Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A prospective analysis of inter- and intrafractional errors to calculate CTV to PTV margins in head and neck patients

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Clinical and Translational Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate an institute-specific CTV–PTV margin for head and neck (HN) patients according to a 3-mm action level protocol.

Methods/patients

Twenty-three HN patients were prospectively analysed. Patients were immobilized with a thermoplastic mask. Inter- and intrafractional set-up errors (in the three dimensions) were assessed from portal images (PI) registration. Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) were compared with two orthogonal PI by matching bone anatomy landmarks. The isocenter was verified during the first five consecutive days of treatment: if the mean error detected was greater than 2 mm the isocenter position was corrected for the rest of the treatment. Isocenter was checked weekly thereafter. Set-up images were obtained before and after treatment administration on 10, 20 and 30 fractions to quantify the intrafractional displacement. For the set-up errors, systematic (Σ), random (σ), overall standard deviations, and the overall mean displacement (M), were determined. CTV to PTV margin was calculated considering both inter- and intrafractional errors.

Results

A total of 396 portal images was analysed in 23 patients. Systematic interfractional (Σinter) set-up errors ranged between 0.77 and 1.42 mm in the three directions, whereas the random (σ inter) errors were around 1–1.31 mm. Systematic intrafractional (Σintra) errors ranged between 0.65 and 1.11 mm, whereas the random (σ intra) errors were around 1.13–1.16 mm.

Conclusions

A verification protocol (3-mm action level) provided by EPIDs improves the set-up accuracy. Intrafractional error is not negligible and contributes to create a larger CTV–PTV margin. The appropriate CTV–PTV margin for our institute is between 3 and 4.5 mm considering both inter- and intrafractional errors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Van Herck M. Errors and margins in radiotherapy. Seminars in radiation Oncology. 2004;14:52–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Stroom JC, Heijmen BJ. Geometrical uncertainties, radiotherapy planning margins, and the ICRU-62 report. Radiother Oncol. 2002;64:75–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Drabik DM, MacKenzie MA, Fallone GB. Quantifying appropriate PTV setup margins: analysis of patient setup fidelity and interfraction motion using post-treatment megavoltage computed tomography scans. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:1222–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Van Sörsen de Koste JR, De Boer HC, Schuchhard-Schipper RH, Senan S, Heijmen BJ. Procedures for high precision setup verification and correction of lung cancer patients using CT—simulation and digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:804–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Remeijer P, Rasch C, Lebesque JV, Van Herk M. A general methodology for three-dimensional analysis of variation in target volume delineation. Med Phys. 1999;26:931–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Suzuky M, Nishimura Y, Nakamatsu K, Okumura M, Hashiba H, Koike R, 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;78:283–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prisciandaro JI, Frechette CM, Herman MG, Brown PD, Garces YI, Foote RL. A methodology to determine margins by EPID measurements of patient setup variation and motion as applied to immobilization devices. Med Phys. 2004;31:2978–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hurkmans CW, Remeijer P, Lebesque JV, Mijnheer BJ. Set-up verification using portal imaging; review of current clinical practice. Radiother Oncol. 2001;58(2):105–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gilbeau L, Octave-prignot M, Loncol T, Renard L, Scalliet P, Gregoire V. Comparison of set-up accuracy of three different thermoplastic masks for the treatment of brain and head and neck tumors. Radiother Oncol. 2001;58:155–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamlet S, Ezzel G, Aref A. Larynx motion associated with swallowing during radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;28:467–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Asselen B, Dehnad H, Raaijmakers CP, Lagendijk JJ, Terhaard CH. Intrafraction motions of the larynx during radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Incol Biol Phys. 2003;56:384–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim S, Akpati HC, Kielbasa JE, Li JG, Liu C, Amdur RJ, et al. Evaluation of intrafraction patient movement for CNS and head and neck IMRT. Med Phys. 2004;31(3):500–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hoogeman MS, Nuyttens JJ, Levendag PC, Heijmen BJ. Time dependence of intrafraction patient motion assessed by repeat stereoscopic imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70(2):609–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hansen EK, Bucci MK, Quivey JM, Weinberg V, Xia P. Repeat CT imaging and replanning during the course of IMRT for head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:355–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bradley JA, Paulson ES, Ahunbay E, Schultz C, Li XA, Wang D. Dynamic MRI analysis of tumor and organ motion during rest and deglutition and margin assessment for radiotherapy of head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(5):803–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Potters L, Gaspar LE, Kavanagh B, Galvin JM, Hartford AC, Hevezi JM, et al. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) and American College of Radiology (ACR) Practice guidelines for image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;76:319–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Qi XS, Hu AY, Lee SP, Lee P, DeMarco J, Li XA, et al. Assessment of interfraction patient setup for head-and-neck cancer intensity modulated radiation therapy using multiple computed tomography-based image guidance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;86(3):432–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zumsteg Z, De Marco J, Lee SP, Steinberg ML, Lin CS, McBride W, et al. Image guidance during head-and-neck cancer radiation therapy: analysis of alignment trends with in-room cone-beam computed tomography scans. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83(2):712–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li H, Zhu XR, Zhang L, Dong L, Tung S, Ahamad A, et al. Comparison of 2D radiographic images and 3D cone beam computed tomography for positioning head-and-neck radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71(3):916–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. http://www.rtog.org/ClinicalTrials/ProtocolTable/StudyDetails.aspx?study=1221.

  21. Pehlivan B, Pichenot C, Castaing M, Auperin A, Lefkopoulos D, Arriagada R, et al. Interfractional set-up errors evaluation by daily electronic portal imaging of IMRT in head and neck cancer patients. Acta Oncol. 2009;48(3):440–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lozano EM, Pérez LA, Torres J, Carrascosa C, Sanz M, Mendicote F, et al. Correction of systematic set-up error in breast and head and neck irradiation through a no-action level (NAL) protocol. Clin Transl Oncol. 2011;13(1):34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. de Boer HC, Heijmen BJ. eNAL: an extension of the NAL setup correction protocol for effective use of weekly follow-up measurements. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:1586–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. van Lin EN, van der Vight L, Huizenga H, Kaanders JH, Visser AG. Set-up improvement in head and neck radiotherapy using a 3D off-line EPID-based correction protocol and a customised head and neck support. Radiother Oncol. 2003;68:137–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Korreman S, Rasch C, McNair H, Verellen D, Oelfke U, Maingon P, et al. The European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology-European Institute of Radiotherapy (ESTRO-EIR) report on 3D CT-based in-room image guidance systems: a practical and technical review and guide. Radiother Oncol. 2010;94:129–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiation Oncology Department, Cruces University Hospital, c/Plaza de Cruces s/n, 48903, Barakaldo, Vizcaya, Spain

    J. Cacicedo, O. del Hoyo, F. Casquero, A. Gómez-Iturriaga, A. Lasso, E. Boveda & P. Bilbao

  2. Medical Physics and Radioprotection Department, Cruces University Hospital, Vizcaya, Spain

    J. F. Perez & R. Ortiz de Zarate

Authors
  1. J. Cacicedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. F. Perez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Ortiz de Zarate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. O. del Hoyo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. F. Casquero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Gómez-Iturriaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. Lasso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. E. Boveda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. P. Bilbao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Cacicedo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cacicedo, J., Perez, J.F., Ortiz de Zarate, R. et al. A prospective analysis of inter- and intrafractional errors to calculate CTV to PTV margins in head and neck patients. Clin Transl Oncol 17, 113–120 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-014-1200-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-014-1200-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation