Evaluation of the precision of portal‐image‐guided head‐and‐neck localization: An intra‐ and interobserver study

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that, for some patients, image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head-and-neck cancer patients may maintain target dose coverage and critical organ (e.g., parotids) dose closer to the planned doses than setup using lasers alone. We investigated inter- and intraobserver uncertainties in patient setup in head-and-neck cancer patients. Twenty-two sets of orthogonal digital portal images (from five patients) were selected from images used for daily localization of head-and-neck patients treated with IMRT. To evaluate interobserver variations, five radiation therapists compared the portal images with the plan digitally reconstructed radiographs and reported shifts for the isocenter (approximately C2) and for a supraclavicular reference point. One therapist repeated the procedure a month later to evaluate intraobserver variations. The procedure was then repeated with teams of two therapists. The frequencies for which agreement between the shift reported by the observer and the daily mean shift (average of all observers for a given image set) were less than 1.5 and 2.5 mm were calculated. Standard errors of measurement for the intra- and interobserver uncertainty (SEMintra and SEMinter) for the individual and teams were calculated. The data showed that there was very little difference between individual therapists and teams. At isocenter, 80%-90% of all reported shifts agreed with the daily average within 1.5 mm, showing consistency in the ways both individuals and teams interpret the images (SEMinter approximately 1 mm). This dropped to 65% for the supraclavicular point (SEMinter approximately 1.5 mm). Uncertainties increased for larger setup errors. In conclusion, image-guided patient positioning allows head-and-neck patients to be controlled within 3-4 mm. This is similar to the setup uncertainties found for most head-and-neck patients, but may provide some improvement for the subset of patients with larger setup uncertainties.

Voluntary breath-holding for breast cancer radiotherapy is consistent and stable

“…Given that interobserver and intraobserver errors from electronic portal image matching have been estimated as approximately 1 mm, these results demonstrate that multiple VBHs are stable and reproducible. 17,18 Brouwers et al 15 published a comprehensive set of data from an in vivo dosimetry system using EPI for 15 FB and 28 VBH cases. Our in vivo dosimetry data are of similar magnitude.…”

Normal tissue doses from MV image‐guided radiation therapy (IGRT) using orthogonal MV and MV‐CBCT

“…On‐line mega‐voltage (MV) imaging has been successfully used for daily image‐guided patient setup for many years, including orthogonal imaging, helical computed tomography (CT), and cone‐beam CT (CBCT) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Since the early 2000s, however, there has been a significant increase in the use of kilo‐voltage imaging for in‐room patient setup, including orthogonal imaging, helical CT (CT‐on‐rails), and CBCT 6.…”

Method comparison of automated matching software-assisted cone-beam CT and stereoscopic kilovoltage x-ray positional verification image-guided radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: a prospective analysis

“…A host of planar and volumetric image-guidance platforms are available commercially, some with distinctive proprietary features (Zeidan et al 2007, Pouliot et al 2006, Meyer et al 2007, McBain et al 2006, Letourneau et al 2005, Jaffray et al 2002, Godfrey et al 2006, Court et al 2007). To date, the vast majority of target localization series have focused upon prostatic cancer (Fuss et al 2003, Lohr et al 2007, Scarbrough et al 2006).…”