PurposeTo quantify the difference in accuracy of adapt-to-position (ATP), adapt-to-rotation (ATR) and adapt-to-shape (ATS) workflows used in MRI-guided online adaptive radiotherapy for prostate... Show morePurposeTo quantify the difference in accuracy of adapt-to-position (ATP), adapt-to-rotation (ATR) and adapt-to-shape (ATS) workflows used in MRI-guided online adaptive radiotherapy for prostate carcinoma (PCa) by evaluating the margins required to accommodate intra-fraction motion of the clinical target volumes for prostate (CTVpros), prostate including seminal vesicles (CTVpros + sv) and gross tumor volume (GTV).Materials and methodsClinical delineations of the CTVpros, CTVpros + sv and GTV of 24 patients with intermediate- and high-risk PCa, treated using ATS on a 1.5 T MR-Linac, were used for analysis. Delineations were available pre- and during beam-on. To simulate ATP and ATR workflows, we automatically generated the structures associated with these workflows using rigid transformations from the planning-MRI to the daily online MRIs. Clinical GTVs were analyzed as ATR GTVs and only ATP GTVs were simulated. Planning target volumes (PTVs) were generated with isotropic margins ranging 0.0–5.0 mm. The volumetric overlap was calculated between these PTVs and their corresponding clinical delineation on the MRI acquired during beam-on and averaged over all treatment fractions.ResultsThe PTV margin required to cover > 95% of the CTVpros was equal (2.5 mm) for all workflows. For the CTVpros + sv, this margin increased to 5.0, 4.0 and 3.5 mm in the ATP, ATR and ATS workflow, respectively. GTV coverage improved from ATP to ATR for margins up to 4.0 mm.ConclusionATP, ATR and ATS workflows ensure equal coverage of the CTVpros for the current clinical margins. For the CTVpros + sv, ATS showed optimal performance. GTV coverage improves by additional adaptations to prostate rotations. Show less
Bijl, E. van der; Remeijer, P.; Sonke, J.J.; Heide, U.A. van der; Janssen, T. 2022
Objective:. In online adaptive radiotherapy a new plan is generated every fraction based on the organ and clinical target volume (CTV) delineations of that fraction. This allows for a planning... Show moreObjective:. In online adaptive radiotherapy a new plan is generated every fraction based on the organ and clinical target volume (CTV) delineations of that fraction. This allows for a planning target volume margin that does not need to be constant over the whole course of treatment, as is the case in conventional radiotherapy. This work aims to introduce an approach to update the margins each fraction based on the per-patient treatment history and explore the potential benefits of such adaptive margins. Approach: We introduce a novel methodology to implement adaptive margins, isotropic and anisotropic, during a treatment course based on the accumulated dose to the CTV. We then simulate treatment histories for treatments delivered in up to 20 fractions using various choices for the standard deviations of the systematic and random errors and homogeneous and inhomogeneous dose distributions. The treatment-averaged adaptive margin was compared to standard constant margins. The change in the minimum dose delivered to the CTV was compared on a patient and a population level. All simulations were performed within the van Herk approach and its known limitations. Main results: The population mean treatment-averaged margins are down to 70% and 55% of the corresponding necessary constant margins for the isotropic and anisotropic approach. The reduction increases with longer fractionation schemes and an inhomogeneous target dose distribution. Most of the benefit can be attributed to the elimination of the effective systematic error over the course of treatment. Interpatient differences in treatment-averaged margins were largest for the isotropic margins. For the 10% of patients that would receive a lower than prescribed dose to the CTV this minimum dose to the CTV is increased using the adaptive margin approaches. Significance: Adaptive margins can allow to reduce margins in most patients without compromising patients with greater than average target motion. Show less
Janssen, T.M.; Heide, U.A. van der; Remeijer, P.; Sonke, J.J.; Bijl, E. van der 2022
Background and purpose: Strategies to limit the impact of intra-fraction motion during treatment are common in radiotherapy. Margin recipes, however, are not designed to incorporate these... Show moreBackground and purpose: Strategies to limit the impact of intra-fraction motion during treatment are common in radiotherapy. Margin recipes, however, are not designed to incorporate these strategies. This work aimed to provide a framework to determine how motion management strategies influence treatment margins. Materials and methods: Two models of intra-fraction motion were considered. In model 1 motion was instantaneous, before treatment starts and in model 2 motion was a continuous drift during treatment. Motion management strategies were modelled by truncating the underlying error distribution at cσ, with σ the standard deviation of the distribution and c a free parameter. Using Monte Carlo simulations, we determined how motion management changed the required margin. The analysis was performed for different number of treatment fractions and different standard deviations of the underlying random and systematic errors. Results: The required margin for a continuous drift was found to be well approximated by an average position of the target at ¾ of the drift. Introducing a truncation at cσ, the relative change in the margin was equal to 0.3c. This result held for both models, was independent of σ or the number of fractions and naturally generalizes to the situation with a residual (systematic) error. Conclusion: Treatment margins can be determined when motion management strategies are applied. Moreover, our analysis can be used to study the potential benefit of different motion management strategies. This allows to discuss and determine the most appropriate strategy for margin reduction. Show less
