% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Qubala:286386,
author = {A. Qubala and J. Shafee and T. Tessonnier and J. Horn and
M. Winter and J. Naumann and O. Jäkel$^*$},
title = {{C}haracteristics of breathing-adapted gating using surface
guidance for use in particle therapy: {A} phantom-based
end-to-end test from {CT} simulation to dose delivery.},
journal = {Journal of applied clinical medical physics},
volume = {25},
number = {1},
issn = {1526-9914},
address = {Reston, Va.},
publisher = {ACMP},
reportid = {DKFZ-2023-02789},
pages = {e14249},
year = {2024},
note = {#LA:E040# / 2024 Jan;25(1):e14249},
abstract = {To account for intra-fractional tumor motion during dose
delivery in radiotherapy, various treatment strategies are
clinically implemented such as breathing-adapted gating and
irradiating the tumor during specific breathing phases. In
this work, we present a comprehensive phantom-based
end-to-end test of breathing-adapted gating utilizing
surface guidance for use in particle therapy. A commercial
dynamic thorax phantom was used to reproduce regular and
irregular breathing patterns recorded by the GateRT
respiratory monitoring system. The amplitudes and periods of
recorded breathing patterns were analysed and compared to
planned patterns (ground-truth). In addition, the mean
absolute deviations (MAD) and Pearson correlation
coefficients (PCC) between the measurements and ground-truth
were assessed. Measurements of gated and non-gated
irradiations were also analysed with respect to dosimetry
and geometry, and compared to treatment planning system
(TPS). Further, the latency time of beam on/off was
evaluated. Compared to the ground-truth, measurements
performed with GateRT showed amplitude differences between
0.03 ± 0.02 mm and 0.26 ± 0.03 mm for regular and
irregular breathing patterns, whilst periods of both
breathing patterns ranged with a standard deviation between
10 and 190 ms. Furthermore, the GateRT software precisely
acquired breathing patterns with a maximum MAD of 0.30 ±
0.23 mm. The PCC constantly ranged between 0.998 and 1.000.
Comparisons between TPS and measured dose profiles indicated
absolute mean dose deviations within institutional
tolerances of $±5\%.$ Geometrical beam characteristics also
varied within our institutional tolerances of 1.5 mm. The
overall time delays were <60 ms and thus within both
recommended tolerances published by ESTRO and AAPM of 200
and 100 ms, respectively. In this study, a non-invasive
optical surface-guided workflow including image acquisition,
treatment planning, patient positioning and gated
irradiation at an ion-beam gantry was investigated, and
shown to be clinically viable. Based on phantom
measurements, our results show a clinically-appropriate
spatial, temporal, and dosimetric accuracy when using
surface guidance in the clinical setting, and the results
comply with international and institutional guidelines and
tolerances.},
keywords = {breathing-adapted gating (Other) / commissioning (Other) /
end-to-end testing (Other) / ion beam therapy (Other) /
particle therapy (Other) / surface-guided radiotherapy
(Other)},
cin = {E040},
ddc = {530},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)E040-20160331},
pnm = {315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:38128056},
doi = {10.1002/acm2.14249},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/286386},
}