Intrafractional relationship changes between an external breathing signal and fiducial marker positions in pancreatic cancer patients. Issue 3 (14th March 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pettersson, Niclas; Oderinde, Oluwaseyi M.; Murphy, James; Simpson, Daniel; Cerviño, Laura I.
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 21:Issue 3(2020)
• Page Start: 153
• Page End: 161
• Publication Date: 2020-03-14
• Subjects: fiducial markers -- fluoroscopic imaging -- pancreatic cancer -- respiratory‐guided radiation therapy -- SBRT; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12841
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: Background and purpose: The purpose of this study of pancreatic cancer patients treated with respiratory‐guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) on a standard linac was to investigate (a) the intrafractional relationship change (IRC) between a breathing signal and the tumor position, (b) the impact of IRC on the delivered dose, and (c) potential IRC predictors. Materials and methods: We retrospectively investigated 10 pancreatic cancer patients with 2–4 implanted fiducial markers in the tumor treated with SBRT. Fluoroscopic images were acquired before and after treatment delivery simultaneously with the abdominal breathing motion. We quantified the IRC as the change in fiducial location for a given breathing amplitude in the left–right (LR), anterior–posterior (AP), and superior–inferior (SI) directions from before to after treatment delivery. The treatment plans were re‐calculated after changing the isocenter coordinates according to the IRCs. Four treatment‐ or patient‐related factors were investigated as potential predictors for IRC using linear models. Results: The average (±1 SD) absolute IRCs in the LR, AP, and SI directions were 1.2 ± 1.2 mm, 0.7 ± 0.7 mm, and 1.1 ± 0.8 mm, respectively. The average 3D IRC was 2.0 ± 1.3 mm (range: 0.4–5.3 mm) for a median treatment delivery time of 8.5 min (range: 5.7–19.9 min; n = 31 fractions). The dose coverage of the internal target volume (ITV) decreased by more than 3% points in three of 31 fractions. In those cases, the 3D IRC had been larger than 4.3 mm. The 3D IRC was found to correlate with changes in the minimum breathing amplitude during treatment delivery. Conclusion: On average, 2 mm of treatment delivery accuracy was lost due to IRC. Periodical intrafractional imaging is needed to safely deliver respiratory‐guided SBRT.