena Xue Fei, Ang, Khong Wei, Master, Zubin, Mui, Wing-Ho, Leung, Ronnie Wing-Kin, Baird, Marilyn, Tuan, Jeffrey Kit Loong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7807728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33458378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2018.03.008
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During radiotherapy, prostate motion changes over time. Quantifying and accounting for this motion is essential. This study aimed to assess intra-fraction prostate motion and derive duration-dependent planning margins for two treatment techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A four-dimension (4D) transperineal ultrasound Clarity® system was used to track prostate motion. We analysed 1913 fractions from 60 patients undergoing volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the prostate. The mean VMAT treatment duration was 3.4 min. Extended monitoring was conducted weekly to simulate motion during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment (an additional seven minutes). A motion-time trend analysis was conducted and the mean intra-fraction motion between VMAT and IMRT treatments compared. Duration-dependent margins were calculated and anisotropic margins for VMAT and IMRT treatments were derived. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in the mean intra-fraction motion between VMAT and the simulated IMRT duration in the inferior (0.1 mm versus 0.3 mm) and posterior (−0.2 versus −0.4 mm) directions respectively (p ≪ 0.01). An intra-fraction motion trend inferiorly and posteriorly was observed. The recommended minimum anisotropic margins are 1.7 mm/2.7 mm (superior/inferior); 0.8 mm (left/right), 1.7 mm/2.9 mm (anterior/posterior) for VMAT treatments and 2.9 mm/4.3 mm (superior/inferior), 1.5 mm (left/right), 2.8 mm/4.8 mm (anterior/posterior) for IMRT treatments. Smaller anisotropic margins were required for VMAT compared to IMRT (differences ranging from 1.2 to 1.6 mm superiorly/inferiorly, 0.7 mm laterally and 1.1–1.9 mm anteriorly/posteriorly). CONCLUSIONS: VMAT treatment is preferred over IMRT as prostate motion increases with time. Larger margins should be employed in the inferior and posterior directions for both treatment durations. Duration-dependent margins should be applied in the presence of prolonged imaging and verification time.