Quality assurance of gating response times for surface guided motion management treatment delivery using an electronic portal imaging detector

Gating response times of monitoring system/LINAC combinations for gated radiotherapy treatments are notoriously difficult to measure. This difficulty may reflect why the incorporation of gating response times is not thoroughly considered when creating treatment margins for gated radiotherapy treatments, however ignoring the effect of gating response time could lead to significant treatment inaccuracies. This study shows a methodology which measured gating response times for AlignRT/Varian Truebeam combination which appears to be applicable to any surface guided monitoring/Linac combination as well as those combinations which incorporate extended lag times (>200 ms). Beam on lag time appears to be measurably greater than beam off lag time. Although these gating response times are slower than other gating systems on the market, the advantages surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) could potentially provide for treatment accuracy is discussed as well as demonstrating the lack of guidance regarding SGRT with respect to gated treatments.

[1]  Suresh Senan,et al.  Four-dimensional CT scans for treatment planning in stereotactic radiotherapy for stage I lung cancer. , 2004, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  The management of respiratory motion in radiation oncology report of AAPM Task Group 76. , 2006, Medical physics.

[3]  C. Belka,et al.  Treatment planning and evaluation of gated radiotherapy in left-sided breast cancer patients using the CatalystTM/SentinelTM system for deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) , 2016, Radiation Oncology.

[4]  P. Price,et al.  An effective deep-inspiration breath-hold radiotherapy technique for left-breast cancer: impact of post-mastectomy treatment, nodal coverage, and dose schedule on organs at risk , 2017, Breast cancer.

[5]  Claus Belka,et al.  Characteristics of gated treatment using an optical surface imaging and gating system on an Elekta linac , 2015, Radiation oncology.

[6]  I J Chetty,et al.  Technical Note: Evaluation of the systematic accuracy of a frameless, multiple image modality guided, linear accelerator based stereotactic radiosurgery system. , 2016, Medical physics.

[7]  M. Herk.  Errors and margins in radiotherapy. , 2004 .

[8]  C. Belka,et al.  Evaluation of daily patient positioning for radiotherapy with a commercial 3D surface-imaging system (Catalyst™) , 2016, Radiation Oncology.

[9]  Carri K. Glide‐Hurst,et al.  Evaluation of two synchronized external surrogates for 4D CT sorting , 2013, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[10]  Fang-Fang Yin,et al.  Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. , 2009, Medical physics.

[11]  Darren Kahler,et al.  Characterization of a real-time surface image-guided stereotactic positioning system. , 2010, Medical physics.

[12]  S. Korreman,et al.  Image-guided radiotherapy and motion management in lung cancer. , 2015, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  Wendy L Smith,et al.  Measurement of time delays in gated radiotherapy for realistic respiratory motions. , 2014, Medical physics.

[14]  R. Wiersma,et al.  Technical Note: High temporal resolution characterization of gating response time. , 2016, Medical physics.

[15]  S. Mutic,et al.  Direct comparison between surface imaging and orthogonal radiographic imaging for SRS localization in phantom , 2018, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[16]  Hyejoo Kang,et al.  Spatial and temporal performance of 3D optical surface imaging for real-time head position tracking. , 2013, Medical physics.

[17]  Wendy L. Smith,et al.  Time delays and margins in gated radiotherapy , 2009, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.