Technical note: Tracking target/chest relationship changes during motion‐synchronized tomotherapy treatments

BACKGROUND: Radixact Synchrony® is an intrafraction motion tracking system for helical tomotherapy treatments that uses kV radiographs of the target and LEDs on the patient's chest to synchronize the movement of the radiation beam with the respiratory motion of the target. Several works have demonstrated Synchrony's ability to track target motion when the chest and target motions are perfectly correlated. PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to determine Synchrony's ability to accurately adapt to scenarios with a changing target/chest correlation. METHODS: A custom ion chamber mimicking plug with embedded fiducials was placed inside a Delta4 Phantom+ and used as the tracking object. A separate motion stage was programmed to mimic chest motion. The target and chest surrogate phantom were programmed to move sinusoidally and two types of target/chest relationship changes were introduced: rigid shifts and linear drifts of the target position but not surrogate position. Tracking analysis was performed by comparing programmed phantom motion to log files of the Synchrony‐modeled motion. No dosimetry was performed in this work. RESULTS: At the fastest imaging rate of 2 s/img, Synchrony accurately adapted for gradual drifts in the target location (up to 5 mm/min) with minor increases in tracking errors and adapted for an abrupt 5 mm shift after about 30 s (with an auto‐pause threshold at 60 s). When the imaging period was longer (> 4 s/img), larger tracking errors (> 5 mm) were observed, and the treatment would be paused. The measured delta (MD) parameter (2D target localization error on the most recent image) was found to be a more responsive indicator of tracking errors than the potential difference (PD) parameter (3D estimator of tracking error based on all images in the model). Lastly, the effect of a recent update to the tracking algorithm was found to improve the ability of Synchrony to track target/chest relationship changes. CONCLUSIONS: This work demonstrated that Synchrony can adapt to gradual changes (drifts) in the target/chest relationship, but it takes a finite amount of time to adapt to abrupt shifts. Ability to adapt to these changes increases with increasing imaging frequency. Larger tracking errors were observed in this work than others have reported in the literature due to the introduction of target/chest correlation changes in this work. Future work needs to be performed investigating what type and magnitude of target/chest miscorrelations occur in patients. Lastly, users should ensure they are using the most recent software (3.0.1 or newer) to improve the ability of Synchrony to track these movements.