SU-G-TeP1-01: A Simulation Study to Investigate Maximum Allowable Deformations of Implant Geometry Before Plan Objectives Are Violated in Prostate HDR Brachytherapy

Authors

  • Babier A,

    1. Department of Physics, Engineering Physics and Astronomy, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Joshi C

    1. Department of Physics, Engineering Physics and Astronomy, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    2. Cancer Center of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Purpose:

In prostate HDR brachytherapy dose distributions are highly sensitive to changes in prostate volume and catheter displacements. We investigate the maximum deformations in implant geometry before planning objectives are violated.

Methods:

A typical prostate Ir-192 HDR brachytherapy reference plan was calculated on the Oncentra planning system, which used CT images from a tissue equivalent prostate phantom (CIRS Model 053S) embedded inside a pelvis wax phantom. The prostate was deformed and catheters were displaced in simulations using a code written in MATLAB. For each deformation dose distributions were calculated, based on TG43 methods, using the MATLAB code. The calculations were validated through comparison with Oncentra calculations for the reference plan, and agreed within 0.12%SD and 0.3%SD for dose and volume, respectively. Isotropic prostate volume deformations of up to +34% to −27% relative to its original volume, and longitudinal catheter displacements of 7.5 mm in superior and inferior directions were simulated. Planning objectives were based on American Brachytherapy Society guidelines for prostate and urethra volumes. A plan violated the planning objectives when less than 90% of the prostate volume received the prescribed dose or higher (V100), or the urethral volume receiving 125% of prescribed dose or higher was more than 1 cc (U125). Lastly, the dose homogeneity index (DHI=1-V150/V100) was evaluated; a plan was considered sub-optimal when the DHI fell below 0.62. Results and

Conclusion:

Planning objectives were violated when the prostate expanded by 10.7±0.5% or contracted by 11.0±0.2%; objectives were also violated when catheters were displaced by 4.15±0.15 mm and 3.70±0.15 mm in the superior and inferior directions, respectively. The DHI changes did not affect the plan optimality, except in the case of prostate compression. In general, catheter displacements have a significantly larger impact on plan optimality than prostate volume changes.

Ancillary