69
An Introduction to Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy PHY778 Lecture April 1, 2009

I M R Tintro

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: I M R Tintro

An Introduction to Intensity Modulated

RadiotherapyPHY778 Lecture

April 1, 2009

Page 2: I M R Tintro

Outline Introduction Process Physics Technological Implementation Sites

Page 3: I M R Tintro

Introduction IMRT

Ability to deliver many beamlets of varying radiation intensity within one treatment field

Beamlet Smallest element to be

modified

Beamlet

Field Width

Fie

ld L

engt

h

Page 4: I M R Tintro

Introduction Inverse treatment planning process

Clinical objectives (goals) specified first Planning system optimizes the plan’s parameters

to satisfy the defined clinical objectives Field’s fluence is optimized for IMRT

Page 5: I M R Tintro

Introduction Optimization yields the set of beamlet

weights (fluence map) Fluence map is converted to deliverable

sequences which depend on technique

Page 6: I M R Tintro

Implementation

Page 7: I M R Tintro

ProcessPatient Selection

↓Simulation

↓Target and Tissue Delineation

↓Treatment Planning/Optimization

↓Plan Evaluation

↓Quality Assurance

↓Treatment Delivery

↓Followup

Page 8: I M R Tintro

Patient Selection Nasopharynx T2N2

Improved salivary outcome No difference in reported xerostomia score

Page 9: I M R Tintro

Patient Selection Prostate Cancer

Dose escalation improves outcome Rectal toxicity is dose dependent

Rx to 76 Gy

95%

50%

Page 10: I M R Tintro

Patient Selection Early stage breast cancer

Less heterogeneity Less moist desquamation Improved late cosmesis

Page 11: I M R Tintro

Patient Selection Lung

Proximity to large critical structures Pulmonary toxicity life-threatenning Dose-volume relationship poorly understood Target motion may be a problem

Page 12: I M R Tintro

Simulation Tumour localization is critical

Conformal dose distribution Minimize expansion of PTV into OAR

Page 13: I M R Tintro

Simulation Patient immobilization depends on site

Masks Chest board Characterize device

Page 14: I M R Tintro

Simulation Inter-fraction motion

Implanted gold seed fiducials Surgical clips Bony anatomy Calcifications

Page 15: I M R Tintro

Simulation Intra-fraction motion

Bladder/bowel preparation Compression Gated therapy

Page 16: I M R Tintro

Simulation Fuse images from various modalities

Page 17: I M R Tintro

Contouring Evidence-based Gross disease Potential routes of local and regional spread of

disease Patterns of failure Principles of ICRU 50/62 Normal tissue tolerances/avoidance criteria Radiobiology of dose-fraction-time

Page 18: I M R Tintro

Target Delineation ICRU 50, 62

(A) GTV+CTV(B) (A) + IM (organ

motion)(C) (B) + SM (setup

uncertainty)(D) SM + IMPTV = non-linear

combination of SM + IM

Page 19: I M R Tintro

PTV versus OAR

Conflicts can arise

Page 20: I M R Tintro

Contouring Nodal atlas (normal anatomy)

Page 21: I M R Tintro

Contouring example

Page 22: I M R Tintro

Planning Number and placement of beams Objectives Specify dose Concurrent boost

Page 23: I M R Tintro

Number and Placement of beams Standard beam arrangements usually used Usually 5-9 fields sufficient Some planning systems capable of Beam

Angle Optimization prior to Fluence map optimization

Page 24: I M R Tintro

Planning Number and placement of beams

1 9

8

7

65

4

3

2 1

2

34 5

6

7

Page 25: I M R Tintro

Beam number and placement Considerations:

Complexity of the target shape Proximity to critical organs Previous RT? Central or lateralized target volume Equally spaced Gantry angles that best cover the target and miss

critical structures Ideally no opposing beams (some exceptions)

Page 26: I M R Tintro

Parallel Opposed Fields

During optimization, rays (beamlets) 2 & 2’ compete with each other

Not possible to optimize dose to one point without changing dose to the other points

Rays do not compete with each other

All rays are useable Possible to optimize dose to

all points A, B, and C individually

Page 27: I M R Tintro

Beam number and placement Use of non-coplanar fields may help to

significantly decrease the dose to critical structures

Page 28: I M R Tintro

Collimator Rotation Minimize leakage Maximize coverage

Page 29: I M R Tintro

Objectives Allows definition of clinical goals Each objective has a priority assigned Objectives may be base on:

1. dose

2. clinical knowledge

3. equivalent uniform dose (EUD)

4. TCP or NTCP (estimate local control or toxicity)

Page 30: I M R Tintro

Objectives Minimum dose objective

Penalty if any point in a TARGET structure receives less than a specified dose

Maximum dose objective Penalty if any point in an OAR structure receives

more than a specified dose

Page 31: I M R Tintro

Objectives- Max and Min dose

Maximum = 50 Gy

Minimum = 70 Gy

Page 32: I M R Tintro

Objectives – Uniform dose

Maximum Dose

Maximum = 70 Gy

Minimum = 70 Gy

Page 33: I M R Tintro

Objectives – Dose volume objectives

Maximum Dose

> 70 Gy to 90% Target

< 60 Gy to 10% OAR

Page 34: I M R Tintro

Objectives – Equivalent Uniform Dose

aN

i

aidN

/1

1

1EUD

Region EUD a

Target 71 -8.0

Parotid 30 5.0

Brainstem 49 4.6

Cord 43 7.4

Page 35: I M R Tintro

Physics Objective Functions:

Page 36: I M R Tintro

Physics Minimize objective function using gradient

based methods:

I is a vector of beamlet weights If Mold = 1, steepest descent algorithm If Mold = Hold, Newton’s method where Hold is

the inverse of the Hessian matrix

Page 37: I M R Tintro

Physics – optimization algorithms Simulated annealing

Attempts to find global minimum The probability for accepting a trial configuration is

controlled by the temperature and is given by:

where ΔF is the increase of the objective function and T is the system temperature.

The temperature is gradually lowered according to an empirically chosen cooling schedule.

Page 38: I M R Tintro

Physics – optimization algorithms Iterative algorithms most common Simulated annealing and genetic algorithms

too computationally intensive Filtered back-projection and direct Fourier

transformation methods have difficulty with handling negative fluence and non-invariant kernels.

Page 39: I M R Tintro

Physics – Optimization in Eclipse All contours are sampled by point clouds

Page 40: I M R Tintro

Physics - optimization in Eclipse Dose contribution from

beamlet to each cloud point is established

In the process of optimization, “weight” of each beamlet is changed

Page 41: I M R Tintro

Physics - optimization in Eclipse Multi-Resolution Dose Calculation (MRDC)

Algorithm used for a fast dose estimation during an optimization phase

Objective (penalty) function combines all objectives into a single function

Page 42: I M R Tintro

Physics - optimization in Eclipse Goal is to minimize a

value of objective function Total penalty (black

curve) always goes down

Objectives may be changed on the fly Creates a discontinuity

in the objective function

Page 43: I M R Tintro

Physics - optimization in Eclipse Dose volume optimizer (DVO) handles

optimization of fluence Optimized fluence passed on to the leaf motion

calculator (LMC) Delivery method chosen:

Multiple static fields Sliding window

AAA algorithm used for final dose calculation LMC determines MUs

Page 44: I M R Tintro

Physics - optimization in Pinnacle First generation

Page 45: I M R Tintro

Physics - optimization in Pinnacle Direct Machine Parameter Optimization (DMPO)

Page 46: I M R Tintro

IMRT - optimization in practice Overlapping structures

with competing dose objectives Assign overlap region to

new structure Assign distinct dose

objective to each structure

Page 47: I M R Tintro

IMRT - optimization in practice PTV ring

Represents margin around CTV

95% < PTV ring dose < 100%

Outer ring Represents normal tissue

surrounding PTV Outer ring dose < 95% Improves conformity of

distribution

Page 48: I M R Tintro

IMRT - optimization in practice Treat aggressively/Spare lightly

If optimization problem is constructed so that it is physically possible to meet objectives, then a solution will be found.

PTV coverage will be achieved and solution will not be sensitive to objective weights.

If it is not physically possible to meet objectives, solution will be very sensitive to choice of objective weights and typically clinically unacceptable

IMRT plan not optimized but designed IMRT planning often a trial-and-error process.

Page 49: I M R Tintro

IMRT - optimization in practice Must set minimum segment area

Dosimetry of small irregularly shaped segments is uncertain, particularly in the presence of heterogeneities.

Must limit minimum segment MUs Some LINACS have limited dose linearity down

to small MUs (not Varian due to gridded gun). Must limit maximum number of segments

Plan must deliver efficiently.

Page 50: I M R Tintro

IMRT – radiation protection Increased MUs needed for IMRT

Typical values for 200 cGy fraction, : 700 MU for step-and-shoot 1200 MU for sliding window

Higher beam energy lowers peripheral dose but >10 MV neutron generation important

Secondary cancer risk is potentially greater

Page 51: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC technical details Carriage (bank)

Part of MLC which carries leaves

Leaf Part of MLC used as

final beam limiting device

Page 52: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC technical details MLC leaf design

Page 53: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC technical details Tongue and groove effect

Page 54: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC technical details Inter-digitation

Page 55: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC transmission Amount of radiation

transmitted through the leaves fully blocking the beam

Consists of : Inter-leaf

transmission Intra-leaf

transmission

Page 56: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC dosimetric leaf gap Accounts for extra transmission through the

rounded leaf edge Modeled as an apparent gap between two closed

straight edge leaves

Page 57: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC minimum dose dynamic leaf gap

Minimal tip to tip distance which needs to be maintained for any moving leaf pair in the dMLC mode

Page 58: I M R Tintro

IMRT – MLC leaf speed Speed of the leaf at the level of isocenter.

Maximum limit for Varian MLC is 3cm/ s. Model 2.5 cm/s in LMC. Allows for adjustment of any leaf during

treatment.

Page 59: I M R Tintro

IMRT – Dose/Arc dynamic leaf tolerance

Maximum allowed difference between the planned and actual leaf positions

Page 60: I M R Tintro

IMRT – Jaw over travel The maximum distance the collimator jaw

can extend over the central axis.

Page 61: I M R Tintro

IMRT – Leaf over travel The maximum distance an MLC leaf can

extend over the central axis

Page 62: I M R Tintro

IMRT – Leaf Positions Fully retracted leaf is

in the basic position within the carriage. The leaf is fully inside the carriage, at the “end” position.

Extended leaf is extended from the carriage

Page 63: I M R Tintro

IMRT – Leaf Span Maximum distance

from a tip of the most retracted leaf to the tip of the most extended leaf.

Limits a maximum field size, which can be delivered without repositioning of a carriage.

Page 64: I M R Tintro

IMRT – Multiple carriage delivery Used for large

modulated fields Carriages cannot move

while the beam is on Treatment field split into

subfields with a width smaller than the leaf span

Page 65: I M R Tintro

Electronic compensation Replacement of physical compensator by

means of dynamic MLC delivery. Forward planned IMRT. Electronic Compensator (planar) Irregular Surface Compensator (curved surface) Field in Field Compensator (segmented fields)

Page 66: I M R Tintro

Complete Irradiated Area Outline (CIAO) For portal verification

of intensity modulated field

Based on threshold fluence

Page 67: I M R Tintro

IMRT QA – Ion chamber array

Reliable 2%/2mm digital evaluation

Real-time analysis 4 patients in 30

minutes

Page 68: I M R Tintro

IMRT QA

Ion-chamber array

Page 69: I M R Tintro

IMRT QA – Day 0

Pinnacle Fluence Map EPID image