Abstract
Purpose: To maintain accuracy, respiratory surrogate‐based intra‐fraction tumor motion models must be updated periodically. The purpose of this study was to determine how best to time respiratory surrogate‐based tumor motion model updates by comparing a novel statistical process control (SPC) method, based on external measurements alone, to three direct measurement methods in clinical use.Methods: Position datasets recorded during 121 treatment fractions from 61 lung cancer patients were analyzed. Datasets included 26 Hz localizations of three surrogate markers affixed to the torso as well as tumor localizations from intermittent (approximately once per minute) stereoscopic radiographs. Partial‐least‐squares regression models of tumor position from marker motion were created from six concurrent tumor localizations. At each radiographic localization, model accuracy was assessed and model rebuilding with the six most recent tumor localizations was considered. Model updates were timed according to four methods: (1) never, (2) when an SPC metric (either Hotelling's T,2 or the input‐variable‐squared‐prediction‐error) based on surrogate measurements alone exceeded 70,th percentile confidence limits, (3) when model error >3mm, and (4) at each radiographic localization. Results: Radial tumor displacement prediction errors (mean +/− standard deviation) for the four schema described above were 2.4 +/− 1.2 mm, 1.9 +/− 0.9 mm, 1.9 +/− 0.9 mm, and 1.7 +/− 0.9 mm, respectively. The no‐update error was significantly larger than errors of the other methods, which did not differ significantly. Mean update counts were 0, 3.3, 9.2, and 18.5, respectively, over 20 minutes. SPC‐timed updates were 36% and 18% as frequent as error‐based and each‐localization updates. Conclusions: Tumor localization accuracy improved significantly with model updates. Despite comparable tumor localization accuracy amongst the update methods, there were significantly fewer SPC‐timed model updates than error‐timed updates. This study proves the feasibility of timing model updates through analysis of external measurements alone, without direct tumor localization. This work was supported in part by grant # CA124766 from the NIH/NCI and by the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists (ARCS) scholarship.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | Medical Physics |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2011 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Biophysics
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Cite this
TU‐G‐BRC‐08 : Maintaining Tumor Targeting Accuracy in Gating and Tracking Systems for Respiration‐Induced Tumor Motion. / Malinowski, K.; Mcavoy, T.; George, R.; Dieterich, Sonja; D'souza, W.
In: Medical Physics, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2011.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - TU‐G‐BRC‐08
T2 - Maintaining Tumor Targeting Accuracy in Gating and Tracking Systems for Respiration‐Induced Tumor Motion
AU - Malinowski, K.
AU - Mcavoy, T.
AU - George, R.
AU - Dieterich, Sonja
AU - D'souza, W.
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - Purpose: To maintain accuracy, respiratory surrogate‐based intra‐fraction tumor motion models must be updated periodically. The purpose of this study was to determine how best to time respiratory surrogate‐based tumor motion model updates by comparing a novel statistical process control (SPC) method, based on external measurements alone, to three direct measurement methods in clinical use.Methods: Position datasets recorded during 121 treatment fractions from 61 lung cancer patients were analyzed. Datasets included 26 Hz localizations of three surrogate markers affixed to the torso as well as tumor localizations from intermittent (approximately once per minute) stereoscopic radiographs. Partial‐least‐squares regression models of tumor position from marker motion were created from six concurrent tumor localizations. At each radiographic localization, model accuracy was assessed and model rebuilding with the six most recent tumor localizations was considered. Model updates were timed according to four methods: (1) never, (2) when an SPC metric (either Hotelling's T,2 or the input‐variable‐squared‐prediction‐error) based on surrogate measurements alone exceeded 70,th percentile confidence limits, (3) when model error >3mm, and (4) at each radiographic localization. Results: Radial tumor displacement prediction errors (mean +/− standard deviation) for the four schema described above were 2.4 +/− 1.2 mm, 1.9 +/− 0.9 mm, 1.9 +/− 0.9 mm, and 1.7 +/− 0.9 mm, respectively. The no‐update error was significantly larger than errors of the other methods, which did not differ significantly. Mean update counts were 0, 3.3, 9.2, and 18.5, respectively, over 20 minutes. SPC‐timed updates were 36% and 18% as frequent as error‐based and each‐localization updates. Conclusions: Tumor localization accuracy improved significantly with model updates. Despite comparable tumor localization accuracy amongst the update methods, there were significantly fewer SPC‐timed model updates than error‐timed updates. This study proves the feasibility of timing model updates through analysis of external measurements alone, without direct tumor localization. This work was supported in part by grant # CA124766 from the NIH/NCI and by the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists (ARCS) scholarship.
AB - Purpose: To maintain accuracy, respiratory surrogate‐based intra‐fraction tumor motion models must be updated periodically. The purpose of this study was to determine how best to time respiratory surrogate‐based tumor motion model updates by comparing a novel statistical process control (SPC) method, based on external measurements alone, to three direct measurement methods in clinical use.Methods: Position datasets recorded during 121 treatment fractions from 61 lung cancer patients were analyzed. Datasets included 26 Hz localizations of three surrogate markers affixed to the torso as well as tumor localizations from intermittent (approximately once per minute) stereoscopic radiographs. Partial‐least‐squares regression models of tumor position from marker motion were created from six concurrent tumor localizations. At each radiographic localization, model accuracy was assessed and model rebuilding with the six most recent tumor localizations was considered. Model updates were timed according to four methods: (1) never, (2) when an SPC metric (either Hotelling's T,2 or the input‐variable‐squared‐prediction‐error) based on surrogate measurements alone exceeded 70,th percentile confidence limits, (3) when model error >3mm, and (4) at each radiographic localization. Results: Radial tumor displacement prediction errors (mean +/− standard deviation) for the four schema described above were 2.4 +/− 1.2 mm, 1.9 +/− 0.9 mm, 1.9 +/− 0.9 mm, and 1.7 +/− 0.9 mm, respectively. The no‐update error was significantly larger than errors of the other methods, which did not differ significantly. Mean update counts were 0, 3.3, 9.2, and 18.5, respectively, over 20 minutes. SPC‐timed updates were 36% and 18% as frequent as error‐based and each‐localization updates. Conclusions: Tumor localization accuracy improved significantly with model updates. Despite comparable tumor localization accuracy amongst the update methods, there were significantly fewer SPC‐timed model updates than error‐timed updates. This study proves the feasibility of timing model updates through analysis of external measurements alone, without direct tumor localization. This work was supported in part by grant # CA124766 from the NIH/NCI and by the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists (ARCS) scholarship.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029264020&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029264020&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1118/1.3613237
DO - 10.1118/1.3613237
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85029264020
VL - 38
JO - Medical Physics
JF - Medical Physics
SN - 0094-2405
IS - 6
ER -