Comparative study of setup errors between new and reused thermoplastic masks in irradiated head and neck cancer patients

Nipha Chumsuwan; Lalita Romkedpikun; Janyaporn Thongthae; Tanapan Yousuk

doi:10.46475/asean-jr.v24i2.808

Authors

Nipha Chumsuwan, Ph.D. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.
Lalita Romkedpikun, B.Sc. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand
Janyaporn Thongthae, B.Sc. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.
Tanapan Yousuk, B.Sc. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46475/asean-jr.v24i2.808

Keywords:

Thermoplastic mask, Image-guided Radiotherapy, Head and neck cancer, Setup error

Abstract

Background: The accuracy and precision of patient setup are important in radiotherapy. The thermoplastic mask is used to immobilize head and neck cancer patient. However, the mask is reused for low-income patients. Therefore, the setup error should be evaluated to approve that these patients remain in the exact position during treatment.

Objective: To investigate setup errors with the use of thermoplastic masks in head and neck cancer patients and to compare setup errors of new and reused thermoplastic masks.

Materials and Methods: Eighty patients who underwent volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) for head and neck cancer lesions were retrospectively evaluated. The setup error, population systematic error, and population random error were calculated. Subsequently, setup errors in patients using the new and reused thermoplastic masks were compared.

Results: The population systematic error in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions for new masks was 2.02, 2.27, and 2.13 mm, respectively, and that for reused masks was 2.37, 1.96, and 2.33 mm, respectively. The population random error in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral direction for new masks was 1.46, 1.54, and 1.57 mm, respectively, and that for reused masks was 1.65, 1.63, and 1.87 mm, respectively. The results showed no statistically significant difference supported by p value > 0.05 in the setup error between using the new and reused thermoplastic masks in all directions.

Conclusion: For head and neck radiotherapy, the population setup errors were < 3 mm in all directions. Moreover, thermoplastic masks can be reused in patients with head and neck cancer.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Iyer NG, Tan DS, Tan VK, Wang W, Hwang J, Tan NC, et al. Randomized trial comparing surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with advanced, nonmetastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: 10-year update and subset analysis. Cancer 2015;121:1599-607. doi:10.1002/cncr.29251.

Alterio D, Marvaso G, Ferrari A, Volpe S, Orecchia R, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Modern radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Semin Oncol 2019;46:233-45. doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2019.07.002.

Corvò R. Evidence-based radiation oncology in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Radiother Oncol 2007;85:156-70. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2007.04.002.

Sterzing F, Engenhart-Cabillic R, Flentje M, Debus J. Image-guided radiotherapy: a new dimension in radiation oncology. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011;108:274-80. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2011.0274.

Dawson LA, Jaffray DA. Advances in image-guided radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol 2007 ;25:938-46. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.9515.

Bujold A, Craig T, Jaffray D, Dawson LA. Image-guided radiotherapy: has it influenced patient outcomes? Semin Radiat Oncol 2012;22:50-61. doi: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2011.09.001.

Kang H, Lovelock DM, Yorke ED, Kriminski S, Lee N, Amols HI. Accurate positioning for head and neck cancer patients using 2D and 3D image guidance. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2010;12:3270. doi:10.1120/jacmp.v12i1.3270.

Hong TS, Tomé WA, Chappell RJ, Chinnaiyan P, Mehta MP, Harari PM. The impact of daily setup variations on head-and-neck intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:779-88. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.07.696.

Sharp L, Lewin F, Johansson H, Payne D, Gerhardsson A, Rutqvist LE. Randomized trial on two types of thermoplastic masks for patient immobilization during radiation therapy for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:250-6.

doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.04.047.

Linthout N, Verellen D, Tournel K, Storme G. Six dimensional analysis with daily stereoscopic x-ray imaging of intrafraction patient motion in head and neck treatments using five points fixation masks. Med Phys 2006;33:504-13. doi: 10.1118/1.2165417.

Rotondo RL, Sultanem K, Lavoie I, Skelly J, Raymond L. Comparison of repositioning accuracy of two commercially available immobilization systems for treatment of head-and-neck tumors using simulation computed tomography imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70:1389-96. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.08.035.

Badajena A, Raturi VP, Sirvastava K, Hojo H, Ohyoshi H, Bei Y, et al. Prospective evaluation of the setup errors and its impact on safety margin for cervical cancer pelvic conformal radiotherapy. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2020;25:260-65. doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2020.02.006.

Gupta T, Chopra S, Kadam A, Agarwal JP, Devi PR, Ghosh-Laskar S, et al. Assessment of three-dimensional set-up errors in conventional head and neck radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging device. Radiother Oncol 2007;2:44. doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-2-44.

SPSS Tutorials. SPSS Shapiro-Wilk Test [software] . 2023 [cited 2023 Aug 19]. Available from: https://www.spss-tutorials.com/spss-shapiro-wilk-test-for-normality/

Mann Whitney U Test (Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2023 Aug 19]. Available from: https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mph-modules/bs/bs704_nonparametric/bs704_nonparametric4.html.

Mandair D, Quoc-Anh H, Bets W, Gia J, Roe D, Watchman CJ, et al. Comparison of two thermoplastic immobilization mask systems in daily volumetric image guided radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. Biomed Phys Eng Express 2018;4:055007.

Gilbeau L, Octave-Prignot M, Loncol T, Renard L, Scalliet P, Grégoire V. Comparison of setup accuracy of three different thermoplastic masks for the treatment of brain and head and neck tumors. Radiother Oncol 2001;58:155-62. doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(00)00280-2.

Jeon SH, Kim JH. Positional uncertainties of cervical and upper thoracic spine in stereotactic body radiotherapy with thermoplastic mask immobilization. Radiat Oncol J 2018;36:122-8. doi:10.3857/roj.2017.00591.

Tryggestad E, Christian M, Ford E, Kut C, Le Y, Sanguineti G, et al. Inter- and intrafraction patient positioning uncertainties for intracranial radiotherapy: a study of four frameless, thermoplastic mask-based immobilization strategies using daily cone-beam CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;80:281-90. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.0.

Rosenfelder NA, Corsini L, McNair H, Pennert K, Aitken A, Lamb CM, et al. Comparison of setup accuracy and intrafraction motion using stereotactic frame versus 3-point thermoplastic mask-based immobilization for fractionated cranial image guided radiation therapy. Pract Radiat Oncol 2013;3:171-9. doi:10.1016/j.prro.2012.06.004.