Margins for translational and rotational uncertainties: a probability-based approach.

PURPOSE To define margins for systematic rotations and translations, based on known statistical distributions of these deviations. METHODS AND MATERIALS The confidence interval-based expansion method for translations, known as the "rolling ball algorithm," was extended to include rotations. This new method, which we call the Rotational and Translational Confidence Limit (RTCL) method, is exact for a point with arbitrary rotations and translations or for a finite shape with rotations only. The method was compared with two existing expansion methods: a rolling ball algorithm without rotations, and a convolution (blurring) method which included rotations. On the basis of these methods, planning target volumes (PTVs, expanded clinical target volumes [CTVs]) were constructed for a number of shapes (a sphere, a sphere with an extension, and three prostate cases), and evaluated in several ways by means of a Monte Carlo method. The accuracy of each method was measured by determining the probability of finding the CTV completely inside the PTV (P(CTVinPTV)), using parameters that yield a 90% probability for a sphere-shaped CTV without rotations. Furthermore, with the expansion parameters adjusted to give an equal P(CTVinPTV) for all methods, PTV volumes were compared. RESULTS With the expansion algorithm parameters chosen to yield P(CTVinPTV) = 90% for a sphere, an average P(CTVinPTV) of 84%, 57%, and 46% was obtained for the other shapes, using the RTCL method, coverage probability, and rolling ball, respectively. With the parameters adjusted to yield an equal P(CTVinPTV) for all methods, the PTV volume was on average 8% larger for the coverage probability method and 15% larger for the rolling ball algorithm compared to the RTCL method. CONCLUSION The RTCL method provides an accurate way to include the effects of systematic rotations in the margin. Compared to other algorithms, the method is less sensitive to the shape of the CTV, and, given a fixed probability of finding the CTV inside the PTV, a smaller PTV volume can be obtained.

[1]  M Wannenmacher,et al.  Combined error of patient positioning variability and prostate motion uncertainty in 3D conformal radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  D P Dearnaley,et al.  Portal imaging protocol for radical dose-escalated radiotherapy treatment of prostate cancer. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  D. Gladstone,et al.  A numerical simulation of organ motion and daily setup uncertainties: implications for radiation therapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  J C Stroom,et al.  Automatic calculation of three-dimensional margins around treatment volumes in radiotherapy planning. , 1997, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  M. V. van Herk,et al.  The probability of correct target dosage: dose-population histograms for deriving treatment margins in radiotherapy. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  M. Roach,et al.  The impact of isocenter placement errors associated with dose distributions used in irradiating prostate cancer. , 1996, Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

[7]  J. Leong,et al.  Implementation of random positioning error in computerised radiation treatment planning systems as a result of fractionation. , 1987, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  G J Kutcher,et al.  The effect of setup uncertainties on the treatment of nasopharynx cancer. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  M van Herk,et al.  Computerized design of target margins for treatment uncertainties in conformal radiotherapy. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  M van Herk,et al.  Target margins for random geometrical treatment uncertainties in conformal radiotherapy. , 1996, Medical physics.

[11]  G J Kutcher,et al.  Measurement of patient positioning errors in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy of the prostate. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  J C Stroom,et al.  Internal organ motion in prostate cancer patients treated in prone and supine treatment position. , 1999, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[13]  J C Stroom,et al.  Inclusion of geometrical uncertainties in radiotherapy treatment planning by means of coverage probability. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  W A Beckham,et al.  Evaluation of the validity of a convolution method for incorporating tumour movement and set-up variations into the radiotherapy treatment planning system. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  R Mohan,et al.  A method of incorporating organ motion uncertainties into three-dimensional conformal treatment plans. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[16]  M van Herk,et al.  3-D portal image analysis in clinical practice: an evaluation of 2-D and 3-D analysis techniques as applied to 30 prostate cancer patients. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  P Aaltonen,et al.  Specification of dose delivery in radiation therapy. Recommendation by the Nordic Association of Clinical Physics (NACP). , 1997, Acta oncologica.

[18]  I. Kalet,et al.  Three dimensional planning target volumes: a model and a software tool. , 1995, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics.

[19]  M van Herk,et al.  Quantification of organ motion during conformal radiotherapy of the prostate by three dimensional image registration. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  P Aaltonen,et al.  Specification of dose delivery in radiation therapy , 1997 .