Quality assurance of the jaws only-intensity modulated radiation therapy plans for head-and-neck cancer

Enhancing patient positioning accuracy: evaluating daily cone beam computed tomography in the halcyon system

BACKGROUND

Precise patient positioning is crucial for successful radiotherapy, ensuring accurate delivery of radiation to tumors while minimizing exposure to healthy tissues. Positional errors can significantly impact treatment efficacy and increase side effects. This study evaluates the effectiveness of daily cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging in the Halcyon system for detecting and correcting patient misalignments across various cancer types and treatment sites.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 411 patients treated with the Varian Halcyon linear accelerator from August 2022 to August 2024. Patients were grouped based on tumor location: Head and Neck (118 patients), Chest (188 patients), and Pelvis (105 patients). Daily pre-treatment CBCT scans were performed to verify positioning, with shifts in the x, y, and z axes quantified and adjusted using automated couch corrections.

RESULTS

The study revealed average positional shifts along the x-axis of ~0.112 cm, while both the Chest and Pelvic groups recorded 0.194 cm. The y-axis deviations were 0.135 cm for Head and Neck, 0.206 cm for Chest, and 0.195 cm for the Pelvis. On the z-axis, a mean deviation of 0.07 cm was found for the Head and Neck group, while 0.11 cm for the Chest group, and 0.085 cm for the Pelvic group. The Head and Neck group exhibited the smallest standard deviations across all axes, indicating greater positional consistency. Normalized density distributions showed distinct emergent patterns, the Head and Neck group showing tighter distributions compared to the broader distributions observed in the Chest and Pelvic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily CBCT imaging in the Halcyon system significantly enhances patient positioning accuracy in radiotherapy. The findings demonstrate that this approach minimizes positional shifts, particularly in the Head and Neck region, essential for optimizing treatment outcomes and reducing the risk of adverse effects. Future studies should further explore the integration of advanced imaging techniques to improve precision in patient positioning.

Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison in head-and-neck radiotherapy using JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT

Introduction

Dosimetric and radiobiological evaluations for the Jaws-only Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (JO-IMRT) technique for head and neck jaws-only intensity-modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) and 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). To compare the head-and-neck therapeutic approaches utilizing JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT techniques, different radiation dose indices were calculated, including: conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and radiobiological variables like Niemierko's equivalent uniform dose based tumor control probability (TCP) of planning target volume (PTV), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of organs at risk (OAR) (brainstem, spinal cord, and parotid grand).

Materials and methods

Twenty-five nasopharynx patients were studied using the Prowess Panther Treatment Planning System (Prowess Inc). The results were compared with the dose distribution obtained using 3D-CRT.

Results

Regarding tumor coverage and CI, JO-IMRT showed better results than 3D-CRT. The average doses received by the PTVs were quite similar: 72.1 ± 0.8 Gy by 3D-CRT and 72.5 ± 0.6 Gy by JO-IMRT plans (p > 0.05). The mean doses received by the parotid gland were 56.7 ± 0.7 Gy by 3D-CRT and 26.8 ± 0.3 Gy by JO-IMRT (p > 0.05). The HI and CI were 0.13 ± 0.01 and 0.14 ± 0.05 and (p > 0.05) by 3D-CRT and 0.83 ± 0.05 and 0.73 ± 0.10 by JO-IMRT (p < 0.05). The average TCP of PTV was 0.82 ± 0.08 by 3D-CRT and 0.92 ± 0.02 by JO-IMRT. Moreover, the NTCP of the parotid glands, brain stem, and spinal cord were lower using the JO-IMRT than 3D-CRT plans. In comparison to the 3D-CRT approach, the JO-IMRT technique was able to boost dose coverage to the PTV, improve the target's CI and HI, and spare the parotid glands. This suggests the power of the JO-IMRT over 3D-CRT in head-and-neck radiotherapy.

Dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and field-in-field (FIF) technique for head-and-neck cancer

Purpose:

This study compared the plan dosimetry between the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and field-in-field (FIF) technique for head-and-neck cancer using the Elekta Monaco treatment planning system (TPS).

Materials and methods:

A total of 20 head-and-neck cancer patients were selected in this study. IMRT and FIF plans for the patients were created on the Monaco TPS (ver. 5.11.02) using the 6-MV photon beam generated by the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator. The dose–volume histograms, maximum doses, minimum doses, mean doses of the target volumes and organs-at-risk (OARs), conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and monitor units (MUs) were determined for each IMRT and FIF plan. All IMRT plans passed the patient-specific quality assurance tests from the 2D diode array measurements (MatriXX Evolution System, IBA Dosimetry, Germany).

Results:

The results showed that the dose distribution to the target volumes of IMRT plans was better than FIF plans, while the dose (mean or max dose) to the OAR was significantly lower than FIF plan, respectively. IMRT and FIF resulted in planning target volume coverage with mean dose of 71·32 ± 0·76 and 73·12 ± 0·62 Gy, respectively, and HI values of 0·08 ± 0·01 (IMRT) and 0·19 ± 0·06 (FIF). The CI for IMRT was 0·98 ± 0·01 and FIF was 0·97 ± 0·01. For the spinal cord tolerance (maximum dose < 45 Gy), IMRT resulted in 39·85 ± 2·04 Gy compared to 41·37 ± 2·42 Gy for FIF. In addition, the mean doses to the parotid grand were 27·27 ± 7·48 and 48·68 ± 1·62 Gy for the IMRT and FIF plans, respectively. Significantly more MUs were required in IMRT plans than FIF plans (on average, 846 ± 100 MU in IMRT and 467 ± 41 MU in FIF).

Conclusions:

It is concluded that the IMRT technique could provide a better plan dosimetry than the FIF technique for head-and-neck patients.

Dosimetric and Monte Carlo verification of jaws-only IMRT plans calculated by the Collapsed Cone Convolution algorithm for head and neck cancers

AIM

The aim of this study is to verify the Prowess Panther jaws-only intensity modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) treatment planning (TP) by comparing the TP dose distributions for head-and-neck (H&N) cancer with the ones simulated by Monte Carlo (MC).

BACKGROUND

To date, dose distributions planned using JO-IMRT for H&N patients were found superior to the corresponding three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plans. Dosimetry of the JO-IMRT plans were also experimentally verified using an ionization chamber, MapCHECK 2, and Octavius 4D and good agreements were shown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Dose distributions of 15 JO-IMRT plans of nasopharyngeal patients were recalculated using the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code. The clinical photon beams were simulated using the BEAMnrc. The absorbed dose to patients treated by fixed-field IMRT was computed using the DOSXYZnrc. The simulated dose distributions were then compared with the ones calculated by the Collapsed Cone Convolution (CCC) algorithm on the TPS, using the relative dose error comparison and the gamma index using global methods implemented in PTW-VeriSoft with 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 1%/1 mm criteria.

RESULTS

There is a good agreement between the MC and TPS dose. The average gamma passing rates were 93.3 ± 3.1%, 92.8 ± 3.2%, 92.4 ± 3.4% based on the 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 1%/1 mm criteria, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results, it is concluded that the CCC algorithm was adequate for most of the IMRT H&N cases where the target was not immediately adjacent to the critical structures.

Integral dose based inverse optimization objective function promises lower toxicity in head-and-neck

PURPOSE

The voxels in a CT data sets contain density information. Besides its use in dose calculation density has no other application in modern radiotherapy treatment planning. This work introduces the use of density information by integral dose minimization in radiotherapy treatment planning for head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighteen HNSCC cases were studied. For each case two intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans were created: one based on dose-volume (DV) optimization, and one based on integral dose minimization (Energy hereafter) inverse optimization. The target objective functions in both optimization schemes were specified in terms of minimum, maximum, and uniform doses, while the organs at risk (OAR) objectives were specified in terms of DV- and Energy-objectives respectively. Commonly used dosimetric measures were applied to assess the performance of Energy-based optimization. In addition, generalized equivalent uniform doses (gEUDs) were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed to estimate the performance of this novel inverse optimization paradigm.

RESULTS

Energy-based inverse optimization resulted in lower OAR doses for equivalent target doses and isodose coverage. The statistical tests showed dose reduction to the OARs with Energy-based optimization ranging from ∼2% to ∼15%.

CONCLUSIONS

Integral dose minimization based inverse optimization for HNSCC promises lower doses to nearby OARs. For comparable therapeutic effect the incorporation of density information into the optimization cost function allows reduction in the normal tissue doses and possibly in the risk and the severity of treatment related toxicities.

Evaluation of jaws-only intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment plans using Octavius 4D system

Introduction: Jaws-Only Intensity modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) is a technique uses the collimator jaws of the linear accelerator (LINAC) to delivery of complex intensity patterns. In previous studies, pretreatment patient specific quality assurance for those JO-IMRT were also performed using ionization chamber, MapCHECK2, and Octavius 4D and good agreements were shown. The aim of this study is to further verify JO-IMRT plans in 2 different cases: one with the gantry angle set equal to beam angle as in the plans and the other with gantry angle set to zero degree.

Materials and Methods: Twenty-five JO-IMRT, previously verified, were executed twice for each plan. The first one used a real gantry angle, and the second one used a 0° gantry angle. Measurements were performed using Octavius 4D 1500.

Results: The results were analyzed using Verisoft software. The results show that the Gamma average was 97.32 ± 2.21% for IMRT with a 0° gantry angle and 94.72 ± 2.67% for IMRT with a true gantry angle.

Conclusion: In both cases, gamma index of more than 90% were found for all of our 25 JO-IMRT treatment plans.