Medical physics · 2024
Development of patient and catheter specific error thresholds for high dose rate prostate brachytherapy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Koprivec Dylan, Belanger Cedric, Beaulieu Luc, Chatigny Philippe Y, Rosenfeld Anatoly, Cutajar Dean, Petasecca Marco, Howie Andrew, Bucci Joseph, Poder Joel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In-vivo source tracking has been an active topic of research in the field of high-dose rate brachytherapy in recent years to verify accuracy in treatment delivery. Although detection systems for source tracking are being developed, the allowable threshold of treatment error is still unknown and is likely patient-specific due to anatomy and planning variation.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine patient and catheter-specific shift error thresholds for in-vivo source tracking during high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT).
METHODS: A module was developed in the previously described graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm. The module generates systematic catheter shift errors retrospectively into HDRPBT treatment plans, performed on 50 patients. The catheter shift model iterates through the number of catheters shifted in the plan (from 1 to all catheters), the direction of shift (superior, inferior, medial, lateral, cranial, and caudal), and the magnitude of catheter shift (1-6 mm). For each combination of these parameters, 200 error plans were generated, randomly selecting the catheters in the plan to shift. After shifts were applied, dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters were re-calculated. Catheter shift thresholds were then derived based on plans where DVH parameters were clinically unacceptable (prostate V100 < 95%, urethra D0.1cc > 118%, and rectum Dmax > 80%). Catheter thresholds were also Pearson correlated to catheter robustness values.
RESULTS: Patient-specific thresholds varied between 1 to 6 mm for all organs, in all shift directions. Overall, patient-specific thresholds typically decrease with an increasing number of catheters shifted. Anterior and inferior directions were less sensitive than other directions. Pearson's correlation test showed a strong correlation between catheter robustness and catheter thresholds for the rectum and urethra, with correlation values of -0.81 and -0.74, respectively (p < 0.01), but no correlation was found for the prostate.
CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to determine thresholds for each patient, with thresholds showing dependence on shift direction, and number of catheters shifted. Not every catheter combination is explorable, however, this study shows the feasibility to determine patient-specific thresholds for clinical application. The correlation of patient-specific thresholds with the equivalent robustness value indicated the need for robustness consideration during plan optimization and treatment planning.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine patient and catheter-specific shift error thresholds for in-vivo source tracking during high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT).
METHODS: A module was developed in the previously described graphical processor unit multi-criteria optimization (gMCO) algorithm. The module generates systematic catheter shift errors retrospectively into HDRPBT treatment plans, performed on 50 patients. The catheter shift model iterates through the number of catheters shifted in the plan (from 1 to all catheters), the direction of shift (superior, inferior, medial, lateral, cranial, and caudal), and the magnitude of catheter shift (1-6 mm). For each combination of these parameters, 200 error plans were generated, randomly selecting the catheters in the plan to shift. After shifts were applied, dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters were re-calculated. Catheter shift thresholds were then derived based on plans where DVH parameters were clinically unacceptable (prostate V100 < 95%, urethra D0.1cc > 118%, and rectum Dmax > 80%). Catheter thresholds were also Pearson correlated to catheter robustness values.
RESULTS: Patient-specific thresholds varied between 1 to 6 mm for all organs, in all shift directions. Overall, patient-specific thresholds typically decrease with an increasing number of catheters shifted. Anterior and inferior directions were less sensitive than other directions. Pearson's correlation test showed a strong correlation between catheter robustness and catheter thresholds for the rectum and urethra, with correlation values of -0.81 and -0.74, respectively (p < 0.01), but no correlation was found for the prostate.
CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to determine thresholds for each patient, with thresholds showing dependence on shift direction, and number of catheters shifted. Not every catheter combination is explorable, however, this study shows the feasibility to determine patient-specific thresholds for clinical application. The correlation of patient-specific thresholds with the equivalent robustness value indicated the need for robustness consideration during plan optimization and treatment planning.