Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGrimwood, A
dc.contributor.authorMcNair, HA
dc.contributor.authorO'Shea, TP
dc.contributor.authorGilroy, S
dc.contributor.authorThomas, K
dc.contributor.authorBamber, JC
dc.contributor.authorTree, AC
dc.contributor.authorHarris, EJ
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-21T10:04:17Z
dc.date.issued2018-11
dc.identifier.citationInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2018, 102 (4), pp. 912 - 921
dc.identifier.issn0360-3016
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.icr.ac.uk/handle/internal/1897
dc.identifier.eissn1879-355X
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.008
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE:Our purpose was to perform an in vivo validation of ultrasound imaging for intrafraction motion estimation using the Elekta Clarity Autoscan system during prostate radiation therapy. The study was conducted as part of the Clarity-Pro trial (NCT02388308). METHODS AND MATERIALS:Initial locations of intraprostatic fiducial markers were identified from cone beam computed tomography scans. Marker positions were translated according to Clarity intrafraction 3-dimensional prostate motion estimates. The updated locations were projected onto the 2-dimensional electronic portal imager plane. These Clarity-based estimates were compared with the actual portal-imaged 2-dimensional marker positions. Images from 16 patients encompassing 80 fractions were analyzed. To investigate the influence of intraprostatic markers and image quality on ultrasound motion estimation, 3 observers rated image quality, and the marker visibility on ultrasound images was assessed. RESULTS:The median difference between Clarity-defined intrafraction marker locations and portal-imaged marker locations was 0.6 mm (with 95% limit of agreement at 2.5 mm). Markers were identified on ultrasound in only 3 of a possible 240 instances. No linear relationship between image quality and Clarity motion estimation confidence was identified. The difference between Clarity-based motion estimates and electronic portal-imaged marker location was also independent of image quality. Clarity estimation confidence was degraded in a single fraction owing to poor probe placement. CONCLUSIONS:The accuracy of Clarity intrafraction prostate motion estimation is comparable with that of other motion-monitoring systems in radiation therapy. The effect of fiducial markers in the study was deemed negligible as they were rarely visible on ultrasound images compared with intrinsic anatomic features. Clarity motion estimation confidence was robust to variations in image quality and the number of ultrasound-imaged anatomic features; however, it was degraded as a result of poor probe placement.
dc.formatPrint-Electronic
dc.format.extent912 - 921
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.subjectProstate
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectProstatic Neoplasms
dc.subjectUltrasonography
dc.subjectMotion
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectRadiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
dc.titleIn Vivo Validation of Elekta's Clarity Autoscan for Ultrasound-based Intrafraction Motion Estimation of the Prostate During Radiation Therapy.
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-05-11
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.008
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-11
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
dc.relation.isPartOfInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics
pubs.issue4
pubs.notesNo embargo
pubs.organisational-group/ICR
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Imaging for Radiotherapy Adaptation
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Ultrasound & Optical Imaging
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/Royal Marsden Clinical Units
pubs.organisational-group/ICR
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Imaging for Radiotherapy Adaptation
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Radiotherapy and Imaging/Ultrasound & Optical Imaging
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/Royal Marsden Clinical Units
pubs.publication-statusPublished
pubs.volume102
pubs.embargo.termsNo embargo
icr.researchteamImaging for Radiotherapy Adaptationen_US
icr.researchteamUltrasound & Optical Imagingen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorMcNair, Helenen
dc.contributor.icrauthorBamber, Jeffreyen
dc.contributor.icrauthorGrimwood, Alexanderen
dc.contributor.icrauthorTree, Alisonen
dc.contributor.icrauthorHarris, Emmaen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0