Dosimetric impact of geometric errors due to respiratory motion prediction on dynamic multileaf collimator-based four-dimensional radiation delivery.

The synchronization of dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC) response with respiratory motion is critical to ensure the accuracy of DMLC-based four dimensional (4D) radiation delivery. In practice, however, a finite time delay (response time) between the acquisition of tumor position and multileaf collimator response necessitates predictive models of respiratory tumor motion to synchronize radiation delivery. Predicting a complex process such as respiratory motion introduces geometric errors, which have been reported in several publications. However, the dosimetric effect of such errors on 4D radiation delivery has not yet been investigated. Thus, our aim in this work was to quantify the dosimetric effects of geometric error due to prediction under several different conditions. Conformal and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans for a lung patient were generated for anterior-posterior/posterior-anterior (AP/PA) beam arrangements at 6 and 18 MV energies to provide planned dose distributions. Respiratory motion data was obtained from 60 diaphragm-motion fluoroscopy recordings from five patients. A linear adaptive filter was employed to predict the tumor position. The geometric error of prediction was defined as the absolute difference between predicted and actual positions at each diaphragm position. Distributions of geometric error of prediction were obtained for all of the respiratory motion data. Planned dose distributions were then convolved with distributions for the geometric error of prediction to obtain convolved dose distributions. The dosimetric effect of such geometric errors was determined as a function of several variables: response time (0-0.6 s), beam energy (6/18 MV), treatment delivery (3D/4D), treatment type (conformal/IMRT), beam direction (AP/PA), and breathing training type (free breathing/audio instruction/visual feedback). Dose difference and distance-to-agreement analysis was employed to quantify results. Based on our data, the dosimetric impact of prediction (a) increased with response time, (b) was larger for 3D radiation therapy as compared with 4D radiation therapy, (c) was relatively insensitive to change in beam energy and beam direction, (d) was greater for IMRT distributions as compared with conformal distributions, (e) was smaller than the dosimetric impact of latency, and (f) was greatest for respiration motion with audio instructions, followed by visual feedback and free breathing. Geometric errors of prediction that occur during 4D radiation delivery introduce dosimetric errors that are dependent on several factors, such as response time, treatment-delivery type, and beam energy. Even for relatively small response times of 0.6 s into the future, dosimetric errors due to prediction could approach delivery errors when respiratory motion is not accounted for at all. To reduce the dosimetric impact, better predictive models and/or shorter response times are required.

Predicting respiratory motion for four-dimensional radiotherapy.

Adapting radiation delivery to respiratory motion is made possible through corrective action based on real-time feedback of target position during respiration. The advantage of this approach lies with its ability to allow tighter margins around the target while simultaneously following its motion. A significant hurdle to the successful implementation of real-time target-tracking-based radiation delivery is the existence of a finite time delay between the acquisition of target position and the mechanical response of the system to the change in position. Target motion during the time delay leads to a resultant lag in the system's response to a change in tumor position. Predicting target position in advance is one approach to ensure accurate delivery. The aim of this manuscript is to estimate the predictive ability of sinusoidal and adaptive filter-based prediction algorithms on multiple sessions of patient respiratory patterns. Respiratory motion information was obtained from recordings of diaphragm motion for five patients over 60 sessions. A prediction algorithm that employed both prediction models-the sinusoidal model and the adaptive filter model-was developed to estimate prediction accuracy over all the sessions. For each session, prediction error was computed for several time instants (response time) in the future (0-1.8 seconds at 0.2-second intervals), based on position data collected over several signal-history lengths (1-7 seconds at 1-second intervals). Based on patient data included in this study, the following observations are made. Qualitative comparison of predicted and actual position indicated a progressive increase in prediction error with an increase in response time. A signal-history length of 5 seconds was found to be the optimal signal history length for prediction using the sinusoidal model for all breathing training modalities. In terms of overall error in predicting respiratory motion, the adaptive filter model performed better than the sinusoidal model. With the adaptive filter, average prediction errors of less than 0.2 cm (1sigma) are possible for response times less than 0.4 seconds. In comparing prediction error with system latency error (no prediction), the adaptive filter model exhibited lesser prediction errors as compared to the sinusoidal model, especially for longer response time values (>0.4 seconds). At smaller response time values (<0.4 seconds), improvements in prediction error reduction are required for both predictive models in order to maximize gains in position accuracy due to prediction. Respiratory motion patterns are inherently complex in nature. While linear prediction-based prediction models perform satisfactorily for shorter response times, their prediction accuracy significantly deteriorates for longer response times. Successful implementation of real-time target-tracking-based radiotherapy requires response times less than 0.4 seconds or improved prediction algorithms.