Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:42:39.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of set-up errors and estimation of set-up margin during external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer using electronic portal imaging device (EPID)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2021

Daryoush Khoramian Open the ORCID record for Daryoush Khoramian [Opens in a new window] ,
Soroush Sistani  and
Bagher Farhood
Daryoush Khoramian*
Affiliation:
Medical Physics Department, Ramezan Zadeh Radiotherapy Center, Yazd, Iran Department of Medical Physics, The Advocate Center for Clinical Research, Ayatollah Yasrebi Hospital, Kashan, Iran
Soroush Sistani
Affiliation:
Medical Physics Department, Ramezan Zadeh Radiotherapy Center, Yazd, Iran Department of Medical Physics, The Advocate Center for Clinical Research, Ayatollah Yasrebi Hospital, Kashan, Iran
Bagher Farhood
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Physics and Radiology, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran
*
Author for correspondence: Daryoush Khoramian, Medical Physics Department, Ayatollah Yasrebi Hospital, Kashan, Iran, Tel: +98 9378394640. E-mail: daryoushkhoramian@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aim:

In radiation therapy, accurate dose distribution in target volume requires accurate treatment setup. The set-up errors are unwanted and inherent in the treatment process. By achieving these errors, a set-up margin (SM) of clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) can be determined. In the current study, systematic and random set-up errors that occurred during prostate cancer radiotherapy were measured by an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). The obtained values were used to propose the optimum CTV-to-PTV margin in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Materials and methods:

A total of 21 patients with prostate cancer treated with external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) participated in this study. A total of 280 portal images were acquired during 12 months. Gross, population systematic (Σ) and random (σ) errors were obtained based on the portal images in Anterior–Posterior (AP), Medio-Lateral (ML) and Superior–Inferior (SI) directions. The SM of CTV to PTV were then calculated and compared by using the formulas presented by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) 62, Stroom and Heijmen and Van Herk et al.

Results:

The findings showed that the population systematic errors during prostate cancer radiotherapy in AP, ML and SI directions were 1·40, 1·95 and 1·94 mm, respectively. The population random errors in AP, ML and SI directions were 2·09, 1·85 and 2·29 mm, respectively. The SM of CTV to PTV calculated in accordance with the formula of ICRU 62 in AP, ML and SI directions were 2·51, 2·68 and 3·00 mm, respectively. And according to Stroom and Heijmen, formula were 4·23, 5·19 and 5·48 mm, respectively. And Van Herk et al. formula were 4·96, 6·17 and 6·45 mm, respectively.

Findings:

The SM of CTV to PTV in all directions, based on the formulas of ICRU 62, Stroom and Heijmen and van Herk et al., were equal to 2·73, 4·98 and 5·86 mm, respectively; these values were obtained by averaging the margins in all directions.

Keywords

3DCRTEPIDprostate cancerset-up errorsset-up margin
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , December 2022 , pp. 493 - 500
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Farhood, B, Geraily, G, Alizadeh, A. Incidence and mortality of various cancers in Iran and compare to other countries: a review article. Iran J Public Health 2018; 47 (3): 309.Google ScholarPubMed
van der Wielen, GJ, van Putten, WL, Incrocci, L. Sexual function after three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results from a dose-escalation trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 68 (2): 479–484.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farhood, B, Mortezaee, K, Haghi-Aminjan, H, et al. A systematic review of radiation-induced testicular toxicities following radiotherapy for prostate cancer. 2019. PubMed PMID: 30740683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mortezaee, K, Motallebzadeh, E, Milajerdi, A, Farhood, B, Najafi, M, Sahebkar, A. The effect of prostate cancer radiotherapy on testosterone level: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anti-Cancer Agents Med Chem 2020. PubMed PMID: 31994469. Epub 2020/01/30. eng.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boehmer, D, Badakhshi, H, Kuschke, W, Bohsung, J, Budach, V. Testicular dose in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2005; 181 (3): 179–184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yonai, S, Matsufuji, N, Akahane, K. Monte Carlo study of out-of-field exposure in carbon-ion radiotherapy with a passive beam: Organ doses in prostate cancer treatment. Phys Med 2018; 51: 48–55. PubMed PMID: 29699921. Epub 2018/04/28. eng.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aliasgharzadeh, A, Mohammadi, A, Farhood, B, Anaraki, V, Mohseni, M, Moradi, H. Improvement of the sensitivity of PASSAG polymer gel dosimeter by urea. Radiat Phys Chem 2020; 166: 108470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herman, MG, Balter, JM, Jaffray, DA, et al. Clinical use of electronic portal imaging: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 58. Med Phys 2001; 28 (5): 712–737.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gupta, T, Chopra, S, Kadam, A, et al. Assessment of three-dimensional set-up errors in conventional head and neck radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging device. Radiat Oncol 2007; 2 (1): 44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
The Royal College of Radiologists, Society and College of Radiographers, Institute of Physical and Engineering in Medicine. On target: ensuring geometric accuracy in radiotherapy. London: The Royal College of Radiologists, 2008.Google Scholar
Stroom, JC, Heijmen, BJ. Geometrical uncertainties, radiotherapy planning margins, and the ICRU-62 report. Radiother Oncol 2002; 64 (1): 75–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Team NCA. National radiotherapy implementation group report. Image guided radiotherapy (IGRT): guidance for implementation and use. London: NCAT, 2012.Google Scholar
Wambersie, A, Landgerg, T. ICRU report 62: prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy. Bethesda, MD: ICRU Publ., 1999.Google Scholar
Van Herk, M, Remeijer, P, Rasch, C, Lebesque, JV. The probability of correct target dosage: dose-population histograms for deriving treatment margins in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 47 (4): 1121–1135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Podgorsak, EB. Radiation oncology physics. Vienna: IAEA; 2005.Google Scholar
Kukołowicz, P, Kukołowicz, H, Tyburska, I. Dependence of the safe rectum dose on the CTV–PTV margin size and treatment technique. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2015; 20 (3): 198–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liang, Q, Shah, P, Li, S, Miyamoto, C. SU-F-T-403: impact of dose reduction for simulation CT on radiation therapy treatment planning. Med Phys 2016; 43 (6Part19): 3556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Royal College of Radiologists, Society and College of Radiographers, Medicine IoPaEi. On target: ensuring geometric accuracy in radiotherapy. London: The Royal College of Radiologists, 2008.Google Scholar
Kragelj, B. Setup error and its effect on safety margin in conformal radiotherapy of the prostate. Radiol Oncol 2005; 39 (3): 211–217.Google Scholar
Rudat, V, Schraube, P, Oetzel, D, Zierhut, D, Flentje, M, Wannenmacher, M. Combined error of patient positioning variability and prostate motion uncertainty in 3D conformal radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996; 35 (5): 1027–1034.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suzuki, M, Nishimura, Y, Nakamatsu, K, et al. Analysis of interfractional set-up errors and intrafractional organ motions during IMRT for head and neck tumors to define an appropriate planning target volume (PTV)-and planning organs at risk volume (PRV)-margins. Radiother Oncol 2006; 78 (3):283–290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strbac, B, Jokic, VS. Evaluation of set-up errors in head and neck radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging. Phys Med 2013; 29 (5): 531–536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noghreiyan, VV, Nasseri, S, Anvari, K, Naji, M, Momennezhad, M. Evaluation of set-up errors and determination of set-up margin in pelvic radiotherapy by electronic portal imaging device (EPID). J Radiother Pract 2019; 19(2): 1–7.Google Scholar
Khan, FM, Gibbons, JP, Sperduto, PW. Khan’s treatment planning in radiation oncology. 4th ed., Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2016. 648 pp. ISBN: 9781469889979.Google Scholar