Evaluation of CyberKnife® Fiducial Tracking Limitations to Assist Targeting Accuracy: A Phantom Study with Fiducial Displacement.

Introduction  The underlying assumptions of the CyberKnife® (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA, US) fiducial tracking system are: i) fiducial positions are accurately detected; ii) inter-fiducial geometry remains consistent (rigid); iii) inter-fiducial geometric array changes are detected and either accommodated with corrections or treatment is interrupted. However: i) soft-tissue targets are deformable & fiducial migration is possible; ii) the accuracy of the tracking system has not previously been examined with fiducial displacement; iii) treatment interruptions may occur due to inter-fiducial geometric changes, but there is little information available to assist subsequent troubleshooting. The purpose of this study was to emulate a clinical target defined with a two, three, or four-fiducial array where one fiducial is displaced to mimic a target deformation or fiducial migration scenario. The objectives: evaluate the fiducial positioning accuracy, array interpretation, & corresponding corrections of the CyberKnife system, with the aim of assisting troubleshooting following fiducial displacement. Methods A novel solid-water phantom was constructed with three fixed fiducials (F1,F2,F3) & one moveable fiducial (F4), arranged as if placed to track an imaginary clinical target. Using either two fiducials (F1,F4), different combinations of three fiducials (F1,F2,F4; F1,F3,F4; F2,F3,F4) or four fiducials (F1,F2,F3,F4), repeat experiments were conducted where F4 was displaced inferiorly at 2-mm intervals from 0-16 mm. Data were acquired at each position of F4, including rigid body errors (RBE), fiducial x, y, & z coordinate displacements, six degrees of freedom (DOF) corrections, & robot center-of-mass (COM) translation corrections. Results Maximum positioning difference (mean±SD) between the reference and live x, y, & z coordinates for the three fixed fiducials was 0.08±0.30 mm, confirming good accuracy for fixed fiducial registration. For two fiducials (F1,F4), F4 registration was accurate to 14-mm displacement and the F4 x-axis coordinate change was 2.0±0.12 mm with each 2 mm inferior displacement validating the phantom for tracking evaluation. RBE was >5 mm (system threshold) at 6-14 mm F4 displacement: however, F1 was misidentified as the RBE main contributor. Further, F1/F4 false-lock occurred at 16 mm F4 displacement with corresponding RBE <3 mm & COM corrections >13 mm. For combinations of three fiducials, F4 registration was accurate to 10-mm displacement. RBE was >5 mm at 6-16 mm F4 displacement: however, F4 false-lock occurred at 12-16 mm with RBE 5-6 mm. For four fiducials, F4 registration was accurate to 4 mm displacement: however, F4 false-lock occurred at 6-16 mm displacement with concerning RBE <2 & <5 at 6 & 8-mm F4 displacement, respectively. False-locks were easily identified in the phantom but frequently uncorrectable. Conclusions Results indicate fiducial positioning accuracy and system output following fiducial displacement depends on the number of fiducials correlated, displacement distance, and clinical thresholds applied. Displacements ≤4 mm were accurately located, but some displacements 6-16 mm were misrepresented, either by erroneous main contributor (two-fiducial array only) or by false-locks and misleading RBE, which underestimated displacement. Operator vigilance and implementation of our practical guidelines based on the study findings may help reduce targeting error and assist troubleshooting in clinical situations.

Dose-Volume Histogram Analysis of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: A Focus on Duodenal Dose Constraints.

Pancreatic carcinoma is an aggressive disease and radiotherapy treatment delivery to the primary tumor is constrained by the anatomical close location of the duodenum, stomach, and small bowel. Duodenal dose tolerance for radiosurgery in 2-5 fractions has been largely unknown. The literature was surveyed for quantitative models of risk in 1-5 fractions and we analyzed our own patient population of 44 patients with unresectable pancreatic tumors who received 3 or 5 fractions of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) between March 2009 and March 2013. A logistic model was constructed in the dose-volume histogram (DVH) Evaluator software for the duodenal D50%, D30cc, D5cc, D1cc, and maximum point dose D0.035cc. Dose tolerance limits from the literature were overlaid onto the clinical duodenal data in the form of a DVH Risk Map, with risk levels of the published limits estimated from the model of clinical data. In 3 fractions, Kopek 2010 found a statistically significant difference in D1cc of patients with no common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) v3 grade 2 or higher duodenal complications (mean D1cc = 25.3Gy) as compared with patients with grade 2 or higher toxicity (mean D1cc = 37.4Gy). From the logistic model of our duodenal data in 3 fractions, D1cc = 25.3Gy had 4.7% risk of grade 3-4 hemorrhage or stricture and D1cc = 37.4Gy had 20% risk. The 10% risk level was D1cc = 31.4Gy and we were able to keep duodenum dose for all our patients later this level.

A comparison of four indices for combining distance and dose differences.

PURPOSE: When one is comparing two dose distributions, a number of methods have been published to combine dose difference and distance to agreement into a single measure. Some have been defined as pass/fail indices and some as numeric indices. We show that the pass/fail indices can all be used to derive numeric indices, and we compare the results of using these indices to evaluate one-dimensional (1D) and three-dimensional (3D) dose distributions, with the aim of selecting the most appropriate index for use in different circumstances. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The indices compared are the gamma index, the kappa index, the index in International Commission on Radiation Units & Measurements Report 83, and a box index. Comparisons are made for 1D and 3D distributions. The 1D distribution is chosen to have a variety of dose gradients. The 3D distribution is taken from a clinical treatment plan. The effect of offsetting distributions by known distances and doses is studied. RESULTS: The International Commission on Radiation Units & Measurements Report 83 index causes large discontinuities unless the dose gradient cutoff is set to equal the ratio of the dose tolerance to the distance tolerance. If it is so set, it returns identical results to the kappa index. Where the gradient is very high or very low, all the indices studied in this article give similar results for the same tolerance values. For moderate gradients, they differ, with the box index being the least strict, followed by the gamma index, and with the kappa index being the most strict. CONCLUSIONS: If the clinical tolerances are much greater than the uncertainties of the measuring system, the kappa index should be used, with tolerance values determined by the clinical tolerances. In cases where the uncertainties of the measuring system dominate, the box index will be best able to determine errors in the delivery system.

An unexpected artefact with low-contrast high-energy film.

Kodak recently introduced new packaging for its X-Omat V verification film, including a label on the exterior of the packet. Patient images taken using the film in an image intensification cassette showed artefacts which appeared to be related to the label. Investigation showed the effect was only observed in conditions of high-Z build-up or backscatter or when the film was used without additional backscatter. The label provides extra build up when in front of the film and an increase in optical density of up to 0.04 units. When the label is on the rear of the film it absorbs backscattered particles, causing a decrease in optical density. It is concluded that X-Omat V film packets with labels are unsuitable for use in imaging cassettes unless they are used in conditions of low-Z build-up. Alternatively the film must be removed from the labelled envelope if it is to be used in high-Z build-up conditions.