Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:40:51.468Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An investigation of rotational issues for rectal carcinoma treated with radiotherapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2013

Dominique A. Taylor ,
Thomas ffrench ,
Charlotte A. Sale  and
Paul Foulstone
Dominique A. Taylor*
Affiliation:
Andrew Love Cancer Centre, The Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
Thomas ffrench
Affiliation:
Andrew Love Cancer Centre, The Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
Charlotte A. Sale
Affiliation:
Andrew Love Cancer Centre, The Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
Paul Foulstone
Affiliation:
Andrew Love Cancer Centre, The Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria, Australia
*
Correspondence to: Dominique Taylor, Andrew Love Cancer Centre, The Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia. Tel: +61 3 4215 2600. Fax: +61 3 4215 2669. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purpose

To quantify the amount of inter-fractional pitch for rectal carcinoma patients, to investigate the dosimetric impact of pitch on the target volume and critical structures and to determine a tolerance where no pitch correction is required.

Materials and methods

Daily pre-treatment images of rectal carcinoma patients were analysed to determine the residual pitch compared with the computed tomography (CT) planning scan. The dosimetric impact of pelvic rotation was modelled. The dose coverage of the clinical target volume (CTV) and small bowel were evaluated using dose–volume histograms.

Results

Pre-treatment images had a mean of 0·27° and standard deviation was 2·23°. The volume of CTV receiving 95% of the prescription dose altered by 0·1% when up to ±10° of pitch was simulated.

Conclusions

No clinically significant change in CTV coverage was found (when ±10° of pitch was simulated). A tolerance of ±10° of pitch has been implemented for rectal carcinoma patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in our institution, when daily pre-treatment imaging with a zero action threshold for translational shifts is used.

Keywords

IGRTpitchrectal Ca.rotation
Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 2014 , pp. 195 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Verellen, D, De Ridder, M, Storme, G. A (short) history of image-guided radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2008; 86: 4–13.Google Scholar
2.Potters, L, Gasper, L E, Kavanagh, Bet al. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) and American College of Radiology (ACR) Practice Guidelines for Image Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 76: 319–325.Google Scholar
3.Gwynne, S, Webster, R, Adams, R, Mukherjee, S, Coles, B, Staffurth, J. Image-guided radiotherapy for rectal cancer – a systematic review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2012; 24: 250–260.Google Scholar
4.Nijkamp, J, de Jong, R, Sonke, J J, van Vliet, C, Marijnen, C. Target volume shape variation during irradiation of rectal cancer patients in the supine position: comparison with prone position. Radiother Oncol 2009; 93: 285–292.Google Scholar
5.Van Herk, M, Remeijer, P, Rasch, C, Lebesque, J V. The probability of correct target dosage: dose-population histograms for deriving treatment margins in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000; 47: 1121–1135.Google Scholar
6.Baglan, K L, Frazier, R C, Yan, Det al. The dose-volume relationship of acute small bowel toxicity from concurrent 5-FU-based chemotherapy and radiation therapy for rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 52: 176–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Emami, B, Lyman, J, Brown, Aet al. Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991; 21: 109–122.Google Scholar
8.Aubry, J F, Beaulieu, L, Girouard, L Met al. Measurements of intrafraction motion and inter-fraction and intra-fraction rotation of prostate by three-dimensional analysis of daily portal imaging with radiopaque markers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 60: 30–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Cranmer-Sargison, G. A treatment planning investigation into the dosimetric effects of systemic prostate patient rotational set-up errors. Med Dosim 2008; 33: 199–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Kasabasic, M, Faj, D, Ivkovic, Aet al. Rotation of the sacrum during bellyboard pelvic radiotherapy. Med Dosim 2010; 35: 28–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Kruse, J, Herman, M, Hagness, Cet al. Electronic and film portal images: a comparison of landmark visibility and review accuracy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 54: 584–591.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Koelbl, O, Richter, S, Flentje, M. Influence of patient positioning on dose–volume histogram and normal tissue complication probability for small bowel and bladder in patients receiving pelvic irradiation: a prospective study using a 3D planning system and a radiobiological model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999; 45: 1193–1198.Google Scholar
13.Kim, T H, Chie, E K, Kim, D Yet al. Comparison of the belly board device method and the distended bladder method for reducing irradiated small bowel volumes in preoperative radiotherapy of rectal cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 62: 769–775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Nuyttens, J J, Robertson, J M, Yan, D, Martinez, A. The position and volume of the small bowel during adjuvant radiation therapy for rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 51: 1271–1280.Google Scholar
15.Myerson, R, Garofalo, M, Naqa, I et al. Elective clinical target volumes in anorectal cancer: an RTOG consensus panel contouring atlas. http://www.rtog.org/CoreLab/ContouringAtlases/Anorectal.aspx. Accessed on 23rd October 2012.Google Scholar
16.International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU). Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy. Report 50. Washington, DC: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, 1993.Google Scholar