[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
IJRR Information::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Subscription::
News & Events::
Web Mail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
ISSN
Hard Copy 2322-3243
Online 2345-4229
..
Online Submission
Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.
..

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE

:: Volume 24, Issue 3 (7-2026) ::
Int J Radiat Res 2026, 24(3): 685-692 Back to browse issues page
A novel averaging method for reducing systematic and random errors in breast cancer radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging device
M. Khosravi , A. Shakeri , M. Khosroabadi , S.M. Hosseini , G. Mehri-Kakavand Mehri-Kakavand , M. Pursamimi , W. Parwaie , M. Shafiee , M. Ghorbani , M. Tavakoli
Department of Anatomy and Medical Imaging, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand , mohamadpursamimi65@gmail.com
Abstract:   (429 Views)
Background: The aim of this study is to introduce a novel averaging method to reduce systematic and random errors using electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in breast cancer radiotherapy. Materials and methods: Data from 78 female breast cancer patients, treated with photons beams of an Elekta Synergy linac were retrospectively analyzed. A novel five-session EPID averaging method (Optimized Five Session Averaging Method) was compared with a traditional three-session approach (Three Session Averaging Method) and a no-averaging approach (No Averaging Method). Statistical analysis was performed to compare the accuracy of the three methods. Results: The Optimized Five-Session Averaging Method demonstrated superior accuracy in minimizing individual mean set up errors compared to the Three-Session Averaging Method. Specifically, in the x direction, 71.80 of patients in the Optimized Five-Session Averaging Method had errors closer to zero, as opposed to 28.21 in the 2 Three-Session Averaging Method. In the y direction, 67.94 and 32.05 were closer to zero in the Optimized Five-Session Averaging Method and Three-Session Averaging Method, respectively. In the z direction, 70.51 and 29.49 achieved this in the Optimized Five-Session Averaging Method and Three-Session Averaging Method. Statistical analysis confirmed the significant difference between the two methods (p=0.00). Conclusion: The novel averaging method effectively enhanced the accuracy and reduced errors in breast cancer radiotherapy compared to the two conventional methods. This study provides a significant advancement in reducing patient set up error in breast cancer radiotherapy and highlights the potential of the Optimized Five-Session Averaging Method for optimization in diverse clinical contexts.
Keywords: Breast cancer, radiotherapy, IGRT, setup error, EPID.
Full-Text [PDF 1262 kb]   (142 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
References
1. Supakalin N, Pesee M, Thamronganantasakul K, Promsensa K, et al. (2018) Comparision of different radiotherapy planning techniques for breast cancer after breast conserving surgery. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 19(10): 2929-34.
2. Costa B, Amorim I, Gärtner F, Vale N (2020) Understanding breast cancer: From conventional therapies to repurposed drugs. Eur J Pharm Sci, 151: 105401. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejps.2020.105401]
3. Akram M, Iqbal M, Daniyal M, Khan AU (2017) Awareness and current knowledge of breast cancer. Biol Res, 50(1): 33. [DOI:10.1186/s40659-017-0140-9]
4. Pursamimi M, Ghorbani M, Parwaie W, Shakeri A, Meigooni AS (2022) Evaluation of field-in-field, three-field, and four-field techniques for treatment planning of radiotherapy of pancreatic cancer. J Cancer Res Ther, 18(1): 190-9. [DOI:10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_181_20]
5. Guo J, Zhou L, Zeng H (2024) Research on the correction method for radiotherapy verification plans based on displaced electronic portal imaging device. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, e14401. [DOI:10.1002/acm2.14401]
6. Toossi MT, Ghorbani M, Rostami A, Khosroabadi M, et al. (2016) Comparison of the hypothetical (57)Co brachytherapy source with the (192)Ir source. Contemp Oncol (Pozn), 20(4): 327-34. [DOI:10.5114/wo.2016.61854]
7. Mehri-Kakavand G, Pursamimi M, Parwaie W, Ghorbani M, et al. (2022) Assessment of field-in-field, 3-field, and 4-field treatment planning methods for radiotherapy of gastro-esophageal junction cancer. J Biomed Phys Engin, 12(5): 439-454. [DOI:10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2206-1500]
8. Leszczyńska P, Leszczyński W, Wydmański J, Kinga D, et al. (2017) Delineation of margins for the planning target volume (PTV) for image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) of gastric cancer based on intrafraction motion. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 18(1): 37-41.
9. Goyal S and Kataria T (2014) Image guidance in radiation therapy: techniques and applications. Radiol Res Pract, 2014(1): 705604. [DOI:10.1155/2014/705604]
10. Soleymanifard S, Toossi MT, Khosroabadi M, Noghreiyan AV, et al. (2014) Assessment of skin dose modification caused by application of immobilizing cast in head and neck radiotherapy. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med, 37(3): 535-40. [DOI:10.1007/s13246-014-0283-8]
11. Cubillos Mesías M, Boda-Heggemann J, Thoelking J, Lohr F, et al. (2016) Quantification and assessment of interfraction setup errors based on cone beam CT and determination of safety margins for radiotherapy. PLoS One, 11(3): e0150326. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0150326]
12. Gupta T, Chopra S, Kadam A, Agarwal JP, et al. (2007) Assessment of three-dimensional set-up errors in conventional head and neck radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging device. Radiat Oncol, 2: 44. [DOI:10.1186/1748-717X-2-44]
13. Van Elmpt W, McDermott L, Nijsten S, Wendling M, et al. (2008) A literature review of electronic portal imaging for radiotherapy dosimetry. Radiother Oncol, 88(3): 289-309. [DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2008.07.008]
14. Ghaempanah H, Tavakoli M, Deevband MR, Alvar AA, et al. (2022) Electronic portal image enhancement based on nonuniformity correction in wavelet domain. Medical Physics, 49(7): 4599-612. [DOI:10.1002/mp.15672]
15. Herman MG, Kruse JJ, Hagness CR (2000) Guide to clinical use of electronic portal imaging. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 1(2): 38-57. [DOI:10.1120/jacmp.v1i2.2645]
16. Yamada M, Ohkubo M, Kayugawa A, Yamada H, et al. (2012) Electronic portal imaging device (EPID) portal image filtering for simplifying registration on radiation therapy. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi, 68(5): 593-601. [DOI:10.6009/jjrt.2012_JSRT_68.5.593]
17. Noghreiyan VV, Naseri S, Momennezhad M (2020) Utilization of electronic portal imaging device (EPID) for setup verification and determination of setup margin in head and neck radiation therapy. Iran J Med Phys, 17(3): 197-204.
18. Costin I-C and Marcu LG (2022) Factors impacting on patient setup analysis and error management during breast cancer radiotherapy. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology, 178: 103798. [DOI:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103798]
19. Deantonio L, Masini L, Loi G, Gambaro G, et al. (2011) Detection of setup uncertainties with 3D surface registration system for conformal radiotherapy of breast cancer. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 16(3): 77-81. [DOI:10.1016/j.rpor.2011.02.003]
20. Prabhakar R, Rath GK, Julka PK, Ganesh T, et al. (2008) Simulation of dose to surrounding normal structures in tangential breast radiotherapy due to setup error. Med Dosim, 33(1): 81-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.meddos.2007.03.003]
21. Dong J, Li Z, Huang W, Kong F, et al. (2025) Preliminary application of EPID three-dimensional dose reconstruction in in-vivo dose verification of breast cancer intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Phys Med, 129: 104884. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104884]
22. Topolnjak R, Sonke JJ, Nijkamp J, Rasch C, et al. (2010) Breast patient setup error assessment: comparison of electronic portal image devices and cone-beam computed tomography matching results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 78(4): 1235-43. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.12.021]
23. Zhang X, Dai G, Zhong R, Zhou L, et al. (2021) Radiomics analysis of EPID measurements for patient positioning error detection in thyroid associated ophthalmopathy radiotherapy. Phys Med, 90: 1-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.08.014]
24. Kanakavelu N and Samuel JJ (2016) Determination of patient set-up error and optimal treatment margin for intensity modulated radiotherapy using image guidance system. J BUON, 21(2): 505-11. [DOI:10.1016/j.rpor.2015.11.005]
25. Cao X, Liu M, Zhai F, Li N, et al. (2021) The effects of set-up errors on dose distribution in radiotherapy treatment for lung cancer. Int J Radiat Res, 19(3): 515-20. [DOI:10.52547/ijrr.19.3.515]
26. Mahdavi S, Gharehbagh EJ, Mofid B, Jafari A, Nikoofar A (2017) Accuracy of the dose delivery in prostate cancer patients-using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Int J Radiat Res, 15(1): 39-47.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Khosravi M, Shakeri A, Khosroabadi M, Hosseini S, Mehri-Kakavand G M, Pursamimi M, et al . A novel averaging method for reducing systematic and random errors in breast cancer radiotherapy using electronic portal imaging device. Int J Radiat Res 2026; 24 (3) :685-692
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-7209-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 24, Issue 3 (7-2026) Back to browse issues page
International Journal of Radiation Research
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.12 seconds with 50 queries by YEKTAWEB 4741