A study of the dosimetric impact of daily setup variations measured with cone-beam CT on three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer delivered in the prone position.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the dosimetric impact of daily positioning variations measured with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) on whole-breast radiotherapy patients treated in the prone position. METHODS: Daily CBCT was prospectively acquired for 30 consecutive patients positioned prone. Treatment for early-stage (≤II) breast cancer was prescribed with standard dose (50 Gy/25 fractions) or hypofractionation (42.56 Gy/16 fractions) for 13 and 17 patients, respectively. Systematic and random errors were calculated from the translational CBCT shifts and used to determine population-based setup margins. Mean translations (±one standard deviation) for each patient were used to simulate the dosimetric impact on targets (PTV_eval and lumpectomy cavity), heart, and lung. Paired Student's t tests at α = 0.01 were used to compare dose metrics after correction for multiple testing (P < 0.002). Significant correlation coefficients were used to identify associations (P < 0.01). RESULTS: Of 597 total fractions, 20 ± 13% required patient rotation. Mean translations were 0.29 ± 0.27 cm, 0.41 ± 0.34 cm, and 0.48 ± 0.33 cm in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior, and lateral directions leading to calculated setup margins of 0.63, 0.88, and 1.10 cm, respectively. Average three-dimensional (3D) shifts correlated with the maximum distance of breast tissue from the sternum (r = 0.62) but not with body-mass index. Simulated shifts showed significant, but minor, changes in dose metrics for PTV_eval, lung, and heart. For left-sided treatments (n = 18), mean heart dose increased from 109 ± 75 cGy to 148 ± 115 cGy. Shifts from the original plan caused PTV_eval hotspots (V105%) to increase by 5.2% ± 3.8%, which correlated with the total MU of wedged fields (r = 0.59). No significant change in V95% to the cavity was found. CONCLUSIONS: Large translational variations that occur when positioning prone breast patients had small but significant dosimetric effects on 3DCRT plans. Daily CBCT may still be necessary to correct for rotational variations that occur in 20% of treatments. To maintain planned dose metrics, unintended beam shifts toward the heart and the contribution of wedged fields should be minimized.

Single-institution report of setup margins of voluntary deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) whole breast radiotherapy implemented with real-time surface imaging.

PURPOSE: We calculated setup margins for whole breast radiotherapy during voluntary deep-inspiration breath-hold (vDIBH) using real-time surface imaging (SI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients (n = 58) with a 27-to-31 split between right- and left-sided cancers were analyzed. Treatment beams were gated using AlignRT by registering the whole breast region-of-interest to the surface generated from the simulation CT scan. AlignRT recorded (three-dimensional) 3D displacements and the beam-on-state every 0.3 s. Means and standard deviations of the displacements during vDIBH for each fraction were used to calculate setup margins. Intra-DIBH stability and the intrafraction reproducibility were estimated from the medians of the 5th to 95th percentile range of the translations in each breath-hold and fraction, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 7269 breath-holds were detected over 1305 fractions in which a median dose of 200 cGy was delivered. Each fraction was monitored for 5.95 ± 2.44 min. Calculated setup margins were 4.8 mm (A/P), 4.9 mm (S/I), and 6.4 mm (L/R). The intra-DIBH stability and the intrafraction reproducibility were ≤0.7 mm and ≤2.2 mm, respectively. The isotropic margin according to SI (9.2 mm) was comparable to other institutions' calculations that relied on x-ray imaging and/or spirometry for patients with left-sided cancer (9.8-11.0 mm). Likewise, intra-DIBH variability and intrafraction reproducibility of breast surface measured with SI agreed with spirometry-based positioning to within 1.2 and 0.36 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that intra-DIBH variability, intrafraction reproducibility, and setup margins are similar to those reported by peer studies who utilized spirometry-based positioning.

Assessment of interfractional variation of the breast surface following conventional patient positioning for whole-breast radiotherapy.

The purpose of this study was to quantify the variability of the breast surface position when aligning whole-breast patients to bony landmarks based on MV portal films or skin marks alone. Surface imaging was used to assess the breast surface position of 11 whole-breast radiotherapy patients, but was not used for patient positioning. On filmed fractions, AlignRT v5.0 was used to capture the patient's surface after initial positioning based on skin marks (28 "preshifts" surfaces), and after treatment couch shifts based on MV films (41 "postshifts" surfaces). Translations and rotations based on surface captures were recorded, as well as couch shifts based on MV films. For nonfilmed treatments, "daily" surface images were captured following positioning to skin marks alone. Group mean and systematic and random errors were calculated for all datasets. Pearson correlation coefficients, setup margins, and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated for preshifts translations and MV film shifts. LOA between postshifts surfaces and the filmed treatment positions were also computed. All the surface captures collected were retrospectively compared to both a DICOM reference surface created from the planning CT and to an AlignRT reference surface. All statistical analyses were performed using the DICOM reference surface dataset. AlignRT reference surface data was only used to calculate the LOA with the DICOM reference data. This helped assess any outcome differences between both reference surfaces. Setup margins for preshifts surfaces and MV films range between 8.3-12.0 mm and 5.4-13.4 mm, respectively. The largest margin is along the left-right (LR) direction for preshift surfaces, and along craniocaudal (CC) for films. LOA ranges between the preshifts surfaces and MV film shifts are large (12.6-21.9 mm); these decrease for postshifts surfaces (9.8-18.4 mm), but still show significant disagreements between the two modalities due to their focus on different anatomical landmarks (patient's topography versus bony anatomy). Pearson's correlation coefficients further support this by showing low to moderate correlations in the anterior-posterior (AP) and LR directions (0.47-0.69) and no correlation along CC (< 0.15). The use of an AlignRT reference surface compared to the DICOM reference surface does not significantly affect the LOA. Alignment of breast patients based solely on bony alignment may lead to interfractional inconsistencies in the breast surface position. The use of surface imaging tools highlights these discrepancies, and allows the radiation oncology team to better assess the possible effects on treatment quality.