Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie
Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 3/2015

01-03-2015 | Original article

Roll and pitch set-up errors during volumetric modulated arc delivery

Can adapting gantry and collimator angles compensate?

Authors: Nienke A. Hoffmans-Holtzer, M.Sc., Daan Hoffmans, B.Eng., Max Dahele, MBChB, M.Sc., Ph.D. FRCR, FRCP, Ben J. Slotman, M.D., Ph.D., Wilko F.A.R. Verbakel, Ph.D.

Published in: Strahlentherapie und Onkologie | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this work was to investigate whether adapting gantry and collimator angles can compensate for roll and pitch setup errors during volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery.

Methods

Previously delivered clinical plans for locally advanced head-and-neck (H&N) cancer (n = 5), localized prostate cancer (n = 2), and whole brain with simultaneous integrated boost to 5 metastases (WB + 5M, n = 1) were used for this study. Known rigid rotations were introduced in the planning CT scans. To compensate for these, in-house software was used to adapt gantry and collimator angles in the plan. Doses to planning target volumes (PTV) and critical organs at risk (OAR) were calculated with and without compensation and compared with the original clinical plan. Measurements in the sagittal plane in a polystyrene phantom using radiochromic film were compared by gamma (γ) evaluation for 2 H&N cancer patients.

Results

For H&N plans, the introduction of 2°-roll and 3°-pitch rotations reduced mean PTV coverage from 98.7 to 96.3 %. This improved to 98.1 % with gantry and collimator compensation. For prostate plans respective figures were 98.4, 97.5, and 98.4 %. For WB + 5M, compensation worked less well, especially for smaller volumes and volumes farther from the isocenter. Mean comparative γ evaluation (3 %, 1 mm) between original and pitched plans resulted in 86 % γ < 1. The corrected plan restored the mean comparison to 96 % γ < 1.

Conclusion

Preliminary data suggest that adapting gantry and collimator angles is a promising way to correct roll and pitch set-up errors of < 3° during VMAT for H&N and prostate cancer.
Literature
1.
2.
Guckenberger M, Meyer J, Wilbert J et al (2007) Precision of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) in six degrees of freedom and limitations in clinical practice. Strahlenther Onkol 183:307–313CrossRefPubMed
3.
Linthout N, Verellen D, Tournel K et al (2007) Assessment of secondary patient motion induced by automated couch movement during on-line 6 dimensional repositioning in prostate cancer treatment. Radiother Oncol 83:168–174CrossRefPubMed
4.
Graf R, Boehmer D, Budach V, Wust P (2010) Residual translational and rotational errors after kV X-ray image-guided correction of prostate location using implanted fiducials. Strahlenther Onkol 186:544–550CrossRefPubMed
5.
Hüttenrauch P, Witt M, Wolff D et al (2014) Target volume coverage and dose to organs at risk in prostate cancer patients. Strahlenther Onkol 190:310–6CrossRefPubMed
6.
Vineberg KA, Hunter KU, Schipper M et al (2012) The influence of rotation on delivered dose in oropharyngeal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 84:81CrossRef
7.
8.
Wu Q, Ivaldi G, Liang J et al (2006) Geometric and dosimetric evaluations of an online image-guidance strategy for 3D-CRT of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64:1596–1609CrossRefPubMed
9.
Yue NJ, Knisely JPS, Song H et al (2006) A method to implement full six-degree target shift corrections for rigid body in image-guided radiotherapy. Med Phys 33:21CrossRefPubMed
10.
Bose S, Shukla H, Maltz J (2010) Beam-centric algorithm for pretreatment patient position correction in external beam radiation therapy. Med Phys 37:2004CrossRefPubMed
11.
Rijkhorst EJ, Van Herk M, Lebesque JV et al (2007) Strategy for online correction of rotational organ motion for intensity-modulated radiotherapy of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 69:1608–1617CrossRefPubMed
12.
Boswell SA, Jeraj R, Ruchala KJ et al (2005) A novel method to correct for pitch and yaw patient setup errors in helical tomotherapy. Med Phys 32:1630CrossRefPubMed
13.
Sarkar V, Wang B, Hinkle J et al (2012) Dosimetric evaluation of a “virtual” image guidance alternative to explicit 6 degree of freedom robotic couch correction. Pract Radiat Oncol 2:122–137CrossRefPubMed
14.
Siddon R (1981) Solution to treatment planning problems using coordinate transformations. Med Phys 8:766–774CrossRefPubMed
15.
Doornaert P, Verbakel WFAR, Bieker M et al (2011) RapidArc planning and delivery in patients with locally advanced head-and-neck cancer undergoing chemo radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 79:429–435CrossRefPubMed
16.
Lagerwaard FJ, Van der Hoorn EAP, Verbakel WFAR et al (2009) Whole-brain radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost to multiple brain metastases using volumetric modulated arc therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol BiolPhys 75:253–259CrossRef
17.
Kaiser A, Schultheiss TE, Wong JYC et al (2006) Pitch, roll, and yaw variations inpatient positioning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66:949–955CrossRefPubMed
18.
Stieler F1, Wenz F, Scherrer D et al (2012) Clinical evaluation of a commercial surface-imaging system for patient positioning in radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 188:1080–1084CrossRefPubMed
19.
Verbakel WFAR, Cuijpers JP, Hoffmans D et al (2009) Volumetric intensity modulated arc therapy vs. conventional IMRT in head-and-neck cancer: a comparative planning and dosimetric study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74:252–259CrossRefPubMed
20.
Sterzing F, Schubert K, Sroka-Perez G et al (2008) Helical tomotherapy. Experiences of the first 150 patients in Heidelberg. Strahlenther Onkol 184:8–14CrossRefPubMed
21.
Rijkhorst EJ, Lakeman A, Nijkamp J et al (2009) Strategies for online organ motion correction for intensity-modulated radiotherapy of prostate cancer: prostate, rectum, and bladder dose effects. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 75:1254–60CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Roll and pitch set-up errors during volumetric modulated arc delivery
Can adapting gantry and collimator angles compensate?
Authors
Nienke A. Hoffmans-Holtzer, M.Sc.
Daan Hoffmans, B.Eng.
Max Dahele, MBChB, M.Sc., Ph.D. FRCR, FRCP
Ben J. Slotman, M.D., Ph.D.
Wilko F.A.R. Verbakel, Ph.D.
Publication date
01-03-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0179-7158
Electronic ISSN: 1439-099X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-014-0766-2

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 3/2015 Go to the issue

Literatur kommentiert

Ist eine axilläre Lymphknotendissektion bei N1-Situation nach Sentinel-Lymphknoten-Biopsie und Mastektomie wegen Mammakarzinom nötig?

Original article

Hypoxia imaging with [18F]-FMISO-PET for guided dose escalation with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in head-and-neck cancers

Letter to the Editor

Response to commentary by Champ and Klement

Original article

Improved survival in HPV/p16-positive oropharyngeal cancer patients treated with postoperative radiotherapy

Original article

Radioprotection of targeted and bystander cells by methylproamine

Original article

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer