Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

A prospective study to assess and quantify the setup errors with cone-beam computed tomography in head-and-neck cancer image-guided radiotherapy treatment


1 Department of Radiation Oncology, Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
2 Department of Surgical Oncology, Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
3 Department of Medical Oncology, Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
4 Department of Clinical Trial, Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India

Correspondence Address:
Tej Prakash Soni,
Department of Radiation Oncology, Bhagwan Mahaveer Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_2006_21

Introduction: This study was done to quantify the translational setup errors with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) treatment of head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients. Aims: The objective was to quantify the setup errors by CBCT. Methodology: One hundred patients of HNC were enrolled from March 2020 to March 2021 for IGRT treatment. Pretreatment kV-CBCT images were obtained at the first 3 days of irradiations, and setup error corrections were done in the mediolateral (ML), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions. Subsequently, a weekly kV-CBCT was repeated for whole duration of radiotherapy for the next 6–7 weeks. Adequacy of planning target volume (PTV) margins was assessed by van Herk's formula. Results: Total 630 CBCT scans of 100 patients were analyzed. Setup errors greater than 3 mm and 5 mm were seen in 11.4% and 0.31% of the patients, respectively. Systematic errors and random errors before correction in ML, SI, and AP directions were 0.10 cm, 0.11 cm, and 0.12 cm and 0.24 cm, 0.20 cm, and 0.21 cm, respectively. Systematic errors and random errors after correction in ML, SI, and AP directions were 0.06 cm, 0.07 cm, and 0.07 cm and 0.13 cm, 0.10 cm, and 0.12 cm, respectively. Conclusion: CBCT at the first 3 fractions and then weekly during radiotherapy is effective to detect the setup errors. An isotropic PTV margin of 5 mm over clinical target volume is safe to account for setup errors, however, in the case of close organ at risk, or with IGRT, a PTV margin of 3 mm can be considered.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Jain V
    -  Soni TP
    -  Singh DK
    -  Patni N
    -  Jakhotia N
    -  Gupta AK
    -  Gupta TC
    -  Singhal H
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed341    
    PDF Downloaded3    

Recommend this journal