Stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: Results of multicenter benchmark planning studies

Self-Shielding Gyroscopic Radiosurgery: A Prospective Experience and Analysis of the First 100 Patients

Background Stereotactic radiosurgery is a well-established treatment option for the management of various benign and malignant brain tumors. It can be delivered with several treatment platforms, usually requiring shielded radiation vaults to meet regulatory safety requirements. Recent technical advances have led to the first self-shielding platform enabling the delivery of gyroscopic radiosurgery (GRS). Given the limited number of GRS treatment platforms, the novelty of its characteristics, and the lack of available data, we report our prospective experience with the first 100 patients treated with GRS. Materials and methods Patients undergoing GRS for the treatment of intracranial tumors were enrolled in this prospective study. Patient and treatment characteristics, including patient satisfaction, were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 100 patients with 155 tumors were treated. The most commonly treated tumors comprised brain metastases (BM) (49%), vestibular schwannomas (31%), and meningiomas (14%). The median prescription dose for malignant and benign tumors was 20 and 13 Gy, respectively. The median prescription isodose line was 56%. Gross tumor volumes were small, with a median of 0.37 cc for BM and 0.92 cc for the other entities. The median total treatment time was 40 minutes. Dosimetric performance indices showed median values of 1.20 (conformity index), 1.24 (new conformity index), 1.74 (homogeneity index), and 3.13 (gradient index). Volumetric assessment of the treated tumors showed an overall decrease in size at the first available follow-up. Most patients were satisfied with the treatment experience. Conclusion Our first prospective experience of the use of GRS is favorable. Analyses of the dosimetric performance, treatment times, volumetric assessment, and patient satisfaction demonstrate its suitability for stereotactic treatments of intracranial tumors. Further prospective clinical and dosimetric analyses for GRS are pending.

Plan quality assessment of modern radiosurgery technologies in the treatment of multiple brain metastases

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of multiple brain metastases has evolved over the last 40 years allowing centres to treat an increasing number of brain metastases in a single treatment fraction. HyperArcTMplanning optimisation technique is one such development that streamlines the treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocentre. Several studies have investigated the plan quality of HyperArc compared to CyberKnife or Gamma Knife, however there are limited number of studies that include all three modalities. It is the aim of this study to provide an assessment of plan quality between the three SRS platforms across ten patients with multiple brain metastases ranging from three to eight metastases per patient. Strict planning workflows were established to avoid bias towards any particular treatment platform. Plan quality was assessed through dose to organs at risk, Paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), global efficiency index (Gη) and dose to normal brain tissue. Results from this study found mean PCI observed across Gamma Knife plans was significantly lower than HyperArc and CyberKnife. HyperArc plans observed significantly shorter beam-on times which were 10 to 20 times faster than CyberKnife and Gamma Knife plans. Gamma Knife and CyberKnife were found to produce plans with significantly superior GI, global efficiency index and the volume of healthy brain receiving greater than 12 Gy (V12Gy) when compared to HyperArc plans. Lesion volume was seen to influence the relative difference in dose metrics between systems. The study revealed that all three treatment modalities produced high quality plans for the SRS treatment of multiple brain metastases, each with respective benefits and limitations.

Evaluation of PTV margins and plan robustness for single isocentre multiple target stereotactic radiosurgery

PURPOSE

Robustness to residual setup errors and linac delivery errors of BrainLab Elements single-isocentre-multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery was evaluated.

METHODS

Residual setup errors of 13 patients were evaluated. Linac delivery error was quantified through multi-metastases-Winston-Lutz measurements. PTV margins were calculated using the van Herk recipe. Patient scans were translated and rotated by the median and 95th percentile of the combined uncertainties, and plans were recalculated subsequently. Previous patients' plans were then replanned with the derived margins, effects on GTV coverage and normal brain doses were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean (±stdev) coverage of all targets in the original plans were 99.4% (±0.9%) and 98.9% (±1.0%) for 1 and 3-fraction patients respectively. Median geometrical errors did not result in significant differences. A statistically significant reduction in coverage to 91.4% (±10.4%) and 93.0% (±9.6%) was seen under 95th percentile errors. Applying the derived optimal margin of 0.5 mm resulted in 78% of the GTVs retaining a coverage of 98% or above even in the presence of 95th percentile errors, compared to only 30% if no margins were applied. Replanning with margins also caused no significant increase to local normal brain doses, however global dose increases varied according to the number of metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Plans were shown to be robust to average geometrical uncertainties despite targets having no margins, however occurrence of GTV under-coverage increased under 95th percentile scenarios. The margin was proven to substantially improve the target dose coverage with limited change to local normal brain doses, although not all sources of geometrical uncertainty were considered.

Characterization and commissioning of a new collaborative multi-modality radiotherapy platform

TaiChi, a new multi-modality radiotherapy platform that integrates a linear accelerator, a focusing gamma system, and a kV imaging system within an enclosed O-ring gantry, was introduced into clinical application. This work aims to assess the technological characteristics and commissioning results of the TaiChi platform. The acceptance testing and commissioning were performed following the manufacturer's customer acceptance tests (CAT) and several AAPM Task Group (TG) reports/guidelines. Regarding the linear accelerator (linac), all applicable validation measurements recommended by the MPPG 5.a (basic photon beam model validation, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)/volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) validation, end-to-end(E2E) tests, and patient-specific quality assurance (QA)) were performed. For the focusing gamma system, the absorbed doses were measured using a PTW31014 ion chamber (IC) and PTW60016 diode detector. EBT3 films and a PTW60016 diode detector were employed to measure the relative output factors (ROFs). The E2E tests were performed using PTW31014 IC and EBT3 films. The coincidences between the imaging isocenter and the linac/gamma mechanical isocenter were investigated using EBT3 films. The image quality was evaluated regarding the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), spatial resolution, and uniformity. All tests included in the CAT met the manufacturer's specifications. All MPPG 5.a measurements complied with the tolerances. The confidence limits for IMRT/VMAT point dose and dose distribution measurements were achieved according to TG-119. The point dose differences were below 1.68% and gamma passing rates (3%/2 mm) were above 95.1% for the linac E2E tests. All plans of patient-specific QA had point dose differences below 1.79% and gamma passing rates above 96.1% using the 3%/2 mm criterion suggested by TG-218. For the focusing gamma system, the differences between the calculated and measured absorbed doses were below 1.86%. The ROFs calculated by the TPS were independently confirmed within 2% using EBT3 films and a PTW60016 detector. The point dose differences were below 2.57% and gamma passing rates were above 95.3% using the 2%/1 mm criterion for the E2E tests. The coincidences between the imaging isocenter and the linac/gamma mechanical isocenter were within 0.5 mm. The image quality parameters fully complied with the manufacturer's specifications regarding the CNR, spatial resolution, and uniformity. The multi-modality radiotherapy platform complies with the CAT and AAPM commissioning criteria. The commissioning results demonstrate that this platform performs well in mechanical and dosimetry accuracy.

Benchmarking Tests of Contemporary SRS Platforms: Have Technological Developments Resulted in Improved Treatment Plan Quality?

PURPOSE

Stereotactic radiosurgery treatment delivery can be performed with a range of devices, each of which have evolved over recent years. We sought to evaluate the differences in performance of contemporary stereotactic radiosurgery platforms and also to compare them with earlier platform iterations from a previous benchmarking study.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The following platforms were selected as "state of the art" in 2022: Gamma Knife Icon (GK), CyberKnife S7 (CK), Brainlab Elements (Elekta VersaHD and Varian TrueBeam), Varian Edge with HyperArc (HA), and Zap-X. Six benchmarking cases were used from a 2016 study. To reflect the evolution of increasing numbers of metastases treated per patient, a 14-target case was added. The 28 targets among the 7 patients ranged from 0.02 to 7.2 cc in volume. Participating centers were sent images and contours for each patient and asked to plan them to the best of their ability. Although some variation in local practice was allowed (eg, margins), groups were asked to prescribe a specified dose to each target and tolerance doses to organs at risk were agreed upon. Parameters compared included coverage, selectivity, Paddick conformity index, gradient index (GI), R50%, efficiency index, doses to organs at risk, and planning and treatment times.

RESULTS

Mean coverage for all targets ranged from 98.2% (Brainlab/Elekta) to 99.7% (HA-6X). Paddick conformity index values ranged from 0.722 (Zap-X) to 0.894 (CK). GI ranged from a mean of 3.52 (GK), representing the steepest dose gradient, to 5.08 (HA-10X). The GI appeared to follow a trend with beam energy, with the lowest values from the lower energy platforms (GK, 1.25 MeV; Zap-X, 3 MV) and the highest value from the highest energy (HA-10X). Mean R50% values ranged from 4.48 (GK) to 5.98 (HA-10X). Treatment times were lowest for C-arm linear accelerators.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with earlier studies, newer equipment appears to deliver higher quality treatments. CyberKnife and linear accelerator platforms appear to give higher conformity whereas lower energy platforms yield a steeper dose gradient.

A sub-analysis of multi-center planning radiosurgery for intracranial metastases through automation (MC-PRIMA) comparing UK and international centers

OBJECTIVES

A sub-analysis of the MC-PRIMA study was performed to compare the plan quality of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to multiple brain metastases (MBM) between UK and other international centres.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Six centres from the UK and nineteen from other international centres autoplanned using Multiple Brain Mets™ (AutoMBM; Brainlab, Munich, Germany) software for a five MBM study case from a prior planning competition that was originally organized by the Trans-Tasmania Radiation Oncology Group (TROG). Twenty-three dosimetric metrics and the resulting composite plan score per the TROG planning competition were compared between the UK and other international centres. Planning experience and planning time from each planner were recorded and statistically compared.

RESULTS

Planning experiences between two groups are equal. Except for mean dose to the hippocampus, all other 22 dosimetric metrics were comparable between two groups. The inter-planner variations in these 23 dosimetric metrics and the composite plan score were also statistically equivalent. Planning time is slightly longer in the UK group (mean = 86.8 min) with a mean difference of 50.3 min.

CONCLUSIONS

AutoMBM effectively achieves standardization of the plan quality of SRS to MBM within UK and further against the other international centres. Significant planning efficiency gain by AutoMBM both among the UK and other international centres may help to increase the capacity of SRS service by alleviating the clinical and technical loadings.

Dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy with TrueBeam LINAC and hypofractionated radiosurgery with gamma knife ICON for large (>10 cm3) skull base meningiomas

BACKGROUND

Multi Fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (MF-SRS) of Linac has an essential role in the treatment of skull base meningiomas (sbMNG). However, Gamma Knife Icon (GK) allows MF-SRS using mask immobilization with onboard image guidance.

OBJECTIVE

This dosimetric study aims to investigate whether equivalent plan quality can be achieved with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) in patients with large sbMNG (>10 cm3) previously treated with GK.

METHODS

Twenty patients with the median target volume of 19.7cm3 are re-planned by using VMAT with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. Plan qualities are compared to tumor coverage, paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), V4 Gy, V10 Gy, V12 Gy, optic chiasm V20 Gy, brainstem V23 Gy, optic nerve V25 Gy volumes, and maximum doses for all. Additionally, beam-on time and approximate planning time are also analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

All plans provide adequate clinical requirements. First, the CI is comparable for the GK and VMAT (0.99±0.01 vs. 1.13±0.20; p = 0.18). Second, VMAT has a significantly higher GI than GK (3.81±0.35 vs. 2.63±0.09; p < 0.001). Third, the PCI is significantly higher in GK than VMAT (0.76±0.05 vs. 0.70±0.07; p < 0.001). The lower GI of the GK also results in significantly lower V4 Gy (156.1±43.8 vs. 207.5±40.1 cm3, p < 0.001) and V10 Gy (26.1±9.0 vs. 28.9±7.7 cm3, p < 0.001) compared to VMAT. Last, the VMAT reduces beam-on time (4.8±0.5 vs. 19±1.1 min.; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although both systems have succeeded in creating effective plans in clinical practice, the GK reveals more effective lower normal brain tissue doses. However, the shorter treatment time with LINAC, excluding the total procedure time, can be considered advantageous over GK.

Quality of Automated Stereotactic Radiosurgery Plans in Patients with 4 to 10 Brain Metastases

Simple Summary

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) are promising treatment options for patients with multiple brain metastases in the current era of personalized medicine. Recent international guidelines propose SRS also in patients with more than three brain metastases with low-volume disease. Optimal treatment quality with sparing of healthy brain tissue is essential to avoid SRS/SRT complications such as brain necrosis. The aim of this study was to compare linac (linear accelerator)-based SRS/SRT plan quality of automated planning, intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) and manually planned dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans as well as single- and multiple-isocenter techniques. We found that automated planning with DCA or IMRT can make linac-based SRS/SRT plan quality with single isocenter comparable with a manually planned DCA plan with a separate isocenter for each metastasis.

Abstract

The purpose was to compare linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery and hypofractionated radiotherapy plan quality of automated planning, intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and manual dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans as well as single- and multiple-isocenter techniques for multiple brain metastases (BM). For twelve patients with four to ten BM, seven non-coplanar linac-based plans were created: a manually planned DCA plan with a separate isocenter for each metastasis, a single-isocenter dynamic IMRT plan, an automatically generated single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) plan, four automatically generated single-isocenter DCA plans with three or five couch angles, with high or low sparing of normal tissue. Paddick conformity index, gradient index (GI), mean dose, total V_12Gy and V_5Gy of uninvolved brain, number of monitor units (MUs), irradiation time and pass rate were compared. The GI was significantly higher for VMAT than for separate-isocenter, IMRT, and all automatically generated plans. The number of MUs was lowest for VMAT, followed by automatically generated DCA and IMRT plans and highest for manual DCA plans. Irradiation time was the shortest for automatically planned DCA plans. Automatically generated linac-based single-isocenter plans for multiple BM reduce the number of MUs and irradiation time with at least comparable GI and V_5Gy relative to the reference separate-isocenter DCA plans.

Why all radiotherapy planning studies are wrong but some are useful

Dosimetry comparison studies of radiotherapy treatment planning are common, but often their limitations are not fully acknowledged. Useful data for the community may be produced, which is reproducible and reliable for implementation by others. However, this will only be achieved by clear and detailed reporting, and by consideration of delivered doses and clinical significance.

Effects of cone versus multi-leaf collimation on dosimetry and neurotoxicity in patients with small arteriovenous malformations treated by stereotactic radiosurgery

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

Linear accelerator (LINAC) based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) is delivered with cone or multileaf collimators (MLCs), and favorable dosimetry is associated with reduced radionecrosis in normal brain tissue. This study aims to determine whether cones or MLCs has better dosimetric characteristics, to predict differences in toxicity.

METHODS

All patients treated for AVMs using LINAC SRS from 2003-2017 were examined retrospectively. Demographic data, volumes of normal tissue exposed to 12Gy (V12Gy[cc]) and 4Gy (V4Gy[cc]), maximal dose, and dose gradient were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate relationships between collimator type, dosimetric parameters, and toxicity. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for AVM size.

RESULTS

Compared to MLC, cones were independently associated with reduced V12Gy[cc] after propensity score matching (p=0.008) and reduced neurotoxicity (p=0.016). Higher V12Gy[cc] (p=0.0008) and V4Gy[cc] (p=0.002) were associated with increased neurotoxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating AVMs with cone-based SRS over MLC-based SRS may improve dosimetry and reduce toxicities.

Genesis of Quality Measurements to Improve the Care Delivered to Patients With Brain Metastases

PURPOSE

High-value and high-quality health care requires outcome measurements to inform treatment decisions, but, to our knowledge, no standardized measurements exist to evaluate brain metastases (BMs) care. We propose a set of measurements and report on their implementation in the care of patients with BMs.

METHODS

On the basis of a stakeholders' needs assessment and review of the literature, we identified outcome and process measurements to assess the care of patients with BMs according to treatment modality. Retrospectively, we applied these indicators of care to all patients diagnosed and treated at our institution over 2 years.

RESULTS

We ascertained 5 outcome and 6 process measurements of relevance in the care of BMs. When applied to 209 patients (89.7%) who received cancer treatment, 77% were alive > 90 days after diagnosis. The proportion alive at 90 days after surgery, whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) was 82%, 59%, and 81%, respectively. Other performance measurements included 30-day postoperative readmission rate (6%), SRS within 30 days of surgery (79%), use of memantine with WBRT (41%), advance directives within 6 months of diagnosis (53%), and palliative care consultation for patients with poor prognosis or receiving WBRT (45%). Measurements for the 24 patients (10.3%) receiving best supportive care were advance directives documentation (67%) and referral to palliative or hospice care (83%).

CONCLUSION

We propose a set of measurements to apprise quality improvement efforts, inform treatment decision-making, and to use in evaluation of the performance of interdisciplinary BMs programs. Their refinement can potentially enhance the quality and value of care delivered to patients with BMs.

Tumor-dose-rate variations during robotic radiosurgery of oligo and multiple brain metastases

Purpose

For step-and-shoot robotic stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) the dose delivered over time, called local tumor-dose-rate (TDR), may strongly vary during treatment of multiple lesions. The authors sought to evaluate technical parameters influencing TDR and correlate TDR to clinical outcome.

Material and methods

A total of 23 patients with 162 oligo (1–3) and multiple (>3) brain metastases (OBM/MBM) treated in 33 SRS sessions were retrospectively analyzed. Median PTV were 0.11 cc (0.01–6.36 cc) and 0.50 cc (0.12–3.68 cc) for OBM and MBM, respectively. Prescription dose ranged from 16 to 20 Gy prescribed to the median 70% isodose line. The maximum dose-rate for planning target volume (PTV) percentage p in time span s during treatment (TDR_s,p) was calculated for various p and s based on treatment log files and in-house software.

Results

TDR_60min,98% was 0.30 Gy/min (0.23–0.87 Gy/min) for OBM and 0.22 Gy/min (0.12–0.63 Gy/min) for MBM, respectively, and increased by 0.03 Gy/min per prescribed Gy. TDR_60min,98% strongly correlated with treatment time (ρ = −0.717, p < 0.001), monitor units (MU) (ρ = −0.767, p < 0.001), number of beams (ρ = −0.755, p < 0.001) and beam directions (ρ = −0.685, p < 0.001) as well as lesions treated per collimator (ρ = −0.708, P < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) was 20 months and 1‑ and 2‑year local control (LC) was 98.8% and 90.3%, respectively. LC did not correlate with any TDR, but tumor response (partial response [PR] or complete response [CR]) correlated with all TDR in univariate analysis (e.g., TDR_60min,98%: hazard ration [HR] = 0.974, confidence interval [CI] = 0.952–0.996, p = 0.019). In multivariate analysis only concomitant targeted therapy or immunotherapy and breast cancer tumor histology remained a significant factor for tumor response. Local grade ≥2 radiation-induced tissue reactions were noted in 26.3% (OBM) and 5.2% (MBM), respectively, mainly influenced by tumor volume (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Large TDR variations are noted during MBM-SRS which mainly arise from prolonged treatment times. Clinically, low TDR corresponded with decreased local tumor responses, although the main influencing factor was concomitant medication.

Retrospective quality metrics review of stereotactic radiosurgery plans treating multiple targets using single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

To characterize key plan quality metrics in multi-target stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans treated using single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in comparison to dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans treating single target. To investigate the feasibility of quality improvement in VMAT planning based on previous planning knowledge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

97 VMAT plans of multi-target and 156 DCA plans of single-target treated in 2017 at a single institution were reviewed. A total of 605 targets were treated with these SRS plans. The prescription dose was normalized to 20 Gy in all plans for this analysis. Two plan quality metrics, target conformity index (CI) and normal tissue volume receiving more than 12 Gy (V12Gy), were calculated for each target. The distribution of V12Gy per target was plotted as a function of the target volume. For multi-target VMAT plans, the number of targets being treated in the same plan and the distance between targets were calculated to evaluate their impact on V12Gy. VMAT plans that had a large deviation of V12Gy from the average level were re-optimized to determine the possibility of reducing the variation of V12Gy in VMAT planning.

RESULTS

Conformity index of multi-target VMAT plans were lower than that of DCA plans while the mean values of 12 Gy were comparable. The V12Gy for a target in VMAT plan did not show apparent dependence on the total number of targets or the distance between targets. The distribution of V12Gy exhibited a larger variation in VMAT plans compared to DCA plans. Re-optimization of outlier plans reduced V12 Gy by 33.9% and resulted in the V12Gy distribution in VMAT plans more closely resembling that of DCA plans.

CONCLUSION

The benchmark data on key plan quality metrics were established for single-isocenter multi-target SRS planning. It is feasible to use this knowledge to guide VMAT planning and reduce high V12Gy outliers.

Technological quality requirements for stereotactic radiotherapy : Expert review group consensus from the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy

This review details and discusses the technological quality requirements to ensure the desired quality for stereotactic radiotherapy using photon external beam radiotherapy as defined by the DEGRO Working Group Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy and the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy. The covered aspects of this review are 1) imaging for target volume definition, 2) patient positioning and target volume localization, 3) motion management, 4) collimation of the irradiation and beam directions, 5) dose calculation, 6) treatment unit accuracy, and 7) dedicated quality assurance measures. For each part, an expert review for current state-of-the-art techniques and their particular technological quality requirement to reach the necessary accuracy for stereotactic radiotherapy divided into intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery in one single fraction (SRS), intracranial fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT), and extracranial stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is presented. All recommendations and suggestions for all mentioned aspects of stereotactic radiotherapy are formulated and related uncertainties and potential sources of error discussed. Additionally, further research and development needs in terms of insufficient data and unsolved problems for stereotactic radiotherapy are identified, which will serve as a basis for the future assignments of the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy. The review was group peer-reviewed, and consensus was obtained through multiple working group meetings.

Dosimetric comparison of fractionated radiosurgery plans using frameless Gamma Knife ICON and CyberKnife systems with linear accelerator–based radiosurgery plans for multiple large brain metastases

OBJECTIVE

For patients with multiple large brain metastases with at least 1 target volume larger than 10 cm3, multifractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (MF-SRS) has commonly been delivered with a linear accelerator (LINAC). Recent advances of Gamma Knife (GK) units with kilovolt cone-beam CT and CyberKnife (CK) units with multileaf collimators also make them attractive choices. The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetry of MF-SRS plans deliverable on GK, CK, and LINAC and to discuss related clinical issues.

METHODS

Ten patients with 2 or more large brain metastases who had been treated with MF-SRS on LINAC were identified. The median planning target volume was 18.31 cm3 (mean 21.31 cm3, range 3.42–49.97 cm3), and the median prescribed dose was 27.0 Gy (mean 26.7 Gy, range 21–30 Gy), administered in 3 to 5 fractions. Clinical LINAC treatment plans were generated using inverse planning with intensity modulation on a Pinnacle treatment planning system (version 9.10) for the Varian TrueBeam STx system. GK and CK planning were retrospectively performed using Leksell GammaPlan version 10.1 and Accuray Precision version 1.1.0.0 for the CK M6 system. Tumor coverage, Paddick conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), and normal brain tissue receiving 4, 12, and 20 Gy were used to compare plan quality. Net beam-on time and approximate planning time were also collected for all cases.

RESULTS

Plans from all 3 modalities satisfied clinical requirements in target coverage and normal tissue sparing. The mean CI was comparable (0.79, 0.78, and 0.76) for the GK, CK, and LINAC plans. The mean GI was 3.1 for both the GK and the CK plans, whereas the mean GI of the LINAC plans was 4.1. The lower GI of the GK and CK plans would have resulted in significantly lower normal brain volumes receiving a medium or high dose. On average, GK and CK plans spared the normal brain volume receiving at least 12 Gy and 20 Gy by approximately 20% in comparison with the LINAC plans. However, the mean beam-on time of GK (∼ 64 minutes assuming a dose rate of 2.5 Gy/minute) plans was significantly longer than that of CK (∼ 31 minutes) or LINAC (∼ 4 minutes) plans.

CONCLUSIONS

All 3 modalities are capable of treating multiple large brain lesions with MF-SRS. GK has the most flexible workflow and excellent dosimetry, but could be limited by the treatment time. CK has dosimetry comparable to that of GK with a consistent treatment time of approximately 30 minutes. LINAC has a much shorter treatment time, but residual rotational error could be a concern.

High Quality Clinical Stereotactic Radiosurgery Planning and Delivery With Standard Resolution (5 mm) Multileaf Collimation and Multiple Isocenters

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to demonstrate the use of novel planning techniques in producing high-quality stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans using a standard 5 mm multileaf collimator (MLC) and multiple isocenters delivered clinically at a local institution.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Novel planning techniques consisted of offset isocenter, variable asymmetrical jaws, and Digital Imagine and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) edits to reduce leaf tip transmission, all with the aim of maximizing dose conformity. A local institution clinical cohort was planned (1-4 targets), and plan conformity metrics common to SRS were compared against conformity metrics from selected previous publications comparing Gamma Knife to linear accelerator SRS using high-definition MLC (2.5 mm). Additionally, local institution plan conformity metrics for 2 benchmark SRS planning cases (3 and 7 targets) were compared with metrics from other centers treating SRS clinically in England. Pretreatment quality assurance results, both point dose measurement and film analysis, are presented to demonstrate plan deliverability.

RESULTS

Clinical conformity metrics are shown to be comparable to previously published results using either Gamma Knife or linear accelerator with high-definition MLC. Metrics from benchmark planning cases are shown to be comparable and to have better prescription dose conformity than average nationally in England. Pretreatment quality assurance results demonstrate suitable plan deliverability.

CONCLUSIONS

SRS planning using standard 5 mm MLC and multiple isocenters produces high-quality treatment plans for a limited number of targets with a high degree of dose conformity and dose fall off when employing novel planning techniques to compensate for MLC leaf size and multiple isocenters.

Dosimetric Multicenter Planning Comparison Studies for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: Methodology and Future Perspectives

In this review a summary of the published literature pertaining to the stereotactic body radiation therapy multiplanning comparison, data sharing strategies, and implementation of benchmark planning cases to improve the skills and knowledge of the participating centers was investigated. A total of 30 full-text articles were included. The studies were subdivided in 3 categories: multiplanning studies on dosimetric variability, planning harmonization before clinical trials, and technical and methodologic studies. The methodology used in the studies were critically analyzed to find common and original elements with the pros and cons. Multicenter planning studies have played a key role in improving treatment plan harmonization, treatment plan compliance, and even clinical practices. This review has highlighted that some fundamental steps should be taken to transform a simple treatment planning comparison study into a potential credentialing method for stereotactic body radiation therapy accreditation. In particular, prescription and general requirements should always be well defined; data analysis should be performed with independent dose volume histogram or dose calculations; quality score indices should be constructed; feedback and correction strategies should be provided; and a simple web-based collaboration platform should be used. The results reported clearly showed that a crowd-based replanning approach is a viable method for achieving harmonization and standardization of treatment planning among centers using different technologies.

Multi-center evaluation of dose conformity in stereotactic body radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging technique for treating oligometastases, but limited data is available on what plan quality is achievable for a range of modalities and clinical sites.

METHODS

SBRT plans for lung, spine, bone, adrenal, liver and node sites from 17 participating centers were reviewed. Centers used various delivery techniques including static and rotational intensity-modulation and multiple non-coplanar beams. Plans were split into lung and other body sites and evaluated with different plan quality metrics, including two which are independent of target coverage; "prescription dose spillage" (PDS) and "modified gradient index" (MGI). These were compared to constraints from the ROSEL and RTOG 0813 clinical trials.

RESULTS

Planning target volume (PTV) coverage was compromised (PTV V100% < 90%) in 29% of patient plans in order to meet organ-at-risk (OAR) tolerances, supporting the use of plan quality metrics which are independent of target coverage. Both lung (n = 48) and other body (n = 99) site PDS values agreed well with ROSEL constraints on dose spillage, but RTOG 0813 values were too high to detect sub-optimal plans. MGI values for lung plans were mis-matched to both sets of previous constraints, with ROSEL values too high and RTOG 0813 values too low. MGI values were lower for other body plans as expected, though this was only statistically significant for PTV volumes <20 cm3.

CONCLUSIONS

Updated guidance for lung and other body site SBRT plan quality using the PDS and MGI metrics is presented.

Stereotactic radiosurgery for benign brain tumors: Results of multicenter benchmark planning studies

PURPOSE

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is strongly indicated for treatment of surgically inaccessible benign brain tumors. Various treatment platforms are available, but few comparisons have included multiple centers. As part of a national commissioning program, benchmark planning cases were completed by all clinical centers in the region.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Four benign cases were provided, with images and structures predelineated, including intracanalicular vestibular schwannoma (VS), larger VS, skull base meningioma, and secreting pituitary adenoma. Centers were asked to follow their local practice, and plans were reviewed centrally using metrics for target coverage, selectivity, gradient falloff, and normal tissue sparing.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight plans were submitted using 18 different treatment platforms. Fourteen plans were subsequently revised following feedback, and review of 5 plans led to a restriction of service on 2 platforms (2 centers). Prescription doses were consistent for VS and meningioma submissions, but a wide range of doses were used for the pituitary case. All centers prioritized coverage, with the prescription isodose covering ≥95% of 78/82 target volumes. Lower values may be expected next to air cavities when using advanced algorithms, and in general may be acceptable for some benign lesions. Selectivity was much more variable, and in some cases this was combined with high gradient index and/or >1 mm margin, resulting in large volumes of normal tissue being irradiated. Normal tissue doses were more variable across linear accelerator (LINAC)-based plans than with Gamma Knife or CyberKnife, and dose spillage seemed independent of prescription isodose (inhomogeneity). This may reflect the variety of LINAC-based approaches represented or the necessary tradeoff between different objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

These benchmarking exercises have highlighted areas of different clinical practice and priorities and potential for improvement. The subsequent sharing of plan data and margin philosophies between the neurosurgery and oncology communities allowed for meaningful comparison between centers and their peers.