Program Information
An Analytical Respiratory Perturbation Model for Lung Motion Prediction
G Li1*, A Yuan1 , J Wei2 , (1) Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, (2) City College of New York, New York, NY
Presentations
TU-F-17A-3 Tuesday 4:30PM - 6:00PM Room: 17APurpose: Breathing irregularity is common, causing unreliable prediction in tumor motion for correlation-based surrogates. Both tidal volume (TV) and breathing pattern (BP=ΔVthorax/TV, where TV=ΔVthorax+ΔVabdomen) affect lung motion in anterior-posterior and superior-inferior directions. We developed a novel respiratory motion perturbation (RMP) model in analytical form to account for changes in TV and BP in motion prediction from simulation to treatment.
Methods: The RMP model is an analytical function of patient-specific anatomic and physiologic parameters. It contains a base-motion trajectory d(x,y,z) derived from a 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) at simulation and a perturbation term Δd(ΔTV,ΔBP) accounting for deviation at treatment from simulation. The perturbation is dependent on tumor-specific location and patient-specific anatomy. Eleven patients with simulation and treatment 4DCT images were used to assess the RMP method in motion prediction from 4DCT1 to 4DCT2, and vice versa. For each patient, ten motion trajectories of corresponding points in the lower lobes were measured in both 4DCTs: one served as the base-motion trajectory and the other as the ground truth for comparison. In total, 220 motion trajectory predictions were assessed. The motion discrepancy between two 4DCTs for each patient served as a control. An established 5D motion model was used for comparison.
Results: The average absolute error of RMP model prediction in superior-inferior direction is 1.6±1.8 mm, similar to 1.7±1.6 mm from the 5D model (p=0.98). Some uncertainty is associated with limited spatial resolution (2.5mm slice thickness) and temporal resolution (10-phases). Non-corrected motion discrepancy between two 4DCTs is 2.6±2.7mm, with the maximum of ±20mm, and correction is necessary (p=0.01).
Conclusion: The analytical motion model predicts lung motion with accuracy similar to the 5D model. The analytical model is based on physical relationships, requires no training, and therefore is potentially more resilient to breathing irregularities. On-going investigation introduces airflow into the RMP model for improvement.
Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: This research is in part supported by NIH (U54CA137788/132378). AY would like to thank MSKCC summer medical student research program supported by National Cancer Institute and hosted by Department of Medical Physics at MSKCC.
Contact Email: