Alignment focus of daily image guidance for concurrent treatment of prostate and pelvic lymph nodes.

PURPOSE

To determine the dosimetric impact of daily imaging alignment focus on the prostate soft tissue versus the pelvic bones for the concurrent treatment of the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes (PLN) and to assess whether multileaf collimator (MLC) tracking or adaptive planning (ART) is necessary with the current clinical planning margins of 8 mm/6 mm posterior to the prostate and 5 mm to the PLN.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 124 kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT) images from 6 patients were studied. For each KV-CBCT, 4 plans were retrospectively created using an isocenter shifting method with 2 different alignment focuses (prostate, PLN), an MLC shifting method, and the ART method. The selected dosimetric endpoints were compared among these plans.

RESULTS

For the isoshift contour, isoshift bone, MLC shift, and ART plans, D99 of the prostate was ≥97% of the prescription dose in 97.6%, 73.4%, 98.4%, and 96.8% of 124 fractions, respectively. Accordingly, D99 of the PLN was ≥97% of the prescription dose in 98.4%, 98.4%, 98.4%, and 100% of 124 fractions, respectively. For the rectum, D5 exceeded 105% of the planned D5 (and D5 of ART plans) in 11% (4%), 10% (2%), and 13% (5%) of 124 fractions, respectively. For the bladder, D5 exceeded 105% of the planned D5 (and D5 of ART) plans in 0% (2%), 0% (2%), and 0% (1%) of 124 fractions, respectively.

CONCLUSION

For concurrent treatment of the prostate and PLN, with a planning margin to the prostate of 8 mm/6 mm posterior and a planning margin of 5 mm to the PLN, aligning to the prostate soft tissue can achieve adequate dose coverage to the both target volumes; aligning to the pelvic bone would result in underdosing to the prostate in one-third of fractions. With these planning margins, MLC tracking and ART methods have no dosimetric advantages.