Comparison of different strategies to use four-dimensional computed tomography in treatment planning for lung cancer patients.

Abstract

CONCLUSIONS

The internal target volume method resulted in a significantly larger PTV than conventional CT scanning. The exhale-gated and mid-position approaches were comparable in terms of PTV. However, mid-position (or mid-ventilation) is easier to use in the clinic because it only affects the planning part of treatment and not the delivery.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Respiratory motion induces systematic and random geometric uncertainties. Their contribution to the clinical target volume (CTV)-to-PTV margins differs for each PTV approach. The uncertainty margins were calculated using a dose-probability-based margin recipe (based on patient statistics). Tumor motion in four-dimensional CT scans was determined using a local rigid registration of the tumor. Geometric uncertainties for interfractional setup errors and tumor baseline variation were included. For PTVGating, the residual motion within a 30% gating (time) window was determined. The concepts were evaluated in terms of required CTV-to-PTV margin and PTV volume for 45 patients.

RESULTS

Over the patient group, the PTVITV was on average larger (+6%) and the PTVGating and PTVMidP smaller (-10%) than the PTVConv using an off-line (bony anatomy) setup correction protocol. With an on-line (soft tissue) protocol the differences in PTV compared with PTVConv were +33%, -4%, and 0, respectively.

PURPOSE

To discuss planning target volumes (PTVs) based on internal target volume (PTVITV), exhale-gated radiotherapy (PTVGating), and a new proposed midposition (PTVMidP; time-weighted mean tumor position) and compare them with the conventional free-breathing CT scan PTV (PTVConv).