Predicting tumour motion during the whole radiotherapy treatment: a systematic approach for thoracic and abdominal lesions based on real time MR
This publication appears in: Radiotherapy and Oncology
Authors: D. Cusumano, J. Dhont, L. Boldrini, G. Chiloiro, S. Teodoli, M. Massaccesi, B. Fionda, F. Cellini, L. Azario, J. Vandemeulebroucke, M. De Spirito, V. Valentini and D. Verellen
Publication Date: Dec. 2018
Introduction: Aim of this study was to investigate the ability of pre-treatment four dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) to capture respiratory-motion observed in thoracic and abdominal lesions during treatment. Treatment motion was acquired using full-treatment cine-MR acquisitions. Results of this analysis were compared to the ability of 30 seconds (s) cine Magnetic Resonance (MR) to estimate the same parameters. Methods: A 4DCT and 30 s cine-MR (ViewRay, USA) were acquired on the simulation day for 7 thoracic and 13 abdominal lesions. Mean amplitude, intra- and inter-fraction amplitude variability, and baseline drift were extracted from the full treatment data acquired by 2D cine-MR, and correlated to the motion on pre-treatment 30 s cine-MR and 4DCT. Using the full treatment data, safety margins on the ITV, necessary to account for all motion variability from 4DCT observed during treatment, were calculated. Mean treatment amplitudes were 2 ± 1 mm and 5 ± 3 mm in the anteroposterior (AP) and craniocaudal (CC) direction, respectively. Differences between mean amplitude during treatment and amplitude on 4DCT or during 30 s cine-MR were not significant, but 30 s cine-MR was more accurate than 4DCT. Intra-fraction amplitude variability was positively correlated with both 30 s cine-MR and 4DCT amplitude. Inter-fraction amplitude variability was minimal. Results: Mean baseline drift over all fractions and patients equalled 1 ± 1 mm in both CC and AP direction, but drifts per fraction up to 16 mm (CC) and 12 mm (AP) were observed. Margins necessary on the ITV ranged from 0 to 8 mm in CC and 0 to 5 mm in AP direction. Neither amplitude on 4DCT nor during 30 s cine MR is correlated to the magnitude of drift or the necessary margins in both directions. Conclusion: Lesions moving with small amplitude show limited amplitude variability throughout treatment, making passive motion management strategies seem adequate. However, other variations such as baseline drifts and shifts still cause significant geometrical uncertainty, favouring real-time monitoring and an active approach for all lesions influenced by respiratory motion.