Sheng Yang, Li Taoran, Lee W Robert, Yin Fang-Fang, Wu Q Jackie
Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Jun 1;98(2):473-480. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.089. Epub 2017 Feb 24.
To provide a benchmark for seminal vesicle (SV) margin selection to account for intrafractional motion and to investigate the effectiveness of 2 motion surrogates in predicting intrafractional SV coverage.
Fifteen prostate patients were studied. Each patient had 5 pairs (1 patient had 4 pairs) of pretreatment and posttreatment cone beam CTs (CBCTs). Each pair of CBCTs was registered on the basis of prostate fiducial markers. All pretreatment SVs were expanded with 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, and 8-mm isotropic margins to form a series of planning target volumes, and their intrafractional coverage to the posttreatment SV determined the "ground truth" for exact coverage. Two motion surrogates, the center of mass (COM) and the border of contour, were evaluated by the use of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient and exponential fitting for predicting SV underdosage. Action threshold of each surrogate was calculated. The margin for each surrogate was calculated according to a traditional margin recipe.
Ninety-five percent posttreatment SV coverage was achieved in 9%, 53%, 73%, 86%, 95%, and 97% of fractions with 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, and 8-mm margins, respectively. The 5-mm margins provided 95% intrafractional SV coverage in over 90% of fractions. The correlation between the COM and border was weak, moderate, and strong in the left-right (L-R), anterior-posterior (A-P), and superior-inferior (S-I) directions, respectively. Exponential fitting gave the underdosage threshold of 4.5 and 7.0 mm for the COM and border. The Van Herk margin recipe recommended 0-, 0.5-, and 0.8-mm margins in the L-R, A-P, and S-I directions based on the COM, and 1.2-, 3.9-, and 2.5-mm margins based on the border.
Five-millimeter isotropic margins for the SV constitute the minimum required to mitigate the intrafractional motion. Both the COM and the border are acceptable predictors for SV underdosage with 4.5- and 7.0-mm action threshold. Traditional margin based on the COM or border underestimates the margin.
为精囊(SV)边缘选择提供一个基准,以考虑分次内运动,并研究两种运动替代指标预测分次内SV覆盖范围的有效性。
对15例前列腺患者进行了研究。每位患者有5对(1例患者有4对)治疗前和治疗后的锥形束CT(CBCT)。每对CBCT基于前列腺基准标记进行配准。所有治疗前的SV均以1、2、3、4、5和8mm的各向同性边缘进行扩展,以形成一系列计划靶体积,它们对治疗后SV的分次内覆盖范围决定了精确覆盖的“真实情况”。通过使用Pearson积矩相关系数和指数拟合来评估质心(COM)和轮廓边界这两种运动替代指标,以预测SV剂量不足情况。计算每个替代指标的行动阈值。根据传统的边缘处方计算每个替代指标的边缘。
分别在1、2、3、4、5和8mm边缘的分次中,9%、53%、73%、86%、95%和97%的分次实现了95%的治疗后SV覆盖。5mm边缘在超过90%的分次中提供了95%的分次内SV覆盖。COM与边界之间的相关性在左右(L-R)、前后(A-P)和上下(S-I)方向分别为弱、中、强。指数拟合得出COM和边界的剂量不足阈值分别为4.5和7.0mm。基于COM,Van Herk边缘处方在L-R、A-P和S-I方向分别推荐0、0.5和0.8mm的边缘,基于边界则推荐1.2、3.9和2.5mm的边缘。
SV的5mm各向同性边缘是减轻分次内运动所需的最小边缘。COM和边界都是SV剂量不足的可接受预测指标,行动阈值分别为4.5和7.0mm。基于COM或边界的传统边缘会低估边缘。