Background and purpose: The goal of this prospective study is to validate the use of periodic imaging during treatment with a fiducial marker detection algorithm using radiofrequency transponders for prostate cancer patients undergoing treatment for radiation therapy.
Materials and methods: Ten male patients were enrolled in this study and treated for prostate cancer with implanted electromagnetic monitoring beacons. We evaluated the accuracy and limitations of Intrafraction Motion Review (IMR) by comparing the known locations of the beacons using the electromagnetic monitoring system to the position data reported from IMR images.
Results: A total of 4054 images were taken during treatment. The difference in vector magnitude of the two methods is centered around zero (mean: 0.03 cm, SD: 0.16 cm) and Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC) is 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98, 1) overall. The Euclidean distance between the two methods was close to zero (median: 0.09 cm, IQR: 0.06, 0.14 cm). The difference in distance between any two markers was centered around zero (mean: 0.01 cm, SD: 0.12 cm) and Lin's CCC is 0.97 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.98) overall.
Conclusion: The accuracy of the algorithm for detected markers within the 2D images is comparable to electromagnetic monitoring for fiducial identification when detected. IMR could provide an alternate solution for patients with contraindications of use of an electromagnetic monitoring system and a cost effective alternative to the acquisition of an additional system for patient monitoring, but does not provide data for pre-treatment set-up verification and real-time 3D positioning during treatment.
Keywords: Dual surrogate; Motion management (intrafraction); X-ray projection.
Published by Elsevier B.V.