No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The first clinical implementation of electromagnetic transponder-guided MLC tracking
2. P. J. Keall, H. Cattell, D. Pokhrel, S. Dieterich, K. H. Wong, M. J. Murphy, S. S. Vedam, K. Wijesooriya, and R. Mohan, “Geometric accuracy of a real-time target tracking system with dynamic multileaf collimator tracking system,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 65, 1579–1584 (2006).
3. A. Sawant, R. Venkat, V. Srivastava, D. Carlson, S. Povzner, H. Cattell, and P. Keall, “Management of three-dimensional intrafraction motion through real-time DMLC tracking,” Med. Phys. 35, 2050–2061 (2008).
4. M. B. Tacke, S. Nill, A. Krauss, and U. Oelfke, “Real-time tumor tracking: Automatic compensation of target motion using the Siemens 160 MLC,” Med. Phys. 37, 753–761 (2010).
5. S. P. M. Crijns, B. W. Raaymakers, and J. J. W. Lagendijk, “Proof of concept of MRI-guided tracked radiation delivery: Tracking one-dimensional motion,” Phys. Med. Biol. 57, 7863–7872 (2012).
6. P. R. Poulsen, J. Carl, J. Nielsen, M. S. Nielsen, J. B. Thomsen, H. K. Jensen, B. Kjaergaard, P. R. Zepernick, E. Worm, W. Fledelius, B. Cho, A. Sawant, D. Ruan, and P. J. Keall, “Megavoltage image-based dynamic multileaf collimator tracking of a NiTi stent in porcine lungs on a linear accelerator,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 82, e321–e327 (2012).
7. A. Sawant, R. L. Smith, R. B. Venkat, L. Santanam, B. Cho, P. Poulsen, H. Cattell, L. J. Newell, P. Parikh, and P. J. Keall, “Toward submillimeter accuracy in the management of intrafraction motion: The integration of real-time internal position monitoring and multileaf collimator target tracking,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 74, 575–582 (2009).
8. R. L. Smith, A. Sawant, L. Santanam, R. B. Venkat, L. J. Newell, B. C. Cho, P. Poulsen, H. Catell, P. J. Keall, and P. J. Parikh, “Integration of real-time internal electromagnetic position monitoring coupled with dynamic multileaf collimator tracking: An intensity-modulated radiation therapy feasibility study,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 74, 868–875 (2009).
9. A. Sawant, S. Dieterich, M. Svatos, and P. Keall, “Failure mode and effect analysis-based quality assurance for dynamic MLC tracking systems,” Med. Phys. 37, 6466–6479 (2010).
10. P. J. Keall, A. Sawant, B. Cho, D. Ruan, J. Wu, P. Poulsen, J. Petersen, L. J. Newell, H. Cattell, and S. Korreman, “Electromagnetic-guided dynamic multileaf collimator tracking enables motion management for intensity-modulated arc therapy,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 79, 312–320 (2011).
11. J. Wu, D. Ruan, B. Cho, A. Sawant, J. Petersen, L. J. Newell, H. Cattell, and P. J. Keall, “Electromagnetic detection and real-time DMLC adaptation to target rotation during radiotherapy,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 82, e545–e553 (2012).
12. A. Krauss, S. Nill, M. Tacke, and U. Oelfke, “Electromagnetic real-time tumor position monitoring and dynamic multileaf collimator tracking using a Siemens 160 MLC: Geometric and dosimetric accuracy of an integrated system,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 79, 579–587 (2011).
13. D. Ruan and P. Keall, “Dynamic multileaf collimator control for motion adaptive radiotherapy: An optimization approach,” in 2011 IEEE Power Engineering and Automation Conference (PEAM) (IEEE, New York, 2011), Vol. 3, pp. 100–103.
14. P. R. Poulsen, M. L. Schmidt, P. Keall, E. S. Worm, W. Fledelius, and L. Hoffmann, “A method of dose reconstruction for moving targets compatible with dynamic treatments,” Med. Phys. 39, 6237–6246 (2012).
15. T. N. Eade, L. Guo, E. Forde, K. Vaux, J. Vass, P. Hunt, and A. Kneebone, “Image-guided dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer: Treating to doses beyond 78 Gy,” BJU Int. 109, 1655–1660 (2012).
16. J. M. Michalski, H. Gay, A. Jackson, S. L. Tucker, and J. O. Deasy, “Radiation dose-volume effects in radiation-induced rectal injury,” Int. J. Radiat., Oncol., Biol., Phys. 76, S123–S129 (2010).
17. M. Hiraoka, Y. Matsuo, A. Sawada, N. Ueki, Y. Miyaba, M. Nakamura, S. Yano, S. Kaneko, T. Mizowaki, and M. Kokubo, “Realization of dynamic tumor tracking irradiation with real-time monitoring in lung tumor patients using a gimbaled X-ray head radiation therapy equipment,” Int. J. Radiat. Oncol., Biol., Phys. 84, S560–S561 (2012).
19. J. Wilbert, J. Meyer, K. Baier, M. Guckenberger, C. Herrmann, R. Heß, C. Janka, L. Ma, T. Mersebach, A. Richter, M. Roth, K. Schilling, and M. Flentje, “Tumor tracking and motion compensation with an adaptive tumor tracking system (ATTS): System description and prototype testing,” Med. Phys. 35, 3911–3921 (2008).
20. A. A. Konski, P. E. Wallner, E. E. R. Harris, R. A. Price Jr., M. Buyyounouski, R. Miller, T. Schefter, W. Tome, and I. Parsai, “Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for primary management of early-stage, low-intermediate risk prostate cancer,” Report of the ASTRO Emerging Technology Committee, 2008.
Article metrics loading...
We report on the clinical process, quality assurance, and geometric and dosimetric results of the first clinical implementation of electromagnetic transponder-guided MLC tracking which occurred on 28 November 2013 at the Northern Sydney Cancer Centre.
An electromagnetic transponder-based positioning system (Calypso) was modified to send the target position output to in-house-developed MLC tracking code, which adjusts the leaf positions to optimally align the treatment beam with the real-time target position. Clinical process and quality assurance procedures were developed and performed. The first clinical implementation of electromagnetic transponder-guided MLC tracking was for a prostate cancer patient being treated with dual-arc VMAT (RapidArc). For the first fraction of the first patient treatment of electromagnetic transponder-guided MLC tracking we recorded the in-room time and transponder positions, and performed dose reconstruction to estimate the delivered dose and also the dose received had MLC tracking not been used.
The total in-room time was 21 min with 2 min of beam delivery. No additional time was needed for MLC tracking and there were no beam holds. The average prostate position from the initial setup was 1.2 mm, mostly an anterior shift. Dose reconstruction analysis of the delivered dose with MLC tracking showed similar isodose and target dose volume histograms to the planned treatment and a 4.6% increase in the fractional rectal V60. Dose reconstruction without motion compensation showed a 30% increase in the fractional rectal V60 from that planned, even for the small motion.
The real-time beam-target correction method, electromagnetic transponder-guided MLC tracking, has been translated to the clinic. This achievement represents a milestone in improving geometric and dosimetric accuracy, and by inference treatment outcomes, in cancer radiotherapy.
Full text loading...
Most read this month