Four‐dimensional computerized tomography (4DCT) is required for stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) of mobile targets to account for tumor motion during treatment planning and delivery. In this study, we report on the impact of an image review quality assurance process performed prior to treatment planning by medical physicists for 4DCT scans used for SABR treatment. Reviews were performed of 211 4DCT scans (193 patients) over a 3‐yr period (October 2014 to October 2017). Treatment sites included lung (n = 168), kidney/adrenal/adrenal gland (n = 12), rib (n = 4), mediastinum (n = 10), liver (n = 2), T‐spine (n = 1), and other abdominal sites (n = 14). It was found that in 23% (n = 49) of cases patient management was altered due to the review process. The most frequent intervention involved patient‐specific contouring advice (n = 35 cases, 17%) including adjustment of internal target volume (ITV) margins. In 13 cases (6%) a rescan was requested due to extensive motion artifact rendering the scan inadequate for SABR treatment planning. 4DCT review by medical physicists was found to be an effective method to improve plan quality for SABR.

No abstract

A system for stabilising and monitoring eye movements for linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy associated with the mobile eye, the Eye Tracker, was developed. Whilst the Eye Tracker design is based on a previously reported system, the purpose of this study was to confirm that the modified version can be used with clinically acceptable treatment margins. We report the estimates of the margin required to account for inter- and intra-fraction eye motion based on data from 12 consecutive patients treated with the Eye Tracker system in place. Patients were immobilised in a head and neck mask and were required to fixate on a light source. A camera system monitored eye movements relative to CT simulation baseline measurements. The Exactrac system (Brainlab, Feldkirchen, Germany) combined with the Varian TrueBeamSTx (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) confirmed pre- and intra-treatment setup of the head position. Displacement/rotation of the image of the pupil/iris was determined in the lateral and superior-inferior directions using a video display. A standard margin equation was applied to estimate the margin required to account for inter- and intra-fraction eye movement. The average displacement in both directions was 0.1-0.2 mm (0.36 mm SD). All patients maintained a position within 1 mm of the intended position during treatment. Based on a Bayesian estimation of the systematic and treatment errors, accounting for displacements in two-planes and a standard deviation of the penumbral width of 1.3 mm, the estimated margins to achieve coverage of the GTV with the 95% isodose in 90% of patients was found to be less than 1 mm. Small random and systematic uncertainties due to inter- and intra-fraction movement of the eye were achieved with the Eye Tracker. Whilst the estimated margins are small (<1 mm) they need to be considered in addition to contouring and treatment delivery uncertainties.