• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.247-256
• /
• 2014

Purpose : To assess target motion during radiotherapy by quantifying daily setup errors and inter-fractional and intra-fractional movements of pancreatic fiducials. Materials and Methods : Eleven patients were treated via stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with volumetric modulated arc therapy. Bony setup errors were calculated using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Inter-fractional and intrafractional fiducial (seed) motion was determined via cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) projections and orthogonal fluoroscopy. Results : Using an off-line correction protocol, setup errors were 0.0 (-1.7-4.0), 0.3 (-0.5-3.0), and 0.0 (-4.1-6.6) mm for the left-right, anterior-posterior, and superior-inferior directions respectively. Random inter-fractional setup errors in the mean fiducial positions were -0.1, -1.1, and -2.3 mm respectively. Intra-fractional fiducial margins were 9.9, 7.8, and 12.5 mm, respectively. Conclusion : Online inter-fractional and intra-fractional corrections based on daily kV images and CBCT expedites SBRT of pancreatic cancer. Importantly, inter-fractional and intra-fractional motion needs to be measured regularly during treatment of pancreatic cancer to account for variations in patient respiration.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.33 no.4
• /
• pp.121-128
• /
• 2022

Purpose: This study evaluated the quality of plans based on magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) tri-Co-60, linac, and conventional linac-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (linac-VMAT) for prostate cancer. Methods: Twenty patients suffering from prostate cancer with intermediate risk who were treated by MAT were selected. Additional treatment plans (primary and boost plans) were generated based on MRgRT-tri-Co-60 and MRgRT-linac. The planning target volume (PTV) of MRgRT-based plans was created by adding a 3 mm margin from the clinical target volume (CTV) due to high soft-tissue contrast and real-time motion imaging. On the other hand, the PTV of conventional linac was generated based on a 1 cm margin from CTV. The targets of primary and boost plans were prostate plus seminal vesicle and prostate only, respectively. All plans were normalized to cover 95% of the target volume by 100% of the prescribed dose. Dosimetric characteristics were evaluated for each of the primary, boost, and sum plans. Results: For target coverage and conformity, the three plans showed similar results. In the sum plans, the average value of V_65Gy of the rectum of MRgRT-linac (2.62%±2.21%) was smaller than those of MRgRT tri-Co-60 (9.04%±3.01%) and linac-VMAT (9.73%±7.14%) (P<0.001). In the case of bladder, the average value of V_65Gy of MRgRT-linac was also smaller. Conclusions: In terms of organs at risk sparing, MRgRT-linac shows the best value while maintaining comparable target coverage among the three plans.