Initial clinical experience with infrared-reflecting skin markers in the positioning of patients treated by conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE To evaluate an infrared (IR) marker-based positioning system in patients receiving conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS During 553 treatments, the ability of the IR system to automatically position the isocenter was recorded. Setup errors were measured by means of orthogonal verification films and compared to conventional positioning (using skin drawings and lasers) in 184 treatments. RESULTS The standard deviation of anteroposterior (AP) and lateral setup errors was significantly reduced with IR marker positioning compared to conventional: 2 vs. 4.8 mm AP (p < 0.01) and 1.6 vs. 3.5 mm laterally (p < 0.01). Longitudinally, the difference was not significant (3.5 vs. 3.0 mm). Systematic errors were on the average smaller AP and laterally for the IR method: 4.1 vs. 7.8 mm AP (p = 0.01) and 3.1 vs. 5.6 mm lateral (p = 0.07). Longitudinally, the IR system resulted in somewhat larger systematic errors: 5.0 vs. 3.4 mm for conventional positioning (p = 0.03). The use of an off-line correction protocol, based on the average deviation measured over the first four fractions, allowed virtual elimination of systematic errors. Inability of the IR system to correctly locate the markers, leading to an executional failure, occurred in 21% of 553 fractions. CONCLUSION IR marker-assisted patient positioning significantly improves setup accuracy along the AP and lateral axes. Executional failures need to be reduced.

[1]  A Bel,et al.  High-precision prostate cancer irradiation by clinical application of an offline patient setup verification procedure, using portal imaging. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  D Verellen,et al.  Interactive use of on-line portal imaging in pelvic radiation. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  Douglas L. Jones ICRU Report 50—Prescribing, Recording and Reporting Photon Beam Therapy , 1994 .

[4]  T E Schultheiss,et al.  Optimization of conformal radiation treatment of prostate cancer: report of a dose escalation study. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  L. Gras,et al.  Estimation of the incidence of late bladder and rectum complications after high-dose (70-78 GY) conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer, using dose-volume histograms. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  K L Lam,et al.  Automated localization of the prostate at the time of treatment using implanted radiopaque markers: technical feasibility. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  G T Chen,et al.  A comparison of four patient immobilization devices in the treatment of prostate cancer patients with three dimensional conformal radiotherapy. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  P. Greer,et al.  Comparison of two methods for anterior-posterior isocenter localization in pelvic radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  F. V. Heuvel,et al.  Clinical implementation of an objective computer-aided protocol for intervention in intra-treatment correction using electronic portal imaging , 1995 .

[10]  P. A. Graham,et al.  Patient positioning using detailed three-dimensional surface data for patients undergoing conformal radiation therapy for carcinoma of the prostate: a feasibility study. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  A Pollack,et al.  Complications from radiotherapy dose escalation in prostate cancer: preliminary results of a randomized trial. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  William R. Fair,et al.  DOSE ESCALATION WITH THREE-DIMENSIONAL CONFORMAL RADIATION THERAPY AFFECTS THE OUTCOME IN PROSTATE CANCER , 1998 .

[13]  G Starkschall,et al.  Preliminary results of a randomized radiotherapy dose-escalation study comparing 70 Gy with 78 Gy for prostate cancer. , 2000, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  C. Reddy,et al.  Higher than standard radiation doses (> or =72 Gy) with or without androgen deprivation in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[15]  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.

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

[17]  P. Bergström,et al.  High-precision conformal radiotherapy (HPCRT) of prostate cancer--a new technique for exact positioning of the prostate at the time of treatment. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  G. A. Ferguson,et al.  Statistical analysis in psychology and education , 1960 .

[19]  Icru Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon beam therapy , 1993 .

[20]  P. Kneschaurek,et al.  Daily CT Planning during Boost Irradiation of Prostate Cancer Feasibility and Time Requirements , 2000, Strahlentherapie und Onkologie.

[21]  A. Hanlon,et al.  Late GI and GU complications in the treatment of prostate cancer. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.