Dear Editor,
I have read with great interest the original article entitled “Comparison of patient setup accuracy for optical surface-guided and X-ray-guided imaging with respect to the impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy” by Schöpe, M., Sahlmann, J., Jaschik, S. et al. published in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie (November 2023). The paper examines the patient position accuracy of a surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system (C-Rad) and compares it with an X‑ray-based imaging system (IGRT; BrainLab Exactrac) with an emphasis on stereotactic radiosurgery.
The article states that SGRT has recently been used in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) but publications on the matter are sparse and primarily involve phantom studies. SGRT has been used in cranial radiosurgery for over 10 years with multiple publications using real patient data for the AlignRT system (Vision RT, London, UK) [1,2,3]. Furthermore, the paper states that currently, it is insufficiently known whether the accuracy of SGRT during non-coplanar treatments meets the requirements for SRT treatments. Again, multiple publications have shown SGRT (AlignRT) to have submillimeter accuracy even with couch rotations, head orientation, and multiple targets [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15].
The authors make a few mentions of the specific SGRT system that was utilized in this study (C-Rad) but also use the generic term “SGRT” or “SGRT system,” which has broader implications. Currently there are at least four commercially available SGRT systems: AlignRT (Vision RT, London, UK), Catalyst HD (C-Rad, Uppsala, Sweden), IDENTIFY (Varian, Palo Alto, CA, USA), and Exactrac Dynamic (Brainlab AG, Munich, Germany) [16]. Each SGRT system has different specifications and performance and care should therefore be taken when making conclusions on one generic term. The abstract and conclusions of this article use the term “SGRT system” to describe the study and its results, which, based on many other publications, is misleading to the readers and I therefore recommend should be corrected.
For example, the article recommends increasing the treatment margin: “Compared to the ExacTrac® IGRT system, the SGRT system exhibits greater uncertainty in patient positioning during cranial irradiation, especially with non-coplanar fields. This is in the order of about 5 mm (P95). This means that when only using an SGRT system for positioning, a safety margin of 5 mm or 6 mm when creating the PTV is necessary to safely cover the clinical target volume (CTV). Otherwise, it cannot be assured that the CTV will receive the intended dose.” This would be significantly above the margins used for SRS treatments and exceed the ESTRO-ACROP/AAPM-TG302 guidelines for SRS/SBRT procedures, [16, 17] and is not consistent with the experience of other SGRT systems, as noted above.
Finally, the SGRT references used in the article are within the scope of the study performed; however, they refer to a different SGRT system (AlignRT) than used in the study (C-Rad). Previous studies have compared the C‑Rad SGRT system with respect to SRT/SRS and I believe those would be more relevant [17,18,19,20].
References
Pan H, Cerviño LI, Pawlicki T, Jiang SB, Alksne J, Detorie N, Russell M, Carter BS, Murphy KT, Mundt AJ, Chen C, Lawson JD. Frameless, real-time, surface imaging-guided radiosurgery: clinical outcomes for brain metastases. Neurosurgery. 2012 Oct;71(4):844–51. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182647ad5. PMID: 22989959.
Lau SK, Zakeri K, Zhao X, Carmona R, Knipprath E, Simpson DR, Nath SK, Kim GY, Sanghvi P, Hattangadi-Gluth JA, Chen CC, Murphy KT. Single-Isocenter Frameless Volumetric Modulated Arc Radiosurgery for Multiple Intracranial Metastases. Neurosurgery. 2015 Aug;77(2):233–40; discussion 240. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000763. PMID: 25856109; PMCID: PMC4506233.
Lau SKM, Patel K, Kim T, Knipprath E, Kim GY, Cerviño LI, Lawson JD, Murphy KT, Sanghvi P, Carter BS, Chen CC. Clinical efficacy and safety of surface imaging guided radiosurgery (SIG-RS) in the treatment of benign skull base tumors. J Neurooncol. 2017 Apr;132(2):307–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-017-2370-7. Epub 2017 Jan 24. PMID: 28120301.
Sarkar V, Paxton A, Szegedi MW, Zhao H, Huang L, Nelson G, Huang YJ, Su F, Rassiah-Szegedi P, Salter BJ (2018) An evaluation of the consistency of shifts reported by three different systems for non-coplanar treatments. J Radiosurg SBRT 5(4):323–330 (PMID: 30538893; PMCID: PMC6255716)
Covington EL, Fiveash JB, Wu X, Brezovich I, Willey CD, Riley K, Popple RA. Optical surface guidance for submillimeter monitoring of patient position during frameless stereotactic radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Jun;20(6):91–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12611. Epub 2019 May 16. PMID: 31095866; PMCID: PMC6560239.
Wiant D, Liu H, Hayes TL, Shang Q, Mutic S, Sintay B (2019) Direct comparison between surface imaging and orthogonal radiographic imaging for SRS localization in phantom. J Appl Clin Med Phys 20(1):137–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12498 (Epub 2018 Dec 12. PMID: 30548795; PMCID: PMC6333181)
Cerviño, L.I. et al. (2012). Initial clinical experience with a frameless and maskless stereotactic radiosurgery treatment. Practical Radiation Oncology, 2(1), pp.54–62.
Paravati AJ et al (2014) Initial clinical experience with surface image guided (SIG) radiosurgery for trigeminal neuralgia. Translational Cancer Research, [online]. doi https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2218-676X.2014.07.03
Li, G. et al. (2015). Clinical experience with two frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) systems using optical surface imaging for motion monitoring. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 16(4), pp.149–162.
Jursinic P (2018) Comparison of Head Immobilization with a Metal Frame and Two Different Models of Face Masks. J Cancer Cure 1(1):1–7
Ballangrud A et al (2018) Institutional experience with SRS VMAT planning for multiple cranial metastases. J Appl Clin Med Phys 19((2):176–183
Covington EL et al (2020) Surface guided imaging during stereotactic radiosurgery with automated delivery. J Applied Clin Med Phys 21(12):90–95
Sullivan BBT (2013) Trigeminal Rhizotomy Performed with Modern Image-guided Linac: Case Report. Cureus 5(9):e139
Pham NL et al (2014) Frameless, real-time, surface imaging-guided radiosurgery: Update on clinical outcomes for brain metastases. Transl Cancer Res 3((4):351–357
Palmer JD, Sebastian NT, Chu J, DiCostanzo D, Bell EH, Grecula J, Arnett A, Blakaj DM, McGregor J, Elder JB, Lu L, Zoller W, Addington M, Lonser R, Chakravarti A, Brown PD, Raval R (2020) Single-Isocenter Multitarget Stereotactic Radiosurgery Is Safe and Effective in the Treatment of Multiple Brain Metastases. Adv Radiat Oncol 5(1):70–76
Al-Hallaq, H.A., et al. (2022). AAPM task group report 302: Surface-guided radiotherapy. Medical Physics, 49(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.15532.
Freislederer, P., et al. (2022). ESTRO-ACROP guideline on surface guided radiation therapy. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 173, pp.188–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.026.
Bry V, Saenz D, Pappas E, Klaiitzakis G, Papanikolaou N, Rasmussen K (2022) End to end comparison of surface-guided imaging versus stereoscopic x‑rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms. J Appl Clin Med Phys 23(5):e13576
Bry V, Licon AL, McCulloch J, Kirby N, Myers P, Saenz D, Stathakis S, Papanikolaou N, Rasmussen K (2021) Quantifying false positional corrections due to facial motion using SGRT with open-face. Masks J Appl Clin Med Phys 22(4):172–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13170 (Epub 2021 Mar 19. PMID: 33739569; PMCID: PMC8035563)
Kojima H, Takemura A, Kurokawa S, Ueda S, Noto K, Yokoyama H, Takamatsu S. Evaluation of technical performance of optical surface imaging system using conventional and novel stereotactic radiosurgery algorithms. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021 Feb;22(2):58–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13152. Epub 2020 Dec 27. PMID: 33369014; PMCID: PMC7882109.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
A. Robinson declares that he has no competing interests.
Ethical standards
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Robinson, A. Letter to the Editor: reply to “Comparison of patient setup accuracy for optical surface-guided and X-ray-guided imaging with respect to the impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy”. Strahlenther Onkol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-024-02223-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-024-02223-9