Intensity modulation with photons for benign intracranial tumours: a planning comparison of volumetric single arc, helical arc and fixed gantry techniques

Dosimetric and radiobiological advantages from deep inspiration breath-hold and free breath technique for left-sided breast radiation using 3DCRT, IMRT and Rapid Arc methods-a complete assessment

The verification and use of the best treatment approach using 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and Rapid Arc methods for left breast radiation with dosimetric and radiobiological characteristics. The use of custom-built Python software for the estimation and comparison of volume, mean dose, maximum dose, monitor units and normal tissue integral dose along with radiobiological parameters such as NTCP, tumor control probability, equivalent uniform dose and LKB's effective volume from 3DCRT, IMRT and Rapid Arc planning with deep inspiration with breath holding (DIBH) and free breadth (FB) techniques. Volume growth of three-fourth in DIBH compared with FB causes a decrease in cardiac doses and complications because the left lung expands, pulling the heart away from the chest wall and the treatment area. A tiny area of the left lung was exposed during treatment, which reduced the mean dose. There was little difference in the treatment approaches because the spinal cord was immobile in both techniques. Rapid Arc is the unmatched modality for left-sided breast irradiation with significant patient breath-hold, as shown by the comparison of dosimetric and radiobiological parameters from treatment techniques with a deep inspiration breath-hold approach.

Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and helical tomotherapy for prostate cancer using Pareto fronts

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing different radiotherapy treatment techniques-such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT)-typically compare one treatment plan per technique. Often, some dose metrics favor one plan and others favor the other, so the final plan decision involves subjective preferences. Pareto front comparisons provide a more objective framework for comparing different treatment techniques. A Pareto front is the set of all treatment plans where improvement in one criterion is possible only by worsening another criterion. However, different Pareto fronts can be obtained depending on the chosen machine settings.

PURPOSE

To compare VMAT and HT using Pareto fronts and blind expert evaluation, to explain the observed differences, and to illustrate limitations of using Pareto fronts.

METHODS

We generated Pareto fronts for twenty-four prostate cancer patients treated at our clinic for VMAT and HT techniques using an in-house script that controlled a commercial treatment planning system. We varied the PTV under-coverage (100% - V95%) and the rectum mean dose, and fixed the mean doses to the bladder and femoral heads. In order to ensure a fair comparison, those fixed mean doses were the same for the two treatment techniques and the sets of objective functions were chosen so that the conformity indexes of the two treatment techniques were also the same. We used the same machine settings as are used in our clinic. Then, we compared the VMAT and HT Pareto fronts using a specific metric (clinical distance measure) and validated the comparison using a blinded expert evaluation of treatment plans on these fronts for all patients in the cohort. Furthermore, we investigated the observed differences between VMAT and HT and pointed out limitations of using Pareto fronts.

RESULTS

Both clinical distance and blind treatment plan comparison showed that VMAT Pareto fronts were better than HT fronts. VMAT fronts for 10 and 6 MV beam energy were almost identical. HT fronts improved with different machine settings, but were still inferior to VMAT fronts.

CONCLUSIONS

That VMAT Pareto fronts are better than HT fronts may be explained by the fact that the linear accelerator can rapidly vary the dose rate. This is an advantage in simple geometries that might vanish in more complex geometries. Furthermore, one should be cautious when speaking about Pareto optimal plans as the best possible plans, as their calculation depends on many parameters.

First experimental demonstration of VMAT combined with MLC tracking for single and multi fraction lung SBRT on an MR-linac

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

VMAT is not currently available on MR-linacs but could maximize plan conformality. To mitigate respiration without compromising delivery efficiency, MRI-guided MLC tumour tracking was recently developed for the 1.5 T Unity MR-linac (Elekta AB, Stockholm, Sweden) in combination with IMRT. Here, we provide a first experimental demonstration of VMAT+MLC tracking for several lung SBRT indications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We created central patient and phantom VMAT plans (8×7.5 Gy, 2 arcs) and we created peripheral phantom plans (3×18 & 1×34 Gy, 4 arcs). A motion phantom mimicked subject-recorded respiratory motion (A‾=11 mm, f‾=0.33 Hz, drift‾=0.3 mm/min). This was monitored using 2D-cine MRI at 4 Hz to continuously realign the beam with the target. VMAT+MLC tracking performance was evaluated using 2D film dosimetry and a novel motion-encoded and time-resolved pseudo-3D dosimetry approach.

RESULTS

We found an MLC leaf and jaw end-to-end latency of 328.05(±3.78) ms and 317.33(±4.64) ms, which was mitigated by a predictor. The VMAT plans required maximum MLC speeds of 12.1 cm/s and MLC tracking superimposes an additional 1.48 cm/s. A local 2%/1 mm gamma analysis with a static measurement as reference, revealed pass-rates of 28-46% without MLC tracking and 88-100% with MLC tracking for the 2D film analysis. Similarly the pseudo-3D gamma passing-rates increased from 22-77% to 92-100%. The dose area histograms show that MLC tracking increased the GTV D_98% by 5-20% and the PTV D_95% by 7-24%, giving similar target coverage as their respective static reference.

CONCLUSION

MRI-guided VMAT+MLC tracking is technically feasible on the MR-linac and results in highly conformal dose distribution.

Can volumetric modulated arc radiation therapy reduce organ at risk dose in stage 4 sinonasal tumors in dogs treated with boost irradiation?

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) introduced marked changes to cancer treatment in animals by reducing dose to organs at risk (OAR). As the next technological step, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has advantages (increased degrees-of-freedom, faster delivery) compared to fixed-field IMRT. Our objective was to investigate a possible advantage of VMAT over IMRT in terms of lower OAR doses in advanced-disease sinonasal tumors in dogs treated with simultaneously-integrated boost radiotherapy. A retrospective, analytical, observational study design was applied using 10 pre-existing computed tomography datasets on dogs with stage 4 sinonasal tumors. Each dataset was planned with both, 5-field IMRT and 2 arc VMAT with 10x4.83 Gy to the gross tumor volume and 10x4.2 Gy to the planning target volume. Adequate target dose coverage and normal tissue complication probability of brain ≤5% was required. Dose constraints aspired to were D60 <15 Gy for eyes, D2 <35.4 Gy for corneae, and Dmean <20 Gy for lacrimal glands. OAR dose was statistically significantly higher in IMRT plans than in VMAT plans. Median eye D60% was 18.5 Gy (interquartile range (IQR) 17.5) versus 16.1 Gy (IQR 7.4) (p = 0.007), median lacrimal gland dose 21.8 Gy (IQR 20.5) versus 18.6 Gy (IQR 7.0) (p = 0.013), and median cornea D2% 45.5 Gy (IQR 6.8) versus 39.9 Gy (IQR 10.0) (p<0.005) for IMRT versus VMAT plans, respectively. Constraints were met in 21/40 eyes, 7/40 corneae, and 24/40 lacrimal glands. Median delivery time was significantly longer for IMRT plans than for VMAT plans (p<0.01). Based on these results, VMAT plans were found to be superior in sparing doses to eyes, lacrimal glands, corneae. However, not all ocular OAR constraints could be met while ensuring adequate dose coverage and restricting brain toxicity risk for both planning techniques.

Comparison of non-coplanar optimization of static beams and arc trajectories for intensity-modulated treatments of meningioma cases

Two methods for non-coplanar beam direction optimization, one for static beams and another for arc trajectories, were proposed for intracranial tumours. The results of the beam angle optimizations were compared with the beam directions used in the clinical plans. Ten meningioma cases already treated were selected for this retrospective planning study. Algorithms for non-coplanar beam angle optimization (BAO) and arc trajectory optimization (ATO) were used to generate the corresponding plans. A plan quality score, calculated by a graphical method for plan assessment and comparison, was used to guide the beam angle optimization process. For each patient, the clinical plans (CLIN), created with the static beam orientations used for treatment, and coplanar VMAT approximated plans (VMAT) were also generated. To make fair plan comparisons, all plan optimizations were performed in an automated multicriteria calculation engine and the dosimetric plan quality was assessed. BAO and ATO plans presented, on average, moderate global plan score improvements over VMAT and CLIN plans. Nevertheless, while BAO and CLIN plans assured a more efficient OARs sparing, the ATO and VMAT plans presented a higher coverage and conformity of the PTV. Globally, all plans presented high-quality dose distributions. No statistically significant quality differences were found, on average, between BAO, ATO and CLIN plans. However, automated plan solution optimizations (BAO or ATO) may improve plan generation efficiency and standardization. In some individual patients, plan quality improvements were achieved with ATO plans, demonstrating the possible benefits of this automated optimized delivery technique.

An empirical method for splitting arcs in VMAT

PURPOSE

We present a new approach to determine the optimal arc split for VMAT beams which is an extension of our recently published algorithm for selecting optimal beam angles in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) MATERIAL AND METHODS: The proposed approach uses an objective function based scoring method called "ψ - score" to determine optimal arc splitting strategy. To validate our approach, we applied it in different clinical cases: Abdomen-Para aortic node, Lung, Pancreas and Prostate. Basically, for all clinical cases, two set of plans were created, namely VMAT plan and VMAT_S plan using Pinnacle³ (V16.2, Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc.). In the VMAT plans, full arc (360°) with 4-degree gantry spacing was used during optimization to compute the "ψ - score". Subsequently the avoidable arc portions were identified and removed using the ψ - score plot followed by the final optimization (VMAT_S).

RESULTS

Equivalent or better OAR sparing, and similar target coverage were achieved in VMAT_S plans compared to VMAT plans. VMAT_S reduced the number of control points and monitor units by 24.2% and 12.9% respectively. On the average, beam on time was reduced by 21.9% and low dose volume (5 Gy isodose volume) to healthy tissues was reduced by 4.9% in VMAT_S compared to VMAT plans.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrated that the proposed method is useful for reducing the monitor units, beam on time and low dose volume without significantly compromising plan quality and most useful for non-centrically located targets.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a dosimetric comparison with dynamic IMRT and step-and-shoot IMRT

Aim:

The aim of this study was to compare volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with dynamic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (dIMRT) and step-and-shoot IMRT (ssIMRT) for different treatment sites.

Materials and methods:

Twelve patients were selected for the planning comparison study. This included three head and neck, three brain, three rectal and three cervical cancer patients. Total dose of 50 Gy was given for all the plans. Plans were done for Elekta synergy with Monaco treatment planning system. All plans were generated with 6 MV photons beam. Plan evaluation was based on the ability to meet the dose volume histogram, dose homogeneity index, conformity index and radiation delivery time, and monitor unit needs to deliver the prescribed dose.

Results:

The VMAT and dIMRT plans achieved the better conformity (CI98% = 0·965 ± 0·023) and (CI98% = 0·939 ± 0·01), respectively, while ssIMRT plans were slightly inferior (CI98% = 0·901 ± 0·038). The inhomogeneity in the planning target volume (PTV) was highest with ssIMRT with HI equal to 0·097 ± 0·015 when compared to VMAT with HI equal to 0·092 ± 0·0369 and 0·095 ± 0·023 with dIMRT. The integral dose is found to be inferior with VMAT 105·31 ± 53·6 (Gy L) when compared with dIMRT 110·75 ± 52·9 (Gy L) and ssIMRT 115 38 ± 55·1(Gy L). All the techniques respected the planning objective for all organs at risk. The delivery time per fraction for VMAT was much lower than dIMRT and ssIMRT.

Findings:

Our results indicate that dIMRT and VMAT provide better sparing of normal tissue, homogeneity and conformity than ssIMRT with reduced treatment delivery time.

Dosimetry and Feasibility Studies of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy With Deep Inspiration Breath-Hold Using Optical Surface Management System for Left-Sided Breast Cancer Patients

Background

During radiotherapy (RT) procedure of breast cancer, portions of the heart and lung will receive some radiation dose, which may result in acute and late toxicities. In the current study, we report the experience of our single institution with organs at risk (OARs)–sparing RT with deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) using an Optical Surface Management System (OSMS) and compare the dosimetric parameters with that of free breathing (FB).

Patients and Methods

Forty-eight cases diagnosed as early stage left-sided breast cancer scheduled for postoperative RT were enrolled. The OSMS was used to monitor the breathing magnitude and track the real-time respiratory status, which can control a stable lung and heart volume during RT delivery under DIBH. We did the dosimetric analysis of the heart, left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery, lungs, and contralateral breast under FB and DIBH plans.

Results

Compared with FB–volumetric-modulated arc therapy (FB-VMAT), DIBH-VMAT resulted in significantly changed volumes to the heart and lungs receiving irradiation dose. The average mean heart dose and average D2%, V₅, and V₁₀ showed significant differences between the DIBH and FB techniques. For the LAD coronary artery, we found significantly reduced average mean dose, D2%, and V₁₀ with DIBH. Similar results were also found in the lungs and contralateral breast. The use of flattening-filter–free decreased treatment time compared with the flat beam mode in our VMAT (p < 0.05). For the 48 patients, there were no significant differences in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions between OSMS and cone beam CT.

Conclusions

DIBH-VMAT with OSMS is very feasible in daily practice with excellent patient compliance in our single-center experience. Note that OSMS is an effective tool that may allow easier-to-achieve precise positioning and better and shorter position-verify time. Meanwhile, compared with FB, DIBH was characterized by lower doses to OARs, which may reduce the probability of cardiac and pulmonary complications in the future.

Dosimetric comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and helical tomotherapy for adjuvant treatment of bilateral breast cancer

Purpose:

Dosimetric comparison between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of bilateral breast cancer (BBC).

Materials and methods:

Ten patients treated on HT were selected retrospectively. Dose prescription was 50 Gy in 25 fractions to breast/chest wall and supraclavicular fossa (SCF) while tumour bed was simultaneously boosted to 61 Gy in 25 fractions. VMAT plans were made with four mono-isocentric partial arcs. The monitoring unit (MU) and treatment time were used to quantify the treatment efficiency. Target volumes were compared for homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI) while organs at risk (OARs) were compared for relevant dose volumes and integral doses (IDs).

Result:

For targets, no significant difference is observed between VMAT and HT in CI but VMAT could give better HI. The mean lung dose, V20 and V5 is 10·6 Gy versus 8·4 Gy (p-value 0·03), 12% versus 11·5% (p-value 0·5) and 78·1% versus 43·4% (p-value 0·005), respectively. The mean heart dose, V30 and V5 is 4·9 Gy versus 4·7 Gy (p-value 0·88), 0·5% versus 1·5% (p-value 0·18) and 26·2% versus 22·8% (p-value 0·4). Integral dose (ID) for the whole body and heart are comparable: 289 Gy kg versus 299 Gy kg (p-value 0·24) and 2·9 Gy kg versus 2·8 Gy kg (p-value 0·80). ID for lungs was significantly higher with VMAT: 7·9 Gy kg versus 6·3 Gy kg (p-value 0·03). There is a 53% reduction in treatment time and 78% in MU with VMAT against HT.

Conclusion:

VMAT can generate clinically acceptable plans comparable to HT for BBC. HT shows better control over low dose spillage in lungs compared to VMAT thereby increasing ID to lungs. VMAT shows better homogeneity and efficient treatment delivery than HT.

Characteristics of inverse gamma histograms

This work explores the characteristics of the inverse gamma histogram and its potential use as part of the patient specific quality assurance (PSQA) program for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). ArcCheck measured dose files and TPS predicted dose files were imported and analysed using the in-house inverse gamma code developed in the Python package. Inverse gamma with fixed distance-to-agreement of 2 mm were calculated for 23 VMAT arcs. Dose difference histograms were plotted for six arbitrarily selected arcs with the 95th and 90th percentile values calculated. Dose difference histograms enabled visualisation of the dose difference distribution information. The 95th and 90th percentile values are equivalent to the dose difference criteria where the gamma pass rate is 95% and 90% respectively. These values can be used as a guide to assess plan acceptability, especially for plans that failed the initial gamma evaluation. The inverse gamma histograms are demonstrated to be a useful tool for plan evaluation in addition to the traditional gamma evaluation method. It contains dose difference or distance-to-agreement distribution information, which could be clinically useful for plan evaluation.

The impact of the field width on VMAT plan quality and the assessment of half field method

Purpose

The goal of this work is to investigate the field width dependence of the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan quality and to propose a half field method to irradiate large volumes effectively with VMAT.

Materials and methods

We compared four different VMAT methods; namely three full field (3ff), four full field (4ff), three half field (3hf), four half field (4hf). To evaluate the impact of the field width on VMAT plan quality, 12 different size PTVs were created in the virtual phantom and treatment plans generated for each PTV were compared. The effectiveness of our half field method was tested using computed tomography (CT) data of 10 nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.

Results

In the virtual phantom study, organs at risk (OAR) mean dose, the maximum point dose, and Homogeneity Index (HI) were found to be field width dependent. Conformation Number (CN) was not significantly affected. In the clinical study, 4hf plans obtained statistically significant dose reduction at brainstem (P < 0.001), right parotid (P = 0.034), oral cavity (P < 0.001), larynx (P = 0.003), cochlea (P = 0.017), lips (P = 0.024), and Body‐PTV (P = 0.04) compared to 4ff plans.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that VMAT plan quality is dependent on the field width. Half field VMAT method, with the help of reduced field width, shows a clear advantage for the irradiation of large size targets compared to traditionally used full field VMAT plans.

Comparison of nodal irradiation dose using radiotherapy for patients with thoracic esophageal cancer

The present study aimed to compare incidental nodal irradiation (INI) doses using volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), 5-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (5F-IMRT) and 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) treatment plans for patients with thoracic esophageal cancer (EC). A total of 15 patients with thoracic EC were selected for participation between October 2016 and July 2017 at the Hangzhou Cancer Hospital. Regional lymph nodal stations were contoured according to 3D CT-based images of the Japan Esophageal Society Guidelines. All patients were treated with 60 Gy using VMAT, 5F-IMRT and 3D-CRT plans. Dose-volume histograms of planning target volume (PTV), lung, heart, spinal cord and incidental nodal irradiation were compared between the three plans. 5F-IMRT was superior in PTV_V95% (the volume of the PTV receiving 95% of the prescription dose, P=0.003) and the VMAT plan was best in terms of conformal index (P=0.005). V20 and V30 were reduced by 10.7-22.6% (P=0.002) and 12.8-21% (P=0.026), respectively, in normal lung tissue using the VMAT plan. 5F-IMRT demonstrated the lowest maximum dose (Dmax) for the spinal cord (P=0.037). For the INI, 3D-CRT exhibited the highest equivalent uniform dose (EUD) values for 106pre (P=0.014) and 106tb-L (P=0.03) in upper-thoracic EC. The mean EUD of all lymph nodal regions in middle-thoracic EC were >40 Gy in VMAT and 5F-IMRT plans; the VMAT plan had higher EUD values in lower-thoracic EC compared with 5F-IMRT, 3D-CRT plans for INI. VMAT were comparable to the 5F-IMRT plan with respect to dosimetric characteristics for planning and INI doses to thoracic nodal levels NO 105-112 are considerable for thoracic EC.

Treatment planning of VMAT and step-and-shoot IMRT delivery techniques for single fraction spine SBRT: An intercomparative dosimetric analysis and phantom-based quality assurance measurements

PURPOSE

To retrospectively compare clinically treated step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (ssIMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans in dosimetric endpoints and pretreatment quality assurance (QA) measurements.

METHODS

Five single fraction spine SBRT (18 Gy) cases - including one cervical, two thoracic, and two lumbar spines - clinically treated with ssIMRT were replanned with VMAT, and all plans were delivered to a phantom for comparing plan quality and delivery accuracy. Furthermore, we analyzed 98 clinically treated plans (18 Gy single fraction), including 34 ssIMRT and 29 VMAT for cervical/thoracic spine, and 19 ssIMRT and 16 VMAT for lumbar spine. The conformality index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated, and QA measurement records were compared. For the spinal cord/cauda equina, the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (D_0.03cc ) and volume receiving 10 or 12 Gy (V_10Gy /V_12Gy ) were recorded. Statistical significance was tested with the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Compared to ssIMRT, replanned VMAT plans had lower V_10Gy /V_12Gy and D_0.03cc to the spinal cord/cauda equina in all five cases, and better CI in three out of five cases. The VMAT replans were slightly less homogeneous than those of ssIMRT plans. Both modalities passed IMRT QA with >95% passing rate with (3%, 3 mm) gamma criteria. With the 98 clinical cases, for cervical/thoracic ssIMRT and VMAT plans, the median V_10Gy of spinal cord was 4.15% and 1.85% (P = 0.004); the median D_0.03cc of spinal cord was 10.85 Gy and 10.10 Gy (P = 0.032); the median CI was 1.28 and 1.08 (P = 0.009); the median HI were 1.34 and 1.33 (P = 0.697), respectively. For lumbar spine, no significant dosimetric endpoint differences were observed. The two modalities were comparable in delivery accuracy.

CONCLUSION

From our clinically treated plans, we found that VMAT plans provided better dosimetric quality and comparable delivery accuracy when compared to ssIMRT for single fraction spine SBRT.

Efficacy and Tolerance of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy for Skull Base Meningioma

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of normofractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (RT) and intensity modulated RT with helical tomotherapy for skull base meningioma.

Methods and Materials

Between January 2009 and 2014, 46 patients with skull base meningioma were treated with normofractionated intensity modulated RT in stereotactic conditions (50%) or with helical tomotherapy (50%). Most of the lesions were localized in the cavernous sinus (59%). The mean planning target volume was 47.2 mL (range, 1.1-223 mL).

Results

After treatment, 5 lesions exhibited a partial response radiologically and 39 lesions were stable. At the time of treatment, 35 patients were symptomatic with a mean of 2 symptoms per patient. The most frequent symptoms were visual impairment (41%), cranial nerve dysfunction (20%), and headache (16%). The median follow-up time was 42 months (range, 10-76 months). After RT, 71% of patients exhibited an improvement of at least 1 symptom with a median interval of 15.6 months (range, 5.3-30.5 months). The most frequent improved symptoms were cranial nerve deficits (47%), visual impairment (45%), and headache (42%).The clinical response was correlated with the clinical target volume (CTV) margin (P = .06), extended clinical follow-up time (P = .004), and larger planning target volume (P = .05) by univariate analysis. Taking in account correlation factors, in the multivariate analysis, only CTV was a favorable significant factor of clinical improvement (P = .049; hazard ratio: 5 95%; confidence interval, 1.1-28). We observed 3 cases of trigeminal nerve dysfunction at 4.2, 5.7, and 24.6 months; 2 cases of visual disturbance at 10.1 and 24 months; 2 cases of neurocognitive disorders at 12.9 and 35.2 months; and 1 case of stroke at 20.3 months.

Conclusions

RT for skull base meningiomas is an effective and safe treatment, leading in most cases to clinical improvement. The addition of a CTV margin to meningioma volume improved the symptoms of patients.

Comparison of patient-specific intensity modulated radiation therapy quality assurance for the prostate across multiple institutions

Aim

To evaluate the success of a patient-specific intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA) practice for prostate cancer patients across multiple institutions using a questionnaire survey.

Background

The IMRT QA practice involves different methods of dose distribution verification and analysis at different institutions.

Materials and Methods

Two full-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan and 7 fixed-gantry IMRT plan with DMLC were used for patient specific QA across 22 institutions. The same computed tomography image and structure set were used for all plans. Each institution recalculated the dose distribution with fixed monitor units and without any modification. Single-point dose measurement with a cylindrical ionization chamber and dose distribution verification with a multi-detector or radiochromic film were performed, according to the QA process at each institution.

Results

Twenty-two institutions performed the patient-specific IMRT QA verifications. With a single-point dose measurement at the isocenter, the average difference between the calculated and measured doses was 0.5 ± 1.9%. For the comparison of dose distributions, 18 institutions used a two or three-dimensional array detector, while the others used Gafchromic film. In the γ test with dose difference/distance-to-agreement criteria of 3%-3 mm and 2%-2 mm with a 30% dose threshold, the median gamma pass rates were 99.3% (range: 41.7%-100.0%) and 96.4% (range: 29.4%-100.0%), respectively.

Conclusion

This survey was an informative trial to understand the verification status of patient-specific IMRT QA measurements for prostate cancer. In most institutions, the point dose measurement and dose distribution differences met the desired criteria.

Single-Isocenter Multitarget Stereotactic Radiosurgery Is Safe and Effective in the Treatment of Multiple Brain Metastases

Purpose

Multiple studies have reported favorable outcomes for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the treatment of limited brain metastases. An obstacle of SRS in the management of numerous metastases is the longer treatment time using traditional radiosurgery. Single-isocenter multitarget (SIMT) SRS is a novel technique that permits rapid therapy delivery to multiple metastases. There is a lack of clinical evidence regarding its efficacy and safety. We report the outcomes of patients treated with this technique.

Methods and Materials

We reviewed the records of patients with intact or resected brain metastases treated with SRS in 1 to 5 fractions using SIMT technique at our institution, with at least 1 available follow-up brain magnetic resonance imaging. Survival, disease control, and toxicity were evaluated using Cox regression, logistic regression, and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results

We identified 173 patients with 1014 brain metastases. Median follow up was 12.7 months. Median beam-on time was 4.1 minutes. The median dose to the brain was 219.4 cGy. Median overall survival and freedom from intracranial progression were 13.2 and 6.3 months, respectively. Overall survival did not differ between patients treated with greater than or less than 4 lesions (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.61; P = .91). Actuarial 1- and 2-year local control were 99.0% and 95.1%, respectively. Rates of grade 2 and grade 3 or higher radionecrosis were 1.4% and 0.9%, respectively.

Conclusions

SIMT radiosurgery delivered in 1 to 5 fractions offers excellent local control and acceptable toxicity in the treatment of multiple intact and postoperative brain metastases. This technique should be evaluated prospectively.

Lower doses to hippocampi and other brain structures for skull-base meningiomas with intensity modulated proton therapy compared to photon therapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Radiotherapy of skull-base meningiomas is challenging due to the close proximity of multiple sensitive organs at risk (OARs). This study systematically compared intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) based on automated treatment planning. Differences in OARs sparing, with specific focus on the hippocampi, and low-dose delivery were quantified.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients, target diameter >3 cm, were included. Automated plan generation was used to calculate a VMAT plan with three non-coplanar arcs, an IMRT plan with nine non-coplanar beams with optimized gantry and couch angles, and an IMPT plan with three patient-specific selected non-coplanar beams. A prescription dose of 50.4 GyRBE in 28 fractions was used. The same set of constraints and prioritized objectives was used. All plans were rescaled to the same target coverage. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the statistical significance of differences in OAR dose parameters between planning techniques.

RESULTS

Compared to VMAT and IMRT, IMPT significantly improved dose conformity to the target volume. Consequently, large dose reductions in OARs were observed. With respect to VMAT, the mean dose and D_40% in the bilateral hippocampus were on average reduced by 48% and 74%, respectively (p ≤ 0.005). With IMPT, the mean dose in the normal brain and volumes receiving 20-30 Gy were up to 47% lower (p ≤ 0.01). When comparing IMPT and IMRT, even larger dose differences in those OARs were observed.

CONCLUSION

For skull-base meningiomas IMPT allows for a considerable dose reduction in the hippocampi, normal brain and other OARs compared to both non-coplanar VMAT and IMRT, which may lead to a clinically relevant reduction of late neurocognitive side effects.

Identifying early diffusion imaging biomarkers of regional white matter injury as indicators of executive function decline following brain radiotherapy: A prospective clinical trial in primary brain tumor patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Executive function (EF) decline is common after brain radiation therapy (RT), yet the etiology is unclear. We analyzed the association between longitudinal changes in frontal lobe white matter microstructure and decline in EF following RT in brain tumor patients on a prospective clinical trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Diffusion tensor imaging was obtained on 22 patients with brain tumors prior to RT, as well as 3- and 6-months post-RT, in a prospective, observational trial. Fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), radial diffusivity (RD), and axial diffusivity (AD) were calculated within the superficial white matter (SWM) of the anterior cingulate (AC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Measures of cognitive flexibility, verbal fluency, and verbal set-shifting were obtained pre- and post-RT. Reliable change indices were calculated to determine significant baseline to 6-month EF changes.

RESULTS

Decreases in FA and increases in MD were observed in the caudal AC (CAC) at 3-months post-RT. CAC changes were characterized by increased RD bilaterally. From baseline to 6-months post-RT, decreased FA and increased MD and RD of the CAC was associated with decline in verbal set-shifting ability, whereas increased MD in the CAC was associated with a decline in cognitive flexibility.

CONCLUSION

White matter underlying the AC may be particularly vulnerable to radiation effects. Early microstructural loss within AC SWM represents an important biomarker for EF decline, and dose reduction in this region may represent a possibility for cognitive preservation for patients receiving radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy Advances in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology

Radiation therapy (RT) represents an integral component in the treatment of many pediatric brain tumors. Multiple advances have emerged within pediatric radiation oncology that aim to optimize the therapeutic ratio—improving disease control while limiting RT-related toxicity. These include innovations in treatment planning with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) simulation, as well as increasingly sophisticated radiation delivery techniques. Advanced RT techniques, including photon-based RT such as intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), as well as particle beam therapy and stereotactic RT, have afforded an array of options to dramatically reduce radiation exposure of uninvolved normal tissues while treating target volumes. Along with advances in image guidance of radiation treatments, novel RT approaches are being implemented in ongoing and future prospective clinical trials. As the era of molecular risk stratification unfolds, personalization of radiation dose, target, and technique holds the promise to meaningfully improve outcomes for pediatric neuro-oncology patients.

A retrospective comparison of intensity-modulated arc therapy and 3-dimensional conformal approaches in the planning of grade 3 gliomas

Purpose

To evaluate the extent to which intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) for high-grade gliomas is comparable with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) in relation to the dose delivered to normal brain tissue (NBT), planning target volume (PTV) conformity and the dose delivered to brainstem and optic chiasma.

Method

A total of 16 randomly selected 3DCRT treatment plans of grade 3 gliomas were re-planned using an IMAT planning technique and dose–volume histograms were compared. Primary outcomes were maximum, mean, 1/3 and 2/3 doses to NBT outside the PTV. Also the maximum, mean, D50 and D20 doses to PTV. Secondary outcomes were maximum and mean doses to the brainstem and optic chiasm. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare data.

Results

IMAT led to a statistically significant increase in mean dose to NBT (34·4 versus 33·3 Gy, (p=0·047) but a statistically significant reduction in maximum dose to NBT (62·7 versus 63·8 Gy, p=0·004) compared with 3DCRT. IMAT led to statistically significant reductions in maximum, D50 and D20 doses to the PTV (63·3 versus 64·7 Gy, p=0·001; 60·0 versus 60·7 Gy, p=0·001 and 60·5 versus 61·8 Gy, p=0·002, respectively). No statistically significant differences were seen in doses to brainstem and optic chiasm.

Conclusion

IMAT is at least comparable with 3DCRT in relation to minimising dose to NBT and ensuring good PTV conformity. Doses delivered to organs at risk using IMAT were also comparable with 3DCRT. This study supports the continued use of IMAT for the treatment of high-grade gliomas.

Effect of translational couch shifts in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans and predicting its impact on daily dose delivery

Aim

To evaluate the impact of couch translational shifts on dose–volume histogram (DVH) and radiobiological parameters [tumour control probability (TCP), equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP)] of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans and to develop a simple and swift method to predict the same online, on a daily basis.

Methods

In total, ten prostate patients treated with VMAT technology were selected for this study. The plans were generated using Eclipse TPS and delivered using Clinac ix LINAC equipped with a Millennium 120 multileaf collimator. In order to find the effect of systematic translational couch shifts on the DVH and radiobiological parameters, errors were introduced in the clinically accepted base plan with an increment of 1 mm and up to 5 mm from the iso-centre in both positive and negative directions of each of the three axis, x [right–left (R-L)], y [superior–inferior (S-I)] and z [anterior–posterior (A-P)]. The percentages of difference in these parameters (∆D, ∆TCP, ∆EUD and ∆NTCP) were analyzed between the base plan and the error introduced plans. DVHs of the base plan and the error plans were imported into the MATLAB software (R2013a) and an in-house MATLAB code was generated to find the best curve fitted polynomial functions for each point on the DVH, there by generating predicted DVH for planning target volume (PTV), clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risks (OARs). Functions f(x, vj), f(y, vj) and f(z, vj) were found to represent the variation in the dose when there are couch translation shifts in R-L, S-I and A-P directions, respectively. The validation of this method was done by introducing daily couch shifts and comparing the treatment planning system (TPS) generated DVHs and radiobiological parameters with MATLAB code predicted parameters.

Results

It was noted that the variations in the dose to the CTV, due to both systematic and random shifts, were very small. For CTV and PTV, the maximum variations in both DVH and radiobiological parameters were observed in the S-I direction than in the A-P or R-L directions. ∆V70 Gy and ∆V60 Gy of the bladder varied more due to S-I shift whereas, ∆V40 Gy, ∆EUD and ∆NTCP varied due to A-P shifts. All the parameters in rectum were most affected by the A-P shifts than the shifts in other two directions. The maximum percentage of deviation between the TPS calculated and MATLAB predicted DVHs of plans were calculated for targets and OARs and were found to be less than 0·5%.

Conclusion

The variations in the parameters depend upon the direction and magnitude of the shift. The DVH curves generated by the TPS and predicted by the MATLAB showed good correlation.

[Base of the skull meningioma: Efficacy, clinical tolerance and radiological evaluation after radiotherapy]

Skull base meningioma leads to functional disturbances, which can significantly alter the quality of life. The optimal management of these lesions, whose goals are neurological preservation and tumour local control, is not yet clearly established. It is widely recognized that the goal of a radical excision should be abandoned despite the advances in the field of microsurgery of skull base lesions. Although less morbid, partial tumour excision would be associated with increased risk of local tumour recurrence. Although discussed both exclusive and adjuvant have proven to be highly successful in terms of clinical improvement and local control. Various radiation techniques have demonstrated their efficacy in the management of this pathology. However, high rates of clinical improvement are in contrast with low rates of radiological improvement. The notion of clinical and radiological dissociation appeared. However, in most of these studies, the analysis of the radiological response could be subject of legitimate criticism. This work proposes to review the local control, the efficacy and the clinical tolerance and the radiological response of the various radiation techniques for the meningioma of the base of the skull and to demonstrate the interest of quantitative volumetric analyses in the follow-up of meningioma after radiotherapy.

Optimal collimator rotation based on the outline of multiple brain targets in VMAT

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate the dosimetric quality in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with optimal collimator angles that can represent the outline of multiple brain targets.

Methods

Twenty patients with multiple target volumes in the brain cases were selected retrospectively. To better represent the outline of the multiple brain targets, four conformal arc plans were generated for each patient using one full arc with four collimator settings. The optimal collimator angles calculated from the integrated multi-leaf collimator (MLC) aperture that had the smallest aperture size for certain collimator settings of the conformal arc plan were selected. VMAT plans with the optimal collimator angles with angular sections of 40° and 60° (Colli-VMAT (40°), Colli-VMAT (60°)) were generated, followed by evaluation of field sizes, dose-volumetric parameters and total monitor units (MUs).

Results

Patient-averaged values of field sizes for Colli-VMAT (40°) (111.5 cm²) were lowest and 1.3 times smaller than those for Std-VMAT (143.6 cm²). Colli-VMAT plans improved sparing of most normal organs but for brain stem and left parotid gland. For the total MUs, the averaged values obtained with the Colli-VMAT (40°) (390 ± 148 MU) were smaller than those obtained with the Std-VMAT (472 ± 235 MU).

Conclusions

The Colli-VMAT plans with smaller angular sections could be suitable in the clinic for multiple brain targets as well as for irregularly shaped targets. Determination of the optimal collimator rotation generally showed good normal tissue sparing and MU reduction for multiple brain targets.

A Systematic Analysis of 2 Monoisocentric Techniques for the Treatment of Multiple Brain Metastases

BACKGROUND

In this treatment planning study, we compare the plan quality and delivery parameters for the treatment of multiple brain metastases using 2 monoisocentric techniques: the Multiple Metastases Element from Brainlab and the RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy from Varian Medical Systems.

METHODS

Eight patients who were treated in our institution for multiple metastases (3-7 lesions) were replanned with Multiple Metastases Element using noncoplanar dynamic conformal arcs. The same patients were replanned with the RapidArc technique in Eclipse using 4 noncoplanar arcs. Both techniques were designed using a single isocenter. Plan quality metrics (conformity index, homogeneity index, gradient index, and R50%), monitor unit, and the planning time were recorded. Comparison of the Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans was performed using Shapiro-Wilk test, paired Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

A paired Wilcoxon signed rank test between Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc showed comparable plan quality metrics and dose to brain. Mean ± standard deviation values of conformity index were 1.8 ± 0.7 and 1.7 ± 0.6, homogeneity index were 1.3 ± 0.1 and 1.3 ± 0.1, gradient index were 5.0 ± 1.8 and 5.1 ± 1.9, and R50% were 4.9 ± 1.8 and 5.0 ± 1.9 for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. Mean brain dose was 2.3 and 2.7 Gy for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. The mean value of monitor units in Multiple Metastases Element plan was 7286 ± 1065, which is significantly lower than the RapidArc monitor units of 9966 ± 1533 ( P < .05).

CONCLUSION

For the planning of multiple brain lesions to be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, Multiple Metastases Element planning software produced equivalent conformity, homogeneity, dose falloff, and brain V12 Gy but required significantly lower monitor units, when compared to RapidArc plans.

Sparing of normal tissues with volumetric arc radiation therapy for glioblastoma: single institution clinical experience

Background

Patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) require radiotherapy as part of definitive management. Our institution has adopted the use of volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) due to superior sparing of the adjacent organs at risk (OARs) compared to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Here we report our clinical experience by analyzing target coverage and sparing of OARs for 90 clinical treatment plans.

Methods

VMAT and IMRT patient cohorts comprising 45 patients each were included in this study. For all patients, the planning target volume (PTV) received 50 Gy in 30 fractions, and the simultaneous integrated boost PTV received 60 Gy. The characteristics of the two patient cohorts were examined for similarity. The doses to target volumes and OARs, including brain, brainstem, hippocampi, optic nerves, eyes, and cochleae were then compared using statistical analysis. Target coverage and normal tissue sparing for six patients with both clinical IMRT and VMAT plans were analyzed.

Results

PTV coverage of at least 95% was achieved for all plans, and the median mean dose to the boost PTV differed by only 0.1 Gy between the IMRT and VMAT plans. Superior sparing of the brainstem was found with VMAT, with a median difference in mean dose being 9.4 Gy. The ipsilateral cochlear mean dose was lower by 19.7 Gy, and the contralateral cochlea was lower by 9.5 Gy. The total treatment time was reduced by 5 min. The difference in the ipsilateral hippocampal D_100% was 12 Gy, though this is not statistically significant (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

VMAT for GBM patients can provide similar target coverage, superior sparing of the brainstem and cochleae, and be delivered in a shorter period of time compared with IMRT. The shorter treatment time may improve clinical efficiency and the quality of the treatment experience. Based on institutional clinical experience, use of VMAT for the treatment of GBMs appears to offer no inferiority in comparison to IMRT and may offer distinct advantages, especially for patients who may require re-irradiation.

Dosimetric effects of sectional adjustments of collimator angles on volumetric modulated arc therapy for irregularly-shaped targets

PURPOSE

To calculate an optimal collimator angle at each of sectional arcs in a full-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan and evaluate dosimetric quality of these VMAT plans comparing full-arc VMAT plans with a fixed collimator angle.

METHODS

Seventeen patients who had irregularly-shaped target in abdominal, head and neck, and chest cases were selected retrospectively. To calculate an optimal collimator angle at each of sectional arcs in VMAT, integrated MLC apertures which could cover all shapes of target determined by beam's-eye view (BEV) within angular sections were obtained for each VMAT plan. The angular sections were 40°, 60°, 90° and 120°. When the collimator settings were rotated at intervals of 2°, we obtained the optimal collimator angle to minimize area size difference between the integrated MLC aperture and collimator settings with 5 mm-margins to the integrated MLC aperture. The VMAT plans with the optimal collimator angles (Colli-VMAT) were generated in the EclipseTM. For comparison purposes, one full-arc VMAT plans with a fixed collimator angles (Std-VMAT) were generated. The dose-volumetric parameters and total MUs were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean dose-volumetric parameters for target volume of Colli-VMAT were comparable to Std-VMAT. Colli-VMAT improved sparing of most normal organs but for brain stem, compared to Std-VMAT for all cases. There were decreasing tendencies in mean total MUs with decreasing angular section. The mean total MUs for Colli-VMAT with the angular section of 40° (434 ± 95 MU, 317 ± 81 MU, and 371 ± 43 MU for abdominal, head and neck, and chest cases, respectively) were lower than those for Std-VMAT (654 ± 182 MU, 517 ± 116 MU, and 533 ± 25 MU, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

For an irregularly-shaped target, Colli-VMAT with the angular section of 40° reduced total MUs and improved sparing of normal organs, compared to Std-VMAT.

Comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and dynamic conformal arc treatment planning for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery

The aim was to analyze arc therapy techniques according to the number and position of the brain lesions reported by comparing dynamic noncoplanar conformal arcs (DCA), two coplanar full arcs (RAC) with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), multiple noncoplanar partial arcs with VMAT (RANC), and two full arcs with VMAT and 10° table rotation (RAT). Patients with a single lesion (n= 10), multiple lesions (n = 10) or a single lesion close to organs at risk (n = 5) and previously treated with DCA were selected. For each patient, the DCA treatment was replanned with all VMAT techniques. All DCA plans were compared with VMAT plans and evaluated in regard to the different quality indices and dosimetric parameters. For single lesion, homogeneity index (HI) better results were found for the RANC technique (0.17 ± 0.05) compared with DCA procedure (0.27± 0.05). Concerning conformity index (CI), the RAT technique gave higher and better values (0.85 ± 0.04) compared with those obtained with the DCA technique (0.77 ± 0.05). DCA improved healthy brain protection (8.35 ± 5.61 cc vs. 10.52 ± 6.40 cc for RANC) and reduced monitor unit numbers (3046 ± 374 MU vs. 4651 ± 736 for RANC), even if global room occupation was higher. For multiple lesions, VMAT techniques provided better HI (0.16) than DCA (0.24 ± 0.07). The CI was improved with RAT (0.8 ± 0.08 for RAT vs. 0.71 ± 0.08 for DCA). The V10Gy healthy brain was better protected with DCA (9.27 ± 4.57 cc). Regarding the MU numbers: RANC < RAT< RAC < DCA. For a single lesion close to OAR, RAT achieved high degrees of homogeneity (0.27 ± 0.03 vs. 0.53 ± 0.2 for DCA) and conformity (0.72± 0.06vs. 0.56 ± 0.13 for DCA) while sparing organs at risk (Dmax = 12.36 ± 1.05Gyvs. 14.12 ± 0.59 Gy for DCA, and Dmean = 3.96 ± 3.57Gyvs. 4.72 ± 3.28Gy for DCA). On the other hand, MU numbers were lower with DCA (2254 ± 190 MUvs. 3438 ± 457 MU for RANC) even if overall time was inferior with RAC. For a single lesion, DCA provide better plan considering low doses to healthy brain even if quality indexes are better for the others techniques. For multiple lesions, RANC seems to be the best compromise, due to the ability to deliver a good conformity and homogeneity plan while sparing healthy brain tissue. For a single lesion close to organs at risk, RAT is the most appropriate technique.

Analyzing the performance of ArcCHECK diode array detector for VMAT plan

AIM

The aim of this study is to evaluate performance of ArcCHECK diode array detector for the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) patient specific quality assurance (QA). VMAT patient specific QA results were correlated with ion chamber measurement. Dose response of the ArcCHECK detector was studied.

BACKGROUND

VMAT delivery technique improves the dose distribution. It is complex in nature and requires proper QA before its clinical implementation. ArcCHECK is a novel three dimensional dosimetry system.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve retrospective VMAT plans were calculated on ArcCHECK phantom. Point dose and dose map were measured simultaneously with ion chamber (IC-15) and ArcCHECK diode array detector, respectively. These measurements were compared with their respective TPS calculated values.

RESULTS

The ion chamber measurements are in good agreement with TPS calculated doses. Mean difference between them is 0.50% with standard deviation of 0.51%. Concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) obtained for ion chamber measurements is 0.9996. These results demonstrate a strong correlation between the absolute dose predicted by our TPS and the measured dose. The CCC between ArcCHECK doses and TPS predictions on the CAX was found to be 0.9978. In gamma analysis of dose map, the mean passing rate was 98.53% for 3% dose difference and 3 mm distance to agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

The VMAT patient specific QA with an ion chamber and ArcCHECK phantom are consistent with the TPS calculated dose. Statistically good agreement was observed between ArcCHECK measured and TPS calculated. Hence, it can be used for routine VMAT QA.

Clinical utility of RapidArc™ radiotherapy technology

RapidArc™ is a radiation technique that delivers highly conformal dose distributions through the complete rotation (360°) and speed variation of the linear accelerator gantry. This technique, called volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), compared with conventional radiotherapy techniques, can achieve high-target volume coverage and sparing damage to normal tissues. RapidArc delivers precise dose distribution and conformity similar to or greater than intensity-modulated radiation therapy in a short time, generally a few minutes, to which image-guided radiation therapy is added. RapidArc has become a currently used technology in many centers, which use RapidArc technology to treat a large number of patients. Large and small hospitals use it to treat the most challenging cases, but more and more frequently for the most common cancers. The clinical use of RapidArc and VMAT technology is constantly growing. At present, a limited number of clinical data are published, mostly concerning planning and feasibility studies. Clinical outcome data are increasing for a few tumor sites, even if only a little. The purpose of this work is to discuss the current status of VMAT techniques in clinical use through a review of the published data of planning systems and clinical outcomes in several tumor sites. The study consisted of a systematic review based on analysis of manuscripts retrieved from the PubMed, BioMed Central, and Scopus databases by searching for the keywords “RapidArc”, “Volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy”, and “Intensity-modulated radiotherapy”.

Impact of MLC properties and IMRT technique in meningioma and head-and-neck treatments

Purpose

The impact of multileaf collimator (MLC) design and IMRT technique on plan quality and delivery improvements for head-and-neck and meningioma patients is compared in a planning study.

Material and methods

Ten previously treated patients (5 head-and-neck, 5 meningioma) were re-planned for step-and-shoot IMRT (ssIMRT), sliding window IMRT (dMLC) and VMAT using the MLCi2 without (−) and with (+) interdigitation and the Agility-MLC attached to an Elekta 6MV linac. This results in nine plans per patient. Consistent patient individual optimization parameters are used. Plans are generated using the research tool Hyperion V2.4 (equivalent to Elekta Monaco 3.2) with hard constraints for critical structures and objectives for target structures. For VMAT plans, the improved segment shape optimization is used.

Critical structures are evaluated based on QUANTEC criteria. PTV coverage is compared by EUD, D_mean, homogeneity and conformity. Additionally, MU/plan, treatment times and number of segments are evaluated.

Results

As constrained optimization is used, all plans fulfill the hard constraints. Doses to critical structures do not differ more than 1Gy between the nine generated plans for each patient. Only larynx, parotids and eyes differ up to 1.5Gy (D_mean or D_max) or 7 % (volume-constraint) due to (1) increased scatter, (2) not avoiding structures when using the full range of gantry rotation and (3) improved leaf sequencing with advanced segment shape optimization for VMAT plans. EUD, D_mean, homogeneity and conformity are improved using the Agility-MLC. However, PTV coverage is more affected by technique. MU increase with the use of dMLC and VMAT, while the MU are reduced by using the Agility-MLC. Fastest treatments are always achieved using Agility-MLC, especially in combination with VMAT.

Conclusion

Fastest treatments with the best PTV coverage are found for VMAT plans with Agility-MLC, achieving the same sparing of healthy tissue compared to the other combinations of ssIMRT, dMLC and VMAT with either MLCi2^−/+ or Agility.

The importance of collimator angle error in volumetric-modulated arc therapy

Purpose

To evaluate the dosimetric errors associated with the effect of the collimator angle error in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments.

Methods and materials

Four patients with different planning target volume (PTV) and localisations treated using VMAT were analysed (high-risk prostate, low-risk prostate, head and neck (H&amp;N) and holocranial with hippocampus protection) in terms of dosimetric variations when errors in the collimator angle were introduced. Original plans underwent modifications of the planned collimator angles of ±0·5°, ±1° and ±1·5°. These modified plans were re-calculated using the same original plan fluencies, and the resulting dose–volume histograms and homogeneity index (HI-ICRU) were compared.

Results

For the high-risk prostate case, there was a noticeable loss of PTV dose coverage for collimator angle errors larger than ±1°, with HI-ICRU relative variations up to 75% in the range analysed. The low-risk prostate case did not present significant changes in organs at risk or PTV dose coverage. For the H&amp;N case, the spinal cord presented changes around 4% forD0·1 cc. In the holocranial case, optic lens showed dose variations up to 5% for collimator angle errors larger than ±1°.

Conclusions

The effect of the collimator error in VMAT increased as the PTV increased.

For selecting the position of the isocentre, one should be cautious, and whenever possible choose a position close to the geometrical centre of the PTVs in order to avoid or minimise errors from the calibration of the collimator angle.

Noncoplanar VMAT for nasopharyngeal tumors: Plan quality versus treatment time

PURPOSE

The authors investigated the potential of optimized noncoplanar irradiation trajectories for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments of nasopharyngeal patients and studied the trade-off between treatment plan quality and delivery time in radiation therapy.

METHODS

For three nasopharyngeal patients, the authors generated treatment plans for nine different delivery scenarios using dedicated optimization methods. They compared these scenarios according to dose characteristics, number of beam directions, and estimated delivery times. In particular, the authors generated the following treatment plans: (1) a 4π plan, which is a not sequenced, fluence optimized plan that uses beam directions from approximately 1400 noncoplanar directions and marks a theoretical upper limit of the treatment plan quality, (2) a coplanar 2π plan with 72 coplanar beam directions as pendant to the noncoplanar 4π plan, (3) a coplanar VMAT plan, (4) a coplanar step and shoot (SnS) plan, (5) a beam angle optimized (BAO) coplanar SnS IMRT plan, (6) a noncoplanar BAO SnS plan, (7) a VMAT plan with rotated treatment couch, (8) a noncoplanar VMAT plan with an optimized great circle around the patient, and (9) a noncoplanar BAO VMAT plan with an arbitrary trajectory around the patient.

RESULTS

VMAT using optimized noncoplanar irradiation trajectories reduced the mean and maximum doses in organs at risk compared to coplanar VMAT plans by 19% on average while the target coverage remains constant. A coplanar BAO SnS plan was superior to coplanar SnS or VMAT; however, noncoplanar plans like a noncoplanar BAO SnS plan or noncoplanar VMAT yielded a better plan quality than the best coplanar 2π plan. The treatment plan quality of VMAT plans depended on the length of the trajectory. The delivery times of noncoplanar VMAT plans were estimated to be 6.5 min in average; 1.6 min longer than a coplanar plan but on average 2.8 min faster than a noncoplanar SnS plan with comparable treatment plan quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' study reconfirms the dosimetric benefits of noncoplanar irradiation of nasopharyngeal tumors. Both SnS using optimized noncoplanar beam ensembles and VMAT using an optimized, arbitrary, noncoplanar trajectory enabled dose reductions in organs at risk compared to coplanar SnS and VMAT. Using great circles or simple couch rotations to implement noncoplanar VMAT, however, was not sufficient to yield meaningful improvements in treatment plan quality. The authors estimate that noncoplanar VMAT using arbitrary optimized irradiation trajectories comes at an increased delivery time compared to coplanar VMAT yet at a decreased delivery time compared to noncoplanar SnS IMRT.

Outcome and toxicity profiles in the treatment of locally advanced lung cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

To report about the outcome of radiation treatment of advanced lung cancer patients with volumetric modulated arcs [RapidArc (RA)].

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-five consecutive patients (all stages IIIA and IIIB) were treated with RA. Among them 71 % were men; 25.4 % presented unspecified non-small cell lung cancer, 41.3% adenocarcinoma and 33.3 % squamous cell carcinoma. Of them, 54.7 % received sequential chemotherapy while 45.3% were treated with concomitant regimen. Dose prescription ranged from 54 to 72 Gy. Analysis included survival, local control (LC) and toxicity profiles.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 21.2 months (range 6-75). One- two- and five-year actuarial LC was 91.9 ± 3.2, 79.5 ± 5.7 and 67.4 ± 9.5 %, respectively. Median survival was 19.0 ± 1.1 months. Actuarial survival at 1-2-5 years was 80.0 ± 4.6, 38.5 ± 5.9 and 15.2 ± 4.9 %, respectively. Acute toxicity of G2 was reported in 24, 25.3 and 4.0 % of patients for lung, esophageal and hematological profiles. A total of 2.7 % of patients reported G3 toxicity in the esophagus and 5.3 % of the patients experienced G3-G4 hematological toxicity. Significant differences were observed in all cases between concomitant and sequential chemotherapy regiments. Only 1.3 % (1 patient) showed G2 lung late toxicity. No significant correlation was found between toxicity and organ's irradiation levels.

CONCLUSION

RA proved to be a safe and advantageous treatment modality for advanced lung cancer with results in line with expectations from earlier literature.

VMAT planning study in rectal cancer patients

Background

To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (SA-VMAT) and double-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (DA-VMAT) plans in rectal cancer.

Method

Fifteen patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT in our institution were selected for this study. For each patient, three plans were generated with the planning CT scan: one using a fixed beam IMRT, and two plans using the VMAT technique: SA-VMAT and DA-VMAT. Dose prescription to the PTV was 50 Gy in 2 Gy per fraction. Dose volume histograms (DVH) for the target volume and the organs at risk (small bowel, bladder, femoral heads and healthy tissue) were compared for these different techniques. Monitor units (MU) and delivery treatment time were also reported.

Results

DA-VMAT achieved the highest minimum planning target volume (PTV) dose and the lowest maximal dose, resulting in the most homogeneous PTV dose distribution. DA-VMAT also yielded the best CI, although the difference was not statistically significant. Between SA-VMAT and IMRT, the target dose coverage was largely comparable; however, SA-VMAT was able to achieve a better V95 and V107. VMAT showed to be inferior to IMRT in terms of organ at risk sparing, especially for the small bowel. Compared with IMRT, DA-VMAT increased the V15 of small bowel nearly 55 cc. The MU and treatment delivery time were significantly reduced by the use of VMAT techniques.

Conclusion

VMAT is a new radiation technique that combines the ability to achieve highly conformal dose distributions with highly efficient treatment delivery. Considering the inferior role of normal tissue sparing, especially for small bowel, VMAT need further investigation in rectal cancer treatment.

A dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and non-coplanar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasal cavity and paranasal sinus cancer

Background

To compare dosimetric parameters of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and non-coplanar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasal cavity and paranasal sinus cancer with regard to the coverage of planning target volume (PTV) and the sparing of organs at risk (OAR).

Methods

Ten patients with nasal cavity or paranasal sinus cancer were re-planned by VMAT (two-arc) plan and non-coplanar IMRT (7-, 11-, and 15-beam) plans. Planning objectives were to deliver 60 Gy in 30 fractions to 95% of PTV, with maximum doses (D_max) of <50 Gy to the optic nerves, optic chiasm, and brainstem, <40 Gy to the eyes and <10 Gy to the lenses. The target mean dose (D_mean) to the parotid glands was <25 Gy, and no constraints were applied to the lacrimal glands. Planning was optimized to minimized doses to OAR without compromising coverage of the PTV. VMAT and three non-coplanar IMRT (7-, 11-, and 15-beam) plans were compared using the heterogeneity and conformity indices (HI and CI) of the PTV, D_max and D_mean of the OAR, treatment delivery time, and monitor units (MUs).

Results

The HI and CI of VMAT plan were superior to those of the 7-, 11-, and 15-beam non-coplanar IMRT. VMAT and non-coplanar IMRT (7-, 11-, and 15-beam) showed equivalent sparing effects for the optic nerves, optic chiasm, brainstem, and parotid glands. For the eyes and lenses, VMAT achieved equivalent or better sparing effects when compared with the non-coplanar IMRT plans. VMAT showed lower MUs and reduced treatment delivery time when compared with non-coplanar IMRT.

Conclusions

In 10 patients with nasal cavity or paranasal sinus cancer, a VMAT plan provided better homogeneity and conformity for PTV than non-coplanar IMRT plans, with a shorter treatment delivery time, while achieving equal or better OAR-sparing effects and using fewer MUs.

Dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated and volumetric arc radiation therapy for gastric cancer

The aim of the present study was to compare radiotherapy treatment plans for gastric cancer using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and single/double-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (SA/DA-VMAT) delivery techniques. A total of 29 postoperative gastric cancer patients were enrolled in this study and each patient was scheduled 5-field IMRT (5F-IMRT), 7-field IMRT (7F-IMRT), SA-VMAT and DA-VMAT techniques. Dose-volume histogram statistics, conformal index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and monitor units (MUs) were analyzed to compare treatment plans. The DA-VMAT plans exceeded the other three methods in terms of planning tumor volume dose and organs at risk in the kidneys, but not in the liver. DA-VMAT exhibited a better mean CI (0.87±0.03) and HI (0.10±0.01) than the other techniques. In addition, for the kidneys the dose sparing (V13, V18 and mean kidney dose) was improved by DA-VMAT plans. Similar results were observed for MUs. However, 5F-IMRT showed a marginal advantage in V30 and mean dose in normal liver when compared with DA-VMAT. The results of this study suggest that DA-VMAT provides improved tumor coverage when compared with 5F-IMRT, 7F-IMRT and SA-VMAT; however, DA-VMAT exhibits no advantage in liver protection when compared with 5F-IMRT. Further studies are required to establish differences in treatment outcomes among the four technologies.

Radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases with single-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (SIDCA)

PURPOSE

To propose single-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (SIDCA), a novel technique for radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases, and to compare SIDCA with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and multiple-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (MIDCA) for plan quality.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

SIDCA, MIDCA, and VMAT plans were created on 6 patients with 3-5 metastases. Plans were evaluated using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group conformity index (RCI), Paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), volumes that received more than 100% (V(100%)), 50% (V(50%)), 25% (V(25%)) and 10% (V(10%)) of prescription dose, total monitor units (MUs), and delivery time (DT).

RESULTS

SIDCA achieved conformal plans (RCI = 1.38 ± 0.12, PCI = 0.72 ± 0.06) with steep dose fall-off (GI = 3.97 ± 0.51). MIDCA plans had comparable plan quality and MUs as SIDCA, but 52% longer DT. The VMAT plans had better conformity (RCI = 1.15 ± 0.09, p < 0.01 and PCI = 0.86 ± 0.06, p < 0.01) than SIDCA, worse GI (4.34 ± 0.46, p < 0.01), higher V(25%) (p = 0.05) and V(10%) (p = 0.02), 49% less MUs and 46% shorter DT.

CONCLUSIONS

All three techniques achieved conformal plans with steep dose fall-off from targets. SIDCA plans had similar plan quality as MIDCA but more efficient to delivery. SIDCA plans had lower peripheral dose spread than VMAT; VMAT plans had better conformity and faster delivery time than SIDCA.

Critical appraisal of RapidArc radiosurgery with flattening filter free photon beams for benign brain lesions in comparison to GammaKnife: a treatment planning study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the role of RapidArc (RA) for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of benign brain lesions in comparison to GammaKnife (GK) based technique.

METHODS

Twelve patients with vestibular schwannoma (VS, n = 6) or cavernous sinus meningioma (CSM, n = 6) were planned for both SRS using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) by RA. 104 MV flattening filter free photon beams with a maximum dose rate of 2400 MU/min were selected. Data were compared against plans optimised for GK. A single dose of 12.5 Gy was prescribed. The primary objective was to assess treatment plan quality. Secondary aim was to appraise treatment efficiency.

RESULTS

For VS, comparing best GK vs. RA plans, homogeneity was 51.7 ± 3.5 vs. 6.4 ± 1.5%; Paddick conformity Index (PCI) resulted 0.81 ± 0.03 vs. 0.84 ± 0.04. Gradient index (PGI) was 2.7 ± 0.2 vs. 3.8 ± 0.6. Mean target dose was 17.1 ± 0.9 vs. 12.9 ± 0.1 Gy. For the brain stem, D(1cm3) was 5.1 ± 2.0 Gy vs 4.8 ± 1.6 Gy. For the ipsilateral cochlea, D(0.1cm3) was 1.7 ± 1.0 Gy vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 Gy. For CSM, homogeneity was 52.3 ± 2.4 vs. 12.4 ± 0.6; PCI: 0.86 ± 0.05 vs. 0.88 ± 0.05; PGI: 2.6 ± 0.1 vs. 3.8 ± 0.5; D(1cm3) to brain stem was 5.4 ± 2.8 Gy vs. 5.2 ± 2.8 Gy; D(0.1cm3) to ipsi-lateral optic nerve was 4.2 ± 2.1 vs. 2.1 ± 1.5 Gy; D(0.1cm3) to optic chiasm was 5.9 ± 3.1 vs. 4.5 ± 2.1 Gy. Treatment time was 53.7 ± 5.8 (64.9 ± 24.3) minutes for GK and 4.8 ± 1.3 (5.0 ± 0.7) minutes for RA for schwannomas (meningiomas).

CONCLUSIONS

SRS with RA and FFF beams revealed to be adequate and comparable to GK in terms of target coverage, homogeneity, organs at risk sparing with some gain in terms of treatment efficiency.

Geometric and dosimetric uncertainties in intracranial stereotatctic treatments for multiple nonisocentric lesions

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of geometric uncertainties of patient position on treatments of multiple nonisocentric intracranial lesions. The average distance between lesions in patients with multiple targets was determined by a retrospective survey of patients with multiple lesions. Retrospective patient imaging data from fractionated stereotactic patients were used to calculate interfractional and intrafractional patient position uncertainty. Three different immobilization devices were included in the positioning study. The interfractional and intrafractional patient positioning error data were used to calculate the geometric offset of a lesion located at varying distances from the mechanical isocenter for treatments of multiple lesions with a single arc, assuming that no intrafractional position correction is employed during an arc rotation. Dosimetric effects were studied using two representative lesions of two sizes, 6 mm and 13 mm maximum dimensions, and prescribed to 20 Gy and 18 Gy, respectively. Distances between lesions ranged from < 10 mm to 150 mm, which would correspond to a range of isocenter to lesion separations of < 10 mm to 75 mm, assuming an isocenter located at the geometric mean. In the presence of a full six degree of freedom patient correction system, the effects of the intrafractional patient positioning uncertainties were less than 1.8 mm (3.6 mm) for 1σ (2σ) deviations for lesion spacing up to 75 mm assuming a quadratic summation of 1σ and 2σ. Without the benefit of a six DOF correction device, only correcting for three translations, the effects of the intrafractional patient positioning uncertainties were within 3.1 mm (7.2 mm) for 1σ (2σ) deviations for distances up to 75 mm. 1σ and 2σ deviations along all six axes were observed in 3.6% and 0.3%, respectively, of 974 fractions analyzed. Dosimetric effects for 2 mm and 4 mm offsets were most significant for the small lesion with minimum dose (Dmin) decreasing from 20 Gy to 13.6 Gy and 5.7 Gy and volume receiving the prescription (V_20Gy) reducing from 100% to 57% and 16%, respectively. The dosimetric effects on the larger lesion were less pronounced with Dmin reducing from 18 Gy to 17.5 Gy and 14.2 Gy, and V_18Gy reducing from 100% to 98.3% and 85.4%, for 2 mm and 4 mm offsets, respectively. In the 1σ scenario (3.6% of patients) angular uncertainties in patient positioning can introduce 1.0 mm shifts in the location of the lesion position at distances of 75 mm, compared to an isocentric treatment even with a full six DOF correction. Without the ability to correct angular positioning errors, a lesion positioned 75 mm away from the mechanical isocenter can be located in 3.6% of patients > 3.0 mm distant from the planned position. Dosimetric results depend upon the distance from isocenter and the size of the target. Single isocenter treatments for multiple lesions should be considered only when full six DOF corrections can be applied, the intrafractional immobilization precision is well quantified, and a PTV expansion is included for more distant lesions to account for unavoidable residual patient positioning uncertainties.

PACS number: 87.55.Qr, 87.53.Ly, 87.55.D‐

A dosimetric comparison of IMRT versus helical tomotherapy for brain tumors

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Helical tomotherapy (HT) can deliver highly conformal, uniform doses to the target volume. However, HT can only be delivered in a coplanar mode. The purpose of this study was to perform a dosimetric comparison of HT versus coplanar (cIMRT) and non-coplanar (n-cIMRT) beam arrangements on a conventional linear accelerator in a diverse group of brain tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 45 treatment plans were calculated retrospectively for 15 cases. For each case, 3 different delivery techniques (n-cIMRT, cIMRT and HT) were used. The treatment plans were compared using the parameters of the target coverage (conformity index; CI) and homogeneity (HI) for the planning target volume (PTV) and the maximum and mean doses for organs at risk (OARs).

RESULTS

Median HI and CI were the best for HT plans and the worst for cIMRT. The largest reduction of maximum dose for lenses and mean dose for both eyes was achieved for n-cIMRT plans. Mean dose for chiasm and the ipsilateral optic nerve were the lowest for HT. The contralateral optic nerve was most spared with n-cIMRT. For D1% in the brain stem, there was no significant difference between HT and the IMRT plans.

CONCLUSIONS

Both HT and n-cIMRT are capable of producing conformal and homogeneous treatment plans with a good sparing of OARs. However, due to the non-coplanar capabilities of IMRT, n-cIMRT led to a superior dose reduction to the lenses.

Use of plan quality degradation to evaluate tradeoffs in delivery efficiency and clinical plan metrics arising from IMRT optimizer and sequencer compromises

PURPOSE

Plan degradation resulting from compromises made to enhance delivery efficiency is an important consideration for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans. IMRT optimization and/or multileaf collimator (MLC) sequencing schemes can be modified to generate more efficient treatment delivery, but the effect those modifications have on plan quality is often difficult to quantify. In this work, the authors present a method for quantitative assessment of overall plan quality degradation due to tradeoffs between delivery efficiency and treatment plan quality, illustrated using comparisons between plans developed allowing different numbers of intensity levels in IMRT optimization and/or MLC sequencing for static segmental MLC IMRT plans.

METHODS

A plan quality degradation method to evaluate delivery efficiency and plan quality tradeoffs was developed and used to assess planning for 14 prostate and 12 head and neck patients treated with static IMRT. Plan quality was evaluated using a physician's predetermined "quality degradation" factors for relevant clinical plan metrics associated with the plan optimization strategy. Delivery efficiency and plan quality were assessed for a range of optimization and sequencing limitations. The "optimal" (baseline) plan for each case was derived using a clinical cost function with an unlimited number of intensity levels. These plans were sequenced with a clinical MLC leaf sequencer which uses >100 segments, assuring delivered intensities to be within 1% of the optimized intensity pattern. Each patient's optimal plan was also sequenced limiting the number of intensity levels (20, 10, and 5), and then separately optimized with these same numbers of intensity levels. Delivery time was measured for all plans, and direct evaluation of the tradeoffs between delivery time and plan degradation was performed.

RESULTS

When considering tradeoffs, the optimal number of intensity levels depends on the treatment site and on the stage in the process at which the levels are limited. The cost of improved delivery efficiency, in terms of plan quality degradation, increased as the number of intensity levels in the sequencer or optimizer decreased. The degradation was more substantial for the head and neck cases relative to the prostate cases, particularly when fewer than 20 intensity levels were used. Plan quality degradation was less severe when the number of intensity levels was limited in the optimizer rather than the sequencer.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of plan quality degradation allows for a quantitative assessment of the compromises in clinical plan quality as delivery efficiency is improved, in order to determine the optimal delivery settings. The technique is based on physician-determined quality degradation factors and can be extended to other clinical situations where investigation of various tradeoffs is warranted.

Dosimetric comparison of 3D conformal, IMRT, and V-MAT techniques for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI)

The purpose is to dosimetrically compare the following 3 delivery techniques: 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (V-MAT) in the treatment of accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). Overall, 16 patients with T1/2N0 breast cancer were treated with 3D-CRT (multiple, noncoplanar photon fields) on the RTOG 0413 partial-breast trial. These cases were subsequently replanned using static gantry IMRT and V-MAT technology to understand dosimetric differences among these 3 techniques. Several dosimetric parameters were used in plan quality evaluation, including dose conformity index (CI) and dose-volume histogram analysis of normal tissue coverage. Quality assurance studies including gamma analysis were performed to compare the measured and calculated dose distributions. The IMRT and V-MAT plans gave more conformal target dose distributions than the 3D-CRT plans (p < 0.05 in CI). The volume of ipsilateral breast receiving 5 and 10Gy was significantly less using the V-MAT technique than with either 3D-CRT or IMRT (p < 0.05). The maximum lung dose and the ipsilateral lung volume receiving 10 (V10) or 20Gy (V20) were significantly less with both V-MAT and IMRT (p < 0.05). The IMRT technique was superior to 3D-CRT and V-MAT of low dose distributions in ipsilateral lung (p < 0.05 in V5 and D5). The total mean monitor units (MUs) for V-MAT (621.0 ± 111.9) were 12.2% less than those for 3D-CRT (707.3 ± 130.9) and 46.5% less than those for IMRT (1161.4 ± 315.6) (p < 0.05). The average machine delivery time was 1.5 ± 0.2 minutes for the V-MAT plans, 7.0 ± 1.6 minutes for the 3D-CRT plans, and 11.5 ± 1.9 minutes for the IMRT plans, demonstrating much less delivery time for V-MAT. Based on this preliminary study, V-MAT and IMRT techniques offer improved dose conformity as compared with 3D-CRT techniques without increasing dose to the ipsilateral lung. In terms of MU and delivery time, V-MAT is significantly more efficient for APBI than for conventional 3D-CRT and static-beam IMRT.

Multicriteria optimization informed VMAT planning

We developed a patient-specific volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization procedure using dose-volume histogram (DVH) information from multicriteria optimization (MCO) of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. The study included 10 patients with prostate cancer undergoing standard fractionation treatment, 10 patients with prostate cancer undergoing hypofractionation treatment, and 5 patients with head/neck cancer. MCO-IMRT plans using 20 and 7 treatment fields were generated for each patient on the RayStation treatment planning system (clinical version 2.5, RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden). The resulting DVH of the 20-field MCO-IMRT plan for each patient was used as the reference DVH, and the extracted point values of the resulting DVH of the MCO-IMRT plan were used as objectives and constraints for VMAT optimization. Weights of objectives or constraints of VMAT optimization or both were further tuned to generate the best match with the reference DVH of the MCO-IMRT plan. The final optimal VMAT plan quality was evaluated by comparison with MCO-IMRT plans based on homogeneity index, conformity number of planning target volume, and organ at risk sparing. The influence of gantry spacing, arc number, and delivery time on VMAT plan quality for different tumor sites was also evaluated. The resulting VMAT plan quality essentially matched the 20-field MCO-IMRT plan but with a shorter delivery time and less monitor units. VMAT plan quality of head/neck cancer cases improved using dual arcs whereas prostate cases did not. VMAT plan quality was improved by fine gantry spacing of 2 for the head/neck cancer cases and the hypofractionation-treated prostate cancer cases but not for the standard fractionation-treated prostate cancer cases. MCO-informed VMAT optimization is a useful and valuable way to generate patient-specific optimal VMAT plans, though modification of the weights of objectives or constraints extracted from resulting DVH of MCO-IMRT or both is necessary.

Fractionated radiation therapy for vestibular schwannoma

Vestibular schwannomas are the most common tumors of the cerebellopontine angle. Multiple management paradigms exist for patients with these benign tumors, including observation, microsurgery, stereotactic radiosurgery, and fractionated radiation therapy, or some combination of these. While the proper course of management is controversial, the goals of therapy are to achieve excellent local tumor control and optimize functional outcomes with as little treatment-related morbidity as possible. Decision-making is tailored to patient-specific factors such as tumor size, clinical presentation, patient age, and goals of hearing preservation. We review the literature in order to summarize the application of fractionated radiation therapy to this tumor entity, where it is used as a primary treatment or, more commonly, as an adjunct therapy. We also provide an overview of the use of fractionated radiation therapy for the preservation of hearing and facial function, and dosing and other technical considerations, in light of the indolent natural history of vestibular schwannomas. We also discuss potential risks associated with this treatment modality, including its effects on temporal bone structures and cranial nerves among other possible complications. Lastly, we outline future directions in this rapidly evolving segment of vestibular schwannoma therapy, which has benefited from the advent of intensity-modulated radiation therapy coupled with stereotactic localization.

SmartArc-based volumetric modulated arc therapy for endometrial cancer: a dosimetric comparison with helical tomotherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the feasibility of using volumetric modulated arc therapy with SmartArc (VMAT-S) to achieve radiation delivery efficiency higher than that of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) when treating endometrial cancer, while maintaining plan quality.

METHODS

Nine patients with endometrial cancer were retrospectively studied. Three plans per patient were generated for VMAT-S, IMRT and HT. The dose distributions for the planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk (OARs) and normal tissue were compared. The monitor units (MUs) and treatment delivery time were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The average homogeneity index was 1.06, 1.10 and 1.07 for the VMAT-S, IMRT and HT plans, respectively. The V40 for the rectum, bladder and pelvis bone decreased by 9.0%, 3.0% and 3.0%, respectively, in the VMAT-S plan relative to the IMRT plan. The target coverage and sparing of OARs were comparable between the VMAT-S and HT plans. The average MU was 823, 1105 and 8403 for VMAT-S, IMRT and HT, respectively; the average delivery time was 2.6, 8.6 and 9.5 minutes, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For endometrial cancer, the VMAT-S plan provided comparable quality with significantly shorter delivery time and fewer MUs than with the IMRT and HT plans. In addition, more homogeneous PTV coverage and superior sparing of OARs in the medium to high dose region were observed in the VMAT-S relative to the IMRT plan.