Evaluation of the interplay effect when using RapidArc to treat targets moving in the craniocaudal or right-left direction.

PURPOSE We have investigated the dosimetric errors caused by the interplay between the motions of the LINAC and the tumor during the delivery of a volume modulated arc therapy treatment. This includes the development of an IMRT QA technique, applied here to evaluate RapidArc plans of varying complexity. METHODS An IMRT QA technique was developed, which involves taking a movie of the delivered dose (0.2 s frames) using a 2D ion chamber array. Each frame of the movie is then moved according to a respiratory trace and the cumulative dose calculated. The advantage of this approach is that the impact of turning the beam on at different points in the respiratory trace, and of different types of motion, can be evaluated using data from a single irradiation. We evaluated this technique by comparing with the results when we actually moved the phantom during irradiation. RapidArc plans were created to treat a 62 cc spherical tumor in a lung phantom (16 plans) and a 454 cc irregular tumor in an actual patient (five plans). The complexity of each field was controlled by adjusting the MU (312-966 MU). Each plan was delivered to a phantom, and a movie of the delivered dose taken using a 2D ion chamber array. Patient motion was modeled by shifting each dose frame according to a respiratory trace, starting the motion at different phases. The expected dose distribution was calculated by blurring the static dose distribution with the target motion. The dose error due to the interplay effect was then calculated by comparing the delivered dose with the expected dose distribution. Peak-to-peak motion of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 cm in the craniocaudal and right-left directions, with target periods of 3 and 5 s, were evaluated for each plan (252 different target motion/plan combinations). RESULTS The daily dose error due to the interplay effect was less than 10% for 98.4% of all pixels in the target for all plans investigated. The percentage of pixels for which the daily dose error could be larger than 5% increased with increasing plan complexity (field MU), but was less than 15% for all plans if the motion was 1 cm or less. For 2 cm motion, the dose error could be larger than 5% for 40% of pixels, but was less than 5% for more than 80% of pixels for MU < 550, and was less than 10% for 99% of all pixels. The interplay effect was smaller for 3 s periods than for 5 s periods. CONCLUSIONS The interplay between the motions of the LINAC and the target can result in an error in the delivered dose. This effect increases with plan complexity, and with target magnitude and period. It may average out after many fractions.

[1]  J Debus,et al.  Influence of intra-fractional breathing movement in step-and-shoot IMRT. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  J. Bedford,et al.  Commissioning of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  S. Senan,et al.  Rapid delivery of stereotactic radiotherapy for peripheral lung tumors using volumetric intensity-modulated arcs. , 2009, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[4]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  Effects of motion on the total dose distribution. , 2004, Seminars in radiation oncology.

[5]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  An experimental investigation on intra-fractional organ motion effects in lung IMRT treatments. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  Robert Jeraj,et al.  On the impact of longitudinal breathing motion randomness for tomotherapy delivery , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  Karl Otto,et al.  Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. , 2007, Medical physics.

[8]  Suresh Senan,et al.  Volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy for vestibular schwannomas. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  R. Mohan,et al.  Quantifying the effect of intrafraction motion during breast IMRT planning and dose delivery. , 2003, Medical physics.

[10]  P. Keall 4-dimensional computed tomography imaging and treatment planning. , 2004, Seminars in radiation oncology.

[11]  Gregory C Sharp,et al.  Experimental evaluation of a robust optimization method for IMRT of moving targets. , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Suresh Senan,et al.  Volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy vs. conventional IMRT in head-and-neck cancer: a comparative planning and dosimetric study. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  Ross Berbeco,et al.  Management of the interplay effect when using dynamic MLC sequences to treat moving targets. , 2008, Medical physics.

[14]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  Measurement of the interplay effect in lung IMRT treatment using EDR2 films , 2006, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[15]  Jun Duan,et al.  Dosimetric and radiobiological impact of dose fractionation on respiratory motion induced IMRT delivery errors: a volumetric dose measurement study. , 2006, Medical physics.

[16]  Jay Burmeister,et al.  Effect of respiratory motion on the delivery of breast radiotherapy using SMLC intensity modulation. , 2006, Medical physics.

[17]  D A Jaffray,et al.  The effects of intra-fraction organ motion on the delivery of dynamic intensity modulation. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[18]  Robert Jeraj,et al.  Confirmation, refinement, and extension of a study in intrafraction motion interplay with sliding jaw motion. , 2005, Medical physics.

[19]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  Effects of intra-fraction motion on IMRT dose delivery: statistical analysis and simulation. , 2002, Physics in medicine and biology.

[20]  H Paganetti,et al.  Effects of organ motion on IMRT treatments with segments of few monitor units. , 2007, Medical physics.

[21]  S. Webb Motion effects in (intensity modulated) radiation therapy: a review , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.