Program Information
Deformable Image Registration and Deformed Dose Composite for Volumetric Evaluation of Multimodal Gynecological Cancer Treatments
D Albani1*, J Cantley2 , T Sherertz1 , R Ellis1 , K Herrmann3 , T Podder1 , (1) Seidman Cancer Center University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, (2) Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (3) University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
Presentations
SU-E-T-237 (Sunday, July 12, 2015) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose: Radiotherapy plans for patients with cervical cancer treated with EBRT followed by HDR brachytherapy are optimized by constraining dose to organs at risk (OARs). Risk of treatment related toxicities is estimated based on the dose received to the hottest 2cc (D2cc) of the bladder, bowel, rectum, and sigmoid. To account for intrafractional variation in OAR volume and positioning, a dose deformation method is proposed for more accurate evaluation of dose distribution for these patients.
Methods: Radiotherapy plans from five patients who received 50.4Gy pelvic EBRT followed by 30Gy in five fractions of HDR brachytherapy, using split-ring and tandem applicators, were retrospectively evaluated using MIM Software version 6.0. Dose accumulation workflows were used for initial deformation of EBRT and HDR planning CTs onto a common HDR planning CT. The Reg Refine tool was applied with user-specified local alignments to refine the deformation. Doses from the deformed images were transferred to the common planning CT. Deformed doses were scaled to the EQD2, following the linear-quadratic BED model (considered α/β ratio for tumor as 10, and 3 for rest of the tissues), and then combined to create the dose composite. MIM composite doses were compared to the clinically-reported plan assessments based upon the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) guidelines for cervical HDR brachytherapy treatment.
Results: Bladder D2cc exhibited significant reduction (-11.4%±3.85%, p< 0.02) when evaluated using MIM deformable dose composition. Differences observed for bowel, rectum, and sigmoid D2cc were not significant (-0.58±7.37%, -4.13%±13.7%, and 8.58%±4.71%, respectively and p>0.05 for all) relative to the calculated values used clinically.
Conclusion: Application of deformable dose composite techniques may lead to more accurate total dose reporting and can allow for elevated dose to target structures with the assurance of not exceeding dose to OARs. Further study into deformable dose composition and correlation with clinical outcomes is warranted.
Contact Email: