Limitations of a convolution method for modeling geometric uncertainties in radiation therapy. II. The effect of a finite number of fractions.

Convolution methods can be used to model the effect of geometric uncertainties on the planned dose distribution in radiation therapy. This requires several assumptions, including that the patient is treated with an infinite number of fractions, each delivering an infinitesimally small dose. The error resulting from this assumption has not been thoroughly quantified. This is investigated by comparing dose distributions calculated using the Convolution method with the result of Stochastic simulations of the treatment. Additionally, the dose calculated using the conventional Static method, a Corrected Convolution method, and a Direct Simulation are compared to the Stochastic result. This analysis is performed for single beam, parallel opposed pair, and four-field box techniques in a cubic water phantom. Treatment plans for a simple and a complex idealized anatomy were similarly analyzed. The average maximum error using the Static method for a 30 fraction simulation for the three techniques in phantoms was 23%, 11% for Convolution, 10% for Corrected Convolution, and 10% for Direct Simulation. In the two anatomical examples, the mean error in tumor control probability for Static and Convolution methods was 7% and 2%, respectively, of the result with no uncertainty, and 35% and 9%, respectively, for normal tissue complication probabilities. Convolution provides superior estimates of the delivered dose when compared to the Static method. In the range of fractions used clinically, considerable dosimetric variations will exist solely because of the random nature of the geometric uncertainties. However, the effect of finite fractionation appears to have a greater impact on the dose distribution than plan evaluation parameters.

[1]  A. Brahme,et al.  Optimal radiation beam profiles considering uncertainties in beam patient alignment. , 1993, Acta oncologica.

[2]  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.

[3]  P J Keall,et al.  A method to predict the effect of organ motion and set-up variations on treatment plans. , 1999, Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine.

[4]  G T Chen,et al.  Using serial imaging data to model variabilities in organ position and shape during radiotherapy. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  E. Larsen,et al.  A method for incorporating organ motion due to breathing into 3D dose calculations. , 1999, Medical physics.

[6]  R Calandrino,et al.  Variations of tumor control and rectum complication probabilities due to random set-up errors during conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer. , 1997, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[7]  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.

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

[9]  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.

[10]  J M Balter,et al.  Quantization of setup uncertainties in 3-D dose calculations. , 1999, Medical physics.

[11]  Jonathan G. Li,et al.  Inverse planning incorporating organ motion. , 2000 .

[12]  D. Yan,et al.  A model to accumulate fractionated dose in a deforming organ. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  J T Booth,et al.  Modelling the dosimetric consequences of organ motion at CT imaging on radiotherapy treatment planning. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  A L McKenzie,et al.  How should breathing motion be combined with other errors when drawing margins around clinical target volumes? , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

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

[16]  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.

[17]  Joos V Lebesque,et al.  Inclusion of geometric uncertainties in treatment plan evaluation. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  J. Battista,et al.  Considerations for the implementation of target volume protocols in radiation therapy. , 2001, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics.

[19]  G T Chen,et al.  Numerical analysis of a model of organ motion using serial imaging measurements from prostate radiotherapy. , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[20]  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.

[21]  S. Zavgorodni Treatment planning algorithm corrections accounting for random setup uncertainties in fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy. , 2000, Medical physics.

[22]  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.

[23]  M. Goitein,et al.  Fitting of normal tissue tolerance data to an analytic function. , 1991, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[24]  A B Wolbarst,et al.  Optimization of radiation therapy, IV: A dose-volume histogram reduction algorithm. , 1989, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[25]  W. O'Dell,et al.  Dose broadening due to target position variability during fractionated breath-held radiation therapy. , 2002, Medical physics.

[26]  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.

[27]  A Gustavsson,et al.  The long-term consequences of therapy for Hodgkin's disease are still evolving. , 1997, Acta oncologica.

[28]  R. Mohan,et al.  Histogram reduction method for calculating complication probabilities for three-dimensional treatment planning evaluations. , 1991, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[29]  M Wannenmacher,et al.  Influence of the positioning error on 3D conformal dose distributions during fractionated radiotherapy. , 1994, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[30]  M R Sontag,et al.  The equivalent tissue-air ratio method for making absorbed dose calculations in a heterogeneous medium. , 1978, Radiology.

[31]  M Goitein,et al.  Implementation of a model for estimating tumor control probability for an inhomogeneously irradiated tumor. , 1993, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[32]  M van Herk,et al.  The width of margins in radiotherapy treatment plans. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[33]  M Goitein,et al.  Calculation of the uncertainty in the dose delivered during radiation therapy. , 1985, Medical physics.