Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of setup uncertainties and determine the variation of the clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin for various tumor sites treated with three-dimensional IGRT couch using KV-CBCT

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Radiation Oncology

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the variation of patient setup uncertainties and clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margins for different tumor sites based on clinical data with three-dimensional IGRT couch using pre-treatment verification by KV-CBCT.

Methods

In this study the tumor sites were divided in four categories: (1) brain (50 patients), (2) head and neck (H&N) (226 patients), (3) thorax (64 patients), and (4) pelvis (82 patients). The brain and head and neck patients were immobilized using thermoplastic three and five clamp mask and individual head-rest in the supine position. Using vac-loc had done the immobilization of thorax patients, and thermoplastic mask was used with feet-fix in the supine position for pelvis patients. All brain and H&N patients underwent first 3 days of pretreatment verification by KV-CBCT imaging and weekly one for remaining fractions, whereas for thorax and pelvis cases, patients underwent daily pretreatment verification by KV-CBCT images for the determination of overall distributions of setup error in the directions of anteroposterior, mediolateral, and craniocaudal, and CTV to PTV margins were analyzed with the help of van Herk’s, Stroom’s, and ICRU formulas.

Results

The maximum percentage displacement within ± 3 mm for brain, H&N, thorax, and pelvis cases were 96.5, 93.3, 90.9, and 88.3 in the direction of anterioposterior respectively. The maximum CTV to PTV margin, calculated from van Herk’s formula for the brain, H&N, thorax, and pelvis were 4.939 mm, 4.62 mm, 7.16 mm, and 5.763 mm in the craniocaudal axis respectively. The comparison of CTV to PTV margin in three consecutive years on 2016, 2017, and 2018 showed that for brain and head and neck cases, the margin initially had decreased by 1.03 mm and 1.11 mm, and then it had increased by 0.75 mm and 0.37 mm on 2018 with respect to 2017. But for thorax and pelvis cases, margins were gradually decreased on three consecutive years.

Conclusions

For adequate target coverage, van Herk-calculated CTV to PTV margin are used in our institution. To reduce the setup uncertainties and CTV to PTV margin frequently, CBCT is essential. In the yearly comparison of CTV to PTV margin, we observed that for brain and H&N cases were not in descending order due to the differently deformation of head rests which were used for molding and treatment separately.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

IGRT:

Image-guided radiotherapy

SBRT:

Stereotactic body radiation therapy

SRS:

Stereotactic radio surgery

References

  1. Young-Kee Oh, Jong-Geun Baek, Ok-Bae Kim, Jin-Hee Kim (2014) Assessment of setup uncertainties for various tumor sites when using daily CBCT for more than 2200 VMAT treatments, JACMP, VOLUME 15, NUMBER 2

  2. Saikat Das, Rajesh Isiah, B. Rajesh, B. Paul Ravindran, Rabi Raja Singh, Selvamani Backianathan, J. Subhashini “Accuracy of relocation, evaluation of geometric uncertainties and clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin in fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for intracranial tumors using relocatable Gill-Thomas-Cosman (GTC) frame”, JACMP, VOLUME 12, NUMBER 2, SPRING 2011

  3. On target: ensuring geometric accuracy in radiotherapy, The Royal College of Radiologist

  4. Stroom JC, Heijmen JMB (2002) Geometric uncertainties, radiotherapy planning margins, and the ICRU-62 report. Radiother Oncol 64(1):75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. van Herk M, Witte JM, van der Geer J (2003) Modeling the effect of treatment uncertainties in radiotherapy on tumor control probability for different tumor cell density con gurations [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 55:447

    Google Scholar 

  6. CRU (1999) Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy (supplement to ICRU Report 50). ICRU Report 62. Bethesada, MD: ICRU

  7. Graff P, Kirby N, Weinberg V et al (2012) The residual setup errors of different IGRT alignment procedures for headand neck imrt and the resulting dosimetric impact. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 86(1):170–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Crook JM, Raymond Y, Salhani D, Yang H, Esche B (1995) Prostate motion during standard radiotherapy as assessedby fiducial markers. Radiother Oncol 37(1):35–42

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Alasti H, Petric MP, Catton CN, Warde PR (2001) Portal imaging for evaluation of daily on-line setup errors and off-line organ motion during conformal irradiation of carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 49(3):869–884

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wulf J, Hadinger U, Oppitz U, Olshausen B, Flentje M (2000) Stereotactic radiotherapy of extracranial targets: CT-simulation and accuracy of treatment in the stereotactic body frame. Radiother Oncol 57(2):225–236

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Wulf J, Hadinger U, Oppitz U, Thiele W, Flentje M (2003) Impact of target reproducibility on tumor dose in stereotactic radiotherapy of targets in the lung and liver. Radiother Oncol 66(2):141–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. de Boer HC, van Sornsen de Koste JR, Senan S, Visser AG, Heijmen BJ (2001) Analysis and reduction of 3D systematic and random setup errors during the simulation and treatment of lung cancer patients with CT-based external beam radiotherapy dose planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 49(3):857–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yeung AR, Li JG, Shi W, Newlin HE, Chvetsov A, Liu C, Palta JR, Olivier K (2009) Tumor localization using cone-beam CT reduces setup margins in conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for lung tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74(4):1100–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kupelian PA, Lee C, Langen KM, Zeidan OA, Mañon RR, Willoughby TR, Meeks SL (2008) Evaluation of image-guidance strategies in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70(4):1151–1157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mackie TR, Kapatoes J, Ruchala K, Lu W, Wu C, Olivera G, Forrest L, Tome W, Welsh J, Jeraj R, Harari P, Reckwerdt P, Paliwal B, Ritter M, Keller H, Fowler J, Mehta M (2003) Image guidance for precise conformal radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 56(1):89–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Grills IS, Hugo G, Kestin LL, Galerani AP, Chao KK, Wloch J, Yan D (2008) Image-guided radiotherapy via daily online cone-beam CT substantially reduces margin requirements for stereotactic lung radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70(4):1045–1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hawkins MA, Brock KK, Eccles C, Moseley D, Jaffray D, Dawson LA (2006) Assessment of residual error in liver position using kV cone-beam computed tomography for liver cancer high-precision radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66(2):610–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Worm ES, Hansen AT, Petersen JB, Muren LP, Praestegaard LH, Heyer M (2010) Inter- and intrafractional localisation errors in cone-beam CT guided stereotactic radiation therapy of tumours in the liver and lung. Acta Oncol 49(7):1177–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded by any funding agency.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruby General Hospital, Ltd. , Kolkata, West Bengal, India

    Srimanta Pramanik, Soumen Bera, Arka Choudhury, Asik Iqbal, Subhayan Mondal, Amitabh Ray, Sayan Kundu, Sandip Sarkar & Dipanjan Majumder

  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institution, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

    Dilip Kumar Ray

Authors
  1. Srimanta Pramanik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dilip Kumar Ray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Soumen Bera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Arka Choudhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Asik Iqbal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Subhayan Mondal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Amitabh Ray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Sayan Kundu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Sandip Sarkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Dipanjan Majumder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Srimanta Pramanik.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article dose not contains any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pramanik, S., Ray, D.K., Bera, S. et al. Analysis of setup uncertainties and determine the variation of the clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume (PTV) margin for various tumor sites treated with three-dimensional IGRT couch using KV-CBCT. J Radiat Oncol 9, 25–35 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13566-020-00417-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13566-020-00417-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation