Margins in SBRT. Mischa Hoogeman

Transcription

1 Margins in SBRT Mischa Hoogeman

2 MARGIN CONCEPTS

3 Why do we use margins? Target / tumor To a-priori compensate for (unknown) deviations between the intended target position and the real target position during dose delivery Deviations are estimated from population-based measurements of geometrical errors (can be patient specific, e.g. respiratory motion) Healthy tissue To avoid unintended dose to a critical organs after aligning the beam to the displaced target (in case of differential motion between target and OAR)

4 How large should the margin be? What is the incentive? 99% of the target volume receives 95% of the prescribed dose or more (coverage probability) - Stroom et al. 90% of patients in the population receives a minimum cumulative CTV dose of at least 95% of the prescribed dose - van Herk et al. Not all patients will be treated to 100% of the prescription dose in all fractions M = 2.5S + 0.7s

5 Categorization of Errors: a 2D Example Systematic error S Systematic error M Random error s

6 Probability Density Function: Normal Distribution

7 Random Errors Only: M rand =0.7s The CTV experiences daily shifts of the dose distribution due to daily random variations in the position of the CTV If we add the daily shifted dose distributions the dose distribution appeares to be blurred (motion blurring) The effect of the random error can be calculated by convolving the random error distribution with the dose distribution => blurred dose distribution = random error s

8 Margin Recipe for Random Error Water s p = 3.2 mm Lung s p = 6.4 mm random error s penumbra s p block position 95% 50%

9 Margin Calculation: Random Component The margin that would be needed to ensure a coverage of at least 95% norminv p = 0.95, = 0, s = s p M = 0.7s M = 1.64 s 2 s s2 norminv p2 p = 0.95, = 0, s = s p p 2 s

10 Random Error and Minimum Dose Requirement The margin for random decreases with decreasing prescription isodose line / minimum dose requirement 95% M = b s 2 s - bs p2 73% p 50% Prescription level b 95% % % % 0.25

11 Random Margin and Prescription Level Prescription level b 95% % % % 0.25

12 Systematic Errors Only (M sys = 2.5 S) The systematic set-up errors are described by a 3D Gaussian distribution How to choose M sys to ensure a high probability that the prescribed dose is delivered to the CTV? 95% Choice: for 90% of all possible systematic set-up errors (treatments), the full CTV is within the PTV (=95% isodose)

13 Systematic Errors Only (M sys = 2.5 S) Spherical Tumor 0 M sys p Σ dr = M sys r 2 e π 2 Σ3 r 2 2Σ 2 dr = 0.9 Population (%) S

14 Margin Recipe: Systematic Error and Random Errors Cumulative minimum dose 95% M r = b s 2 +s p2 - bs p Systematic errors are assumed to have an independent effect on the blurred dose distribution 90% of population receives a cumulative CTV dose of 95% M = 2.5S + M r

15 How to Add Various Error Contributions? For a simple criteria as a probability level of the minimum dose the systematic error and random error are added linearly For various systematic errors and various random errors the errors (SDs) should be added in quadrature: S = S 2 a S 2 b S 2 c S = = 10.9(10) Emphasis on large errors!

16 APPLICATION TO SRT AND SBRT

17 Error (mm) Number of Fractions and Residual Systematic Error Limited number of fractions results in a residual shift of the dose distribution Fraction Number Residual error Error after 35 fractions = 0.1 mm Error after 5 fractions = -1.6 mm

18 Effective Standard Deviation of the Errors Effective Systematic Error Error in estimating the average S effective = 1 S 2 s 2 N Effective Random Error s effective 1 = 1 - s N 2 de Boer H C and Heijmen B J 2001 A protocol for the reduction of systematic patient setup errors with minimal portal imaging workload Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys

19 Margin and Number of Fractions S eff s eff Margin S = 2 mm, s = 2 mm, P=80%

20 Including Error due to Respiratory Motion Respiratory motion modeled as sin 6 t The respiratory motion can be described as a standard deviation for a given amplitude s = 0.358A

21 Intra-fraction error vs. motion amplitude (CC) Intra-fraction error (1 SD) [mm] Without Synchrony Slope = Respiratory motion amplitude (mm) Hoogeman M, Prévost JB, Nuyttens J, Pöll J, Levendag P, Heijmen B, Clinical accuracy of the respiratory tumor tracking system of the cyberknife: assessment by analysis of log files. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys May 1;74(1): t y = y cos 6 0 A ( - ) s = 0.358A

22 PRACTICAL EXAMPLES

23 A Practical Example: SRT Case Intracranial lesion: 3 x 8 80% SD of the penumbra is 3.2 mm E2E test device error (1 SD) = 0.4 mm (measured over a long period) Localization (delineation) error = 1.0 mm (1 SD) Systematic error = 0.5 mm (1 SD) [measured from 30-fraction treatments] Random error = 0.5 mm (1 SD) [measured from 30-fraction treatments] Intra-fraction error = 0.5 mm ( 1 SD) [measured from 30-fraction treatments at end of treatment]

24 A Practical Example: SRT Case Intracranial lesion: 3 x 8 80% N=3, b=0.84 SD of the penumbra is 3.2 mm s pen =3.2 mm E2E test device error (S) = 0.4 mm S 1 =0.4 mm Localization (delineation) error = 1.0 mm (1 SD) S 2 =1.0 mm Systematic error = 0.5 mm (1 SD) S eff =0.58 mm Random error = 0.5 mm (1 SD) s eff =0.41 mm Intra-fraction error = 0.5 mm ( 1 SD) s eff =0.20 mm

25 Results SRT Example No delineation error

26 Evaluation of Treatment Accuracy Seravalli E, van Haaren PM, van der Toorn PP, Hurkmans CW. A comprehensive evaluation of treatment accuracy, including end-to-end tests and clinical data, applied to intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol Jul;116(1):131-8.

27 A Practical Example: SBRT Lung Case T1 primary lung lesion: 3 x 18 80% Alignment on time-averaged tumor position by CBCT Tumor in lung tissue E2E test device error (1 SD) = 0.4 mm (measured over a long period) Localization (delineation) error = 2.0 mm (1 SD) Systematic error = 1.0 mm (1 SD) [measured from 3-fraction treatments] Random error = 1.0 mm (1 SD) [measured from 3-fraction treatments] Intra-fraction amplitude = 1 25 mm

28 A Practical Example: SBRT Lung Case T1 primary lung lesion: 3 x 18 80% N = 3, b = 0.84 Alignment on time-averaged tumor position by CBCT SD of the penumbra is 6.4 mm s pen = 6.4 mm E2E test device error (S) = 0.4 mm S 1 = 0.4 mm Localization (delineation) error = 2.0 mm (1 SD) S 2 = 2.0 mm Systematic error = 1.0 mm (1 SD) S eff = 1.0 mm Random error = 1.0 mm (1 SD) s eff = 1.0 mm Intra-fraction amplitude = 1 25 mm s r = mm

29 Margins SBRT Lung Case No breathing

30 INTERNAL TARGET VOLUME

31 ITV Concept in ICRU-62 Report PTV margin should be derived from Internal Margin (IM) or Internal Target Volume (ITV) Setup Margin IM or ITV should compensate for physiological movements and variations in size, shape, and position of the CTV in relation to an internal reference point ITV often applied in lung SBRT where it encloses the full CTV in all respiratory phases CTV ITV PTV

32 Margin (mm) Margin vs ITV for Perfect Inter-fraction Alignment Amplitude (mm) Margin ITV Margin Water Margin lung

33 Margin Recipe for Random Error % 50%

34 Some Concluding Remarks In radiosurgery often 0-mm margins are being advocated There will always be residual geometrical uncertainties Target definition Errors in image-guidance systems Indirect measures of tumor position Always verify the margin algorithm used in the Treatment Planning System 3D margin algorithm (and not 2D) What is the resolution of the margin algorithm (e.g. CT resolution?) Verify that margin are not truncated to voxel positions, especially in the superior-inferior direction

35 References for Further Reading Stroom JC, de Boer HC, Huizenga H, Visser AG. Inclusion of geometrical uncertainties in radiotherapy treatment planning by means of coverage probability. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Mar 1;43(4): Van Herk M, Remeijer P, Rasch C, Lebesque JV. The probability of correct target dosage: Dose population histograms for deriving margins in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;47: van Herk M, Remeijer P, Lebesque JV. Inclusion of geometric uncertainties in treatment plan evaluation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Apr 1;52(5): Witte MG, van der Geer J, Schneider C, Lebesque JV, van Herk M. The effects of target size and tissue density on the minimum margin required for random errors. Med Phys Nov;31(11): International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy. ICRU Report 50. Bethesda; International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy (Supplement to ICRU Report 50). ICRU Report 62 Bethesda; International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, recording and reporting Photon Beam Intensity- Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). ICRU Report 83; Wolthaus JW, Sonke J-J, van Herk M, et al. Comparison of different strategies to use four-dimensional computed tomography in treatment planning for lung cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70: van Herk M, Witte M, van der Geer J, Schneider C, Lebesque JV Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys., Vol. 57, No. 5, pp , Wunderink W PhD Thesis Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Gordon JJ, Siebers JV. Convolution method and CTV-to-PTV margins for finite fractions and small systematic errors. Phys Med Biol Apr 7;52(7):