Encrypted login | home

Program Information

A Novel Tool for Computing Deliverable Doses in Dynamic MLC Tracking Treatments

no image available
M Fast

M Fast1*, C Kamerling1 , S Crijns2 , M Menten1 , S Nill1 , B Raaymakers2 , U Oelfke1 , (1) The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK, (2) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands


TH-AB-202-3 (Thursday, August 4, 2016) 7:30 AM - 9:30 AM Room: 202

Purpose: In tracked dynamic multi-leaf collimator (MLC) treatments, segments are continuously adapted to the target centroid motion in beams-eye-view. On-the-fly segment adaptation, however, potentially induces dosimetric errors due to the finite MLC leaf width and non-rigid target motion. In this study, we outline a novel tool for computing the 4d dose of lung SBRT plans delivered with MLC tracking.

Methods: The following automated workflow was developed: A) centroid tracking, where the initial segments are morphed to each 4dCT phase based on the beams-eye-view GTV shift (followed by a dose calculation on each phase); B) re-optimized tracking, in which all morphed initial plans from (A) are further optimised (“warm-started”) in each 4dCT phase using the initial optimisation parameters but phase-specific volume definitions. Finally, both dose sets are accumulated to the reference phase using deformable image registration. Initial plans were generated according to the RTOG-1021 guideline (54Gy, 3-Fx, equidistant 9-beam IMRT) on the peak-exhale (reference) phase of a phase-binned 4dCT. Treatment planning and delivery simulations were performed in RayStation (research v4.6) using our in-house segment-morphing algorithm, which directly links to RayStation through a native C++ interface.

Results: Computing the tracking plans and 4d dose distributions via the in-house interface takes 5 and 8 minutes respectively for centroid and re-optimized tracking. For a sample lung SBRT patient with 14mm peak-to-peak motion in sup-inf direction, mainly perpendicular leaf motion (0-collimator) resulted in small dose changes for PTV-D95 (-13cGy) and GTV-D98 (+18cGy) for the centroid tracking case compared to the initial plan. Modest reductions of OAR doses (e.g. spinal cord D2: -11cGy) were achieved in the idealized tracking case.

Conclusion: This study presents an automated “1-click” workflow for computing deliverable MLC tracking doses in RayStation. Adding a non-deliverable re-optimized tracking scenario is expected to help quantify plan robustness for more challenging patients with anatomy deformations.

Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: We acknowledge support of the MLC tracking research from Elekta AB. MFF is supported by Cancer Research UK under Programme C33589/A19908. Research at ICR is also supported by Cancer Research UK under Programme C33589/A19727 and NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at RMH and ICR.

Contact Email: