1. Is multileaf collimator tracking or gating a better intrafraction motion adaptation strategy? An analysis of the TROG 15.01 stereotactic prostate ablative radiotherapy with KIM (SPARK) trial
- Author
-
Andrew Kneebone, Sandra Turner, George Hruby, Thomas Eade, Jeremy T. Booth, Keen Hun Tai, Amy Hayden, Paul J. Keall, Ricky O'Brien, Doan Trang Nguyen, Shankar Siva, Per Rugaard Poulsen, Peter B. Greer, Jarad Martin, Trevor Moodie, Nicholas Hardcastle, and Emily A. Hewson
- Subjects
Male ,image-guided radiation therapy ,0299 Other Physical Sciences, 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Gating ,Radiosurgery ,SABR volatility model ,Multileaf collimator tracking ,0203 Classical Physics ,030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging ,Motion ,03 medical and health sciences ,Prostate cancer ,0302 clinical medicine ,motion management ,Prostate ,Ablative case ,Humans ,Medicine ,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging ,Oncology & Carcinogenesis ,Image-guided radiation therapy ,Real-time image-guided radiotherapy ,business.industry ,Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted ,Prostatic Neoplasms ,Prostate stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) ,Hematology ,medicine.disease ,Multileaf collimator ,Radiation therapy ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Oncology ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Kilovoltage Intrafraction Monitoring (KIM) ,Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated ,business ,Nuclear medicine - Abstract
PurposeStereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) has recently emerged as a favourable treatment option for prostate cancer patients. With higher doses delivered over fewer fractions, motion adaptation is a requirement for accurate delivery of SABR. This study compared the efficacy of multileaf collimator (MLC) tracking vs. gating as a real-time motion adaptation strategy for prostate SABR patients enrolled in a clinical trial.MethodsForty-four prostate cancer patients treated over five fractions in the TROG 15.01 SPARK trial were analysed in this study. Forty-nine fractions were treated using MLC tracking and 166 fractions were treated using beam gating and couch shifts. A time-resolved motion-encoded dose reconstruction method was used to evaluate the dose delivered using each motion adaptation strategy and compared to an estimation of what would have been delivered with no motion adaptation strategy implemented.ResultsMLC tracking and gating both delivered doses closer to the plan compared to when no motion adaptation strategy was used. Differences between MLC tracking and gating were small with differences in the mean discrepancy from the plan of -0.3% (CTV D98%), 1.4% (CTV D2%), 0.4% (PTV D95%), 0.2% (rectum V30Gy) and 0.0% (bladder V30Gy). On average, 0.5 couch shifts were required per gated fractions with a mean interruption duration of 1.8 ± 2.6 min per fraction treated using gating.ConclusionBoth MLC tracking and gating were effective strategies at improving the accuracy of the dose delivered to the target and organs at risk. While dosimetric performance was comparable, gating resulted in interruptions to treatment.Clinical trial registration numberNCT02397317.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF