Vol 26, No 2 (2021)
Research paper
Published online: 2021-03-04

open access

Page views 862
Article views/downloads 622
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Evaluation of two-dimensional electronic portal imaging device using integrated images during volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

Shoki Inui12, Yoshihiro Ueda1, Shunsuke Ono1, Shingo Ohira1, Masaru Isono1, Yuya Nitta1, Hikari Ueda1, Masayoshi Miyazaki1, Masahiko Koizumi2, Teruki Teshima1
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2021;26(2):281-290.

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate analysis criteria for the identification of the presence of rectal gas during volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer patients by using electronic portal imaging device (EPID)-based in vivo dosimetry (IVD).

Materials and methods: All measurements were performed by determining the cumulative EPID images in an integrated acquisition mode and analyzed using PerFRACTION commercial software. Systematic setup errors were simulated by moving the anthropomorphic phantom in each translational and rotational direction. The inhomogeneity regions were also simulated by the I’mRT phantom attached to the Quasar phantom. The presence of small and large air cavities (12 and 48 cm3) was controlled by moving the Quasar phantom in several timings during VMAT. Sixteen prostate cancer patients received EPID-based IVD during VMAT.

Results: In the phantom study, no systematic setup error was detected in the range that can happen in clinical ( < 5-mm and < 3 degree). The pass rate of 2% dose difference (DD2%) in small and large air cavities was 98.74% and 79.05%, respectively, in the appearance of the air cavity after irradiation three quarter times. In the clinical study, some fractions caused a sharp decline in the DD2% pass rate. The proportion for DD2% < 90% was 13.4% of all fractions. Rectal gas was confirmed in 11.0% of fractions by acquiring kilo-voltage X-ray images after the treatment.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that analysis criteria of 2% dose difference in EPID-based IVD was a suitable method for identification of rectal gas during VMAT for prostate cancer patients.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements). Prescribing, reporting, and recording photon-beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) ICRU Report 83. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2010: 41–53.
  2. Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 2008; 35(1): 310–317.
  3. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, et al. ProtecT Study Group. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(15): 1415–1424.
  4. Fonteyne V, Ost P, Vanpachtenbeke F, et al. Rectal toxicity after intensity modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer: which rectal dose volume constraints should we use? Radiother Oncol. 2014; 113(3): 398–403.
  5. Ghadjar P, Thalmann GN. Comparative analysis of prostate-specific antigen free survival outcomes for patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treatment by radical therapy. Results from the Prostate Cancer Results Study Group. BJU Int. 2012; 110(10): E431–2; author reply E432.
  6. McPartlin AJ, Li XA, Kershaw LE, et al. MR-Linac consortium. MRI-guided prostate adaptive radiotherapy - A systematic review. Radiother Oncol. 2016; 119(3): 371–380.
  7. McNair HA, Wedlake L, Lips IM, et al. A systematic review: effectiveness of rectal emptying preparation in prostate cancer patients. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2014; 4(6): 437–447.
  8. Padhani A, Khoo V, Suckling J, et al. Evaluating the effect of rectal distension and rectal movement on prostate gland position using cine MRI. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999; 44(3): 525–533.
  9. Ogino I, Kaneko T, Suzuki R, et al. Rectal content and intrafractional prostate gland motion assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. J Radiat Res. 2011; 52(2): 199–207.
  10. Nichol AM, Brock KK, Lockwood GA, et al. A magnetic resonance imaging study of prostate deformation relative to implanted gold fiducial markers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 67(1): 48–56.
  11. Villeirs GM, De Meerleer GO, Verstraete KL, et al. Magnetic resonance assessment of prostate localization variability in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 60(5): 1611–1621.
  12. Bakhtiari M, Kumaraswamy L, Bailey DW, et al. Using an EPID for patient-specific VMAT quality assurance. Med Phys. 2011; 38(3): 1366–1373.
  13. Iori M, Cagni E, Paiusco M, et al. Dosimetric verification of IMAT delivery with a conventional EPID system and a commercial portal dose image prediction tool. Med Phys. 2010; 37(1): 377–390.
  14. Ueda Y, Miyazaki M, Nishiyama K, et al. Craniocaudal safety margin calculation based on interfractional changes in tumor motion in lung SBRT assessed with an EPID in cine mode. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 83(3): 1064–1069.
  15. Kroonwijk M, Pasma K, Quint S, et al. In vivo dosimetry for prostate cancer patients using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID); demonstration of internal organ motion. Radiother Oncol. 1998; 49(2): 125–132.
  16. Nailon WH, Welsh D, McDonald K, et al. EPID-based in vivo dosimetry using Dosimetry Check™: Overview and clinical experience in a 5-yr study including breast, lung, prostate, and head and neck cancer patients. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019; 20(1): 6–16.
  17. Celi S, Costa E, Wessels C, et al. EPID based in vivo dosimetry system: clinical experience and results. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016; 17(3): 262–276.
  18. Woodruff HC, Fuangrod T, Van Uytven E, et al. First Experience With Real-Time EPID-Based Delivery Verification During IMRT and VMAT Sessions. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015; 93(3): 516–522.
  19. Peca S, Brown DW, Smith WL. A Simple Method for 2-D In Vivo Dosimetry by Portal Imaging. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017; 16(6): 944–955.
  20. Peca S, Sinha RS, Brown DW, et al. Portal Imaging Dosimetry Identifies Delivery Errors in Rectal Cancer Radiotherapy on the Belly Board Device. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017; 16(6): 956–963.
  21. Jomehzadeh A, Shokrani P, Mohammadi M, et al. Assessment of a 2D electronic portal imaging devices-based dosimetry algorithm for pretreatment and midplane dose verification. Adv Biomed Res. 2016; 5: 171.
  22. Hsieh ES, Hansen KS, Kent MS, et al. Can a commercially available EPID dosimetry system detect small daily patient setup errors for cranial IMRT/SRS? Pract Radiat Oncol. 2017; 7(4): e283–e290.
  23. ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements).. Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy. ICRU Report 50. ICRU, Washington 1993: 27–8.
  24. ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements). Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy (Supplement to ICRU Report 50). ICRU Report 62. ICRU, Bethesda 1999: 3–11.
  25. Kruse JJ. On the insensitivity of single field planar dosimetry to IMRT inaccuracies. Med Phys. 2010; 37(6): 2516–2524.
  26. Zhuang AH, Olch AJ. Sensitivity study of an automated system for daily patient QA using EPID exit dose images. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018; 19(3): 114–124.
  27. Rosario T, van der Weide L, Admiraal M, et al. Toward planning target volume margin reduction for the prostate using intrafraction motion correction with online kV imaging and automatic detection of implanted gold seeds. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018; 8(6): 422–428.
  28. Connolly J, Shinohara K, Presti J, et al. Local recurrence after radical prostatectomy: Characteristics in size, location, and relationship to prostate-specific antigen and surgical margins. Urology. 1996; 47(2): 225–231.



Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy