Advertisement

Image-Guided/Adaptive Radiotherapy

Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)

25.8 Summary

Adaptive radiotherapy system is designed to systematically manage treatment feedback, planning, and adjustment in response to temporal variations occurring during the radiotherapy course. A temporal variation process, as well as its subprocess, can be classified as a stationary random process or a nonstationary random process. Image feedback is normally designed based on this classification, and the imaging mode can be selected as radiographic imaging, fluoroscopic imaging, and/or 3D/4D CT imaging, with regard to the feature and frequency of a patient anatomical variation, such as rigid body motion and/ or organ deformation induced by treatment setup,organ filling, patient respiration, and/or dose response. Parameters of a temporal variation process, as well as treatment dose in organs of interest, can be estimated using image observations. The estimations are then used to select the planning/adjustment parameters and the schedules of imaging, delivery, and planning/adjustment. Based on the selected parameters and schedules, 4D adaptive planning/adjustment are performed accordingly.

Adaptive radiotherapy represents a new standard of radiotherapy, where a “pre-designed adaptive treatment strategy” a priori treatment delivery will replace the “pre-designed treatment plan” by considering the efficiency, optima, and also clinical practice and cost.

Keywords

Dose Distribution Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Organ Motion Stationary Random Process Patient Setup 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Antonie Maintz JB, Viergever MA (1998) Medical image analysis, vol 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–38Google Scholar
  2. Astrom KJ, Wittenmark B (1995) Adaptive control, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  3. Bel A et al. (1993) A verification procedure to improve patient setup accuracy using portal images. Radiat Oncol 29:253–260Google Scholar
  4. Birkner M et al. (2003) Adapting inverse planning to patient and organ geometrical variation: algorithm and implementation. Med Phys 30:2822–2831PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bortfeld T et al. (2002) When should systematic patient positioning errors in radiotherapy be corrected? Phys Med Biol 47:N297–N302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brierley JD et al. (1994) The variation of small bowel volume within the pelvis before and during adjuvant radiation for rectal cancer. Radiother Oncol 31:110–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brock KK et al. (2003) Inclusion of organ deformation in dose calculations. Med Phys 30:290–295PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bryson AE Jr, Ho YC (1975) Applied optimal control. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Christensen GE et al. (2001) Image-based dose planning of intracavitary brachytherapy registration of serial-imaging studies using deformable anatomic templates. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 51:227–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davies SC et al. (1994) Ultrasound quantitation of respiratory organ motion in the upper abdomen. Br J Radiol 67:1096–1102PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ford EC et al. (2002) Evaluation of respiratory movement during gated radiotherapy using film and electronic portal imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 52:522–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ford EC et al. (2003) Respiration-correlated spiral CT: a method of measuring respiratory-induced anatomic motion for radiation treatment. Med Phys 30:88–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ghilezan M et al. (2003) Prostate gland motion assessed with cine magnetic resonance imaging (cine-MRI). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:406–417Google Scholar
  14. Halverson KJ et al. (1991) Study of treatment variation in the radiotherapy of head and neck tumors using a fiber-optic on-line radiotherapy imaging system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 21:1327–1336PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Heidi L et al. (2004) A model to predict bladder shapes from changes in bladder and rectal filling. Med Phys 31:1415–1423Google Scholar
  16. Hugo G et al. (2004) A method of portal verification of 4D lung treatment. Proc XIIIIth International Conference on The Use of Computers in Radiotherapy (ICCR), Seoul, KoreaGoogle Scholar
  17. Keller H et al. (2004) Design of adaptive treatment margins for non-negligible measurement uncertainty: application to ultrasound-guided prostate radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol 49:69–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liang J et al. (2003) Minimization of target margin by adapting treatment planning to target respiratory motion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 57:S233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lof J et al. (1998) An adaptive control algorithm for optimization of intensity modulated radiotherapy considering uncertainties in beam profiles, patient setup and internal organ motion. Phys Med Biol 43:1605–1628PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lujan AE et al. (1999) A method for incorporating organ motion due to breathing into 3D dose calculation. Med Phys 26:715–720PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Marks JE, Haus AG (1976) The effect of immobilization on localization error in the radiotherapy of head and neck cancer. Clin Radiol 27:175–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McInerney T, Terzopoulos D (1996) Deformable models in medical image analysis: a survey. Med Image Anal 1:91–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moerland MA et al. (1994) The influence of respiration induced motion of the kidneys on the accuracy of radiotherapy treatment planning: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Radiol Oncol 30:150–154Google Scholar
  24. Nuyttens JJ et al. (2001) The small bowel position during adjuvant radiation therapy for rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 51:1271–1280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Nuyttens J et al. (2002) The variability of the clinical target volume for rectal cancer due to internal organ motion during adjuvant treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 53:497–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pluim JPW et al. (2003) Mutual information based registration of medical images: a survey. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 10:1–21Google Scholar
  27. Roeske JC et al. (1995) Evaluation of changes in the size and location of the prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum during a course of external beam radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 33:1321–1329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ross CS et al. (1990) Analysis of movement of intrathoracic neoplasms using ultrafast computerized tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 18:671–677PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sonke J et al. (2003) Respiration-correlated cone beam CT: obtaining a four-dimensional data set. Med Phys 30:14–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van Herk M et al. (2000) The probability of correct target dosage: dose-population histograms for deriving treatment margins in radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 47:1121–1135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Wiener (1949) Extrapolation, interpolation and smoothing of stationary time series. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  32. Wong E (1983) Introduction to random processes. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Wu C et al. (2002) Re-optimization in adaptive radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 47:3181–3195PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Yan D (2000) On-line adaptive strategy for dose per fraction design. Proc XIIIth International Conference on The Use of Computers in Radiotherapy. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Yan D, Lockman D (2001) Organ/patient geometric variation in external beam radiotherapy and its effects. Med Phys 28:593–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yan D et al. (1995) A new model for “Accept Or Reject” strategies in on-line and off-line treatment evaluation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 31:943–952PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yan D et al. (1999) A model to accumulate the fractionated dose in a deforming organ. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 44:665–675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yan D et al. (2000) An off-line strategy for constructing a patient-specific planning target volume for image guided adaptive radiotherapy of prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 48:289–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Di Yan
    • 1
  1. 1.Clinical Physics Section, Department of Radiation OncologyWilliam Beaumont HospitalRoyal OakUSA

Personalised recommendations