Whole abdominopelvic radiotherapy (WAPRT) using intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT): first clinical experience

Validation of complex radiotherapy techniques using polymer gel dosimetry

Modern radiotherapy delivers highly conformal dose distributions to irregularly shaped target volumes while sparing the surrounding normal tissue. Due to the complex planning and delivery techniques, dose verification and validation of the whole treatment workflow by end-to-end tests became much more important and polymer gel dosimeters are one of the few possibilities to capture the delivered dose distribution in 3D. The basic principles and formulations of gel dosimetry and its evaluation methods are described and the available studies validating device-specific geometrical parameters as well as the dose delivery by advanced radiotherapy techniques, such as 3D-CRT/IMRT and stereotactic radiosurgery treatments, the treatment of moving targets, online-adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy as well as proton and ion beam treatments, are reviewed. The present status and limitations as well as future challenges of polymer gel dosimetry for the validation of complex radiotherapy techniques are discussed.

Four irradiation and three positioning techniques for whole-breast radiotherapy: Is sophisticated always better?

PURPOSE

We report on a dosimetrical study of three patient positions (supine, prone dive, and prone crawl) and four irradiation techniques for whole-breast irradiation (WBI): wedged-tangential fields (W-TF), tangential-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (TF-IMRT), multi-beam IMRT (MB-IMRT), and intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT). This is the first study to evaluate prone crawl positioning in WBI and the first study to quantify dosimetrical and anatomical differences with prone dive positioning.

METHODS

We analyzed five datasets with left- and right-sided patients (n = 51). One dataset also included deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) data. A total of 252 new treatment plans were composed. Dose-volume parameters and indices of conformity were calculated for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs-at-risk (OARs). Furthermore, anatomical differences among patient positions were quantified to explain dosimetrical differences.

RESULTS

Target coverage was inferior for W-TF and supine position. W-TF proved overall inferior, and IMAT proved foremost effective in supine position. TF-IMRT proved competitive to the more demanding MB-IMRT and IMAT in prone dive, but not in prone crawl position. The lung-sparing effect was overall confirmed for both prone dive and prone crawl positioning and was largest for prone crawl. For the heart, no differences were found between prone dive and supine positioning, whereas prone crawl showed cardiac advantages, although minor compared to the established heart-sparing effect of DIBH. Dose differences for contralateral breast were minor among the patient positions. In prone crawl position, the ipsilateral breast sags deeper and the PTV is further away from the OARs than in prone dive position.

CONCLUSIONS

The prone dive and prone crawl position are valid alternatives to the supine position in WBI, with largest advantages for lung structures. For the heart, differences are small, which establishes the role of DIBH in different patient positions. These results may be of particular interest to radiotherapy centers with limited technical resources.

Radiation Dosimetry by Use of Radiosensitive Hydrogels and Polymers: Mechanisms, State-of-the-Art and Perspective from 3D to 4D

Gel dosimetry was developed in the 1990s in response to a growing need for methods to validate the radiation dose distribution delivered to cancer patients receiving high-precision radiotherapy. Three different classes of gel dosimeters were developed and extensively studied. The first class of gel dosimeters is the Fricke gel dosimeters, which consist of a hydrogel with dissolved ferrous ions that oxidize upon exposure to ionizing radiation. The oxidation results in a change in the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) relaxation, which makes it possible to read out Fricke gel dosimeters by use of quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The radiation-induced oxidation in Fricke gel dosimeters can also be visualized by adding an indicator such as xylenol orange. The second class of gel dosimeters is the radiochromic gel dosimeters, which also exhibit a color change upon irradiation but do not use a metal ion. These radiochromic gel dosimeters do not demonstrate a significant radiation-induced change in NMR properties. The third class is the polymer gel dosimeters, which contain vinyl monomers that polymerize upon irradiation. Polymer gel dosimeters are predominantly read out by quantitative MRI or X-ray CT. The accuracy of the dosimeters depends on both the physico-chemical properties of the gel dosimeters and on the readout technique. Many different gel formulations have been proposed and discussed in the scientific literature in the last three decades, and scanning methods have been optimized to achieve an acceptable accuracy for clinical dosimetry. More recently, with the introduction of the MR-Linac, which combines an MRI-scanner and a clinical linear accelerator in one, it was shown possible to acquire dose maps during radiation, but new challenges arise.

A comparative dosimetric study of cervical cancer patients with para-aortic lymph node metastasis treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy vs. 9-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Background

To compare the dosimetric characteristics between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and 9-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (9F-IMRT) for cervical cancer patients with para-aortic lymph node (PALN) metastasis.

Methods

We selected 20 patients who had received extended-field radiotherapy for cervical cancer with PALN metastasis. IMRT and VMAT plans were compared in terms of target, organs at risk (OARs), homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), the number of monitor units (MUs) and treatment time (s).

Results

The CI and HI of VMAT plans were superior to those of IMRT plans (P<0.05). As for OARs, the mean maximum doses (Dmean) to the kidneys in the VMAT plans were all lower than those in IMRT plans (P<0.001). V40, V50 of the rectum, and V40 of the bladder in VMAT plans involved fewer doses than IMRT plans (P<0.001). Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT reduced the average number of MUs by 51% and the average treatment time by 31%.

Conclusions

Both VMAT and IMRT plans can satisfy clinical dosimetric demands and protect OARs. VMAT has the best performance on CI and HI and can better protect the OARs. VMAT plans have fewer MUs and improve treatment efficiency.

Long-term Benefit of Tumor Volume-Directed Involved Field Radiation Therapy in the Management of Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to report on long-term effectiveness of involved field radiation therapy (IFRT) in the salvage of localized recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 27 patients with a diagnosis of epithelial ovarian cancer who received tumor volume-directed IFRT for localized extraperitoneal recurrences (either as consolidation after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) or as attempted salvage if unresectable) forms the basis of this report. All patients were heavily pretreated with multiple chemotherapy regimens. Involved field radiation therapy was primarily with external beam (median dose, 50.4 Gy). Local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was defined as freedom from in-field recurrences and was considered as a measure of effectiveness of radiotherapy. Statistical analyses evaluated association between disease-free survival, overall survival, LRFS, and various prognostic factors. Comparison was also made with a similar but unmatched cohort with localized recurrences salvaged by additional chemotherapy instead of local therapies (NIFRT group).

RESULTS

Of 27 patients, 17 had optimal CRS before RT. The actuarial survival at 5 and 10 years (in parenthesis) from date of radiation were LRFS (70% and 60%), overall survival (30% and 19%), and disease-free survival (33% and 20%). None of the NIFRT patients survived beyond 5 years from initiation of salvage chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term follow-up in this selected series confirmed the benefit of IFRT (±CRS) in localized ROC. Chemotherapy salvage in a similar NIFRT group was not equivalent, suggesting a role for locoregional therapies in selected patients with ROC.

Survey of Resident Education in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been gaining increasing popularity among practicing physicians in the U.S., but the extent to which radiation oncology residents are taught the principles of this technology and are trained to use IMRT remains unknown. In this paper, we assessed the current level of resident education in IMRT in the United States.

Chief residents at all 77 accredited radiation oncology programs were sent a 13-question survey addressing formal didactics and hands-on experience in IMRT. The survey assessed the frequency, subject, and format of IMRT didactics. Questions also addressed the number of IMRT patients and anatomical sites treated, resident involvement in the IMRT process, and the intent of IMRT use. Finally, residents were asked for their opinions on their IMRT education.

Sixty-one surveys (79%) were completed. Overall, forty-three respondents (71%) reported receiving formal IMRT didactics, with nearly one-third reporting extensive didactics (≥ 3 lectures/seminars et cetera per year). The most common didactic formats were lectures (95%) and journal clubs (63%), most commonly supervised by physicists (98%). Involvement by physicians and radiobiologists were reported by 63% and 7% of respondents, respectively. Overall, 87% of respondents had hands-on IMRT training, with nearly one-half having treated >25 patients. The most common sites treated were head and neck (94%) and prostate (81%). Involvement in all aspects of the IMRT process was common, particularly target and tissue delineation (98%) and plan evaluation (93%). Most respondents (79%) with hands-on experience reported receiving formal didactics. However, nearly one-third received no or only minimal formal didactics. The percentage of respondents desiring increased IMRT didactics and hands-on experience were 70% and 47%, respectively.

Our results suggest that the great majority of radiation oncology residents in the United States are currently exposed to didactics and hands-on training in IMRT. Areas of potential improvement include increased involvement of physicians and radiobiologists in formal IMRT didactics.

Comparison between Dual Arc VMAT and 7F-IMRT in the protection of hippocampus for patients during whole brain radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetric characteristics for protection of the hippocampus between dual arc VMAT (volumetric modulated arc therapy) and 7 fields intensity-modulated radiation therapy (7F-IMRT) for patients with brain metastases from lung cancer under the whole brain radiotherapy.

METHODS

Based on ten cases with brain metastases from lung cancer, two types of radiotherapy plans were designed, namely, dual arc VMAT and 7F-IMRT. Provided that the clinical requirements were satisfied, the comparisons of target dose distribution, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), dose of organs at risk (OARs), monitor units (MU) and treatment time between dual arc VMAT and 7F-IMRT were investigated for their dosimetric difference.

RESULTS

Both treatment plans met the requirements of clinical treatments. However, the PTV-HA conformity and homogeneity of dual arc VMAT were superior to those of 7F-IMRT (P < 0.05). As to OARs, the mean maximum doses (Dmax) of hippocampus, eyes and optic nerves in the dual arc VMAT plan were all lower than those in 7F-IMRT plan (P < 0.05), but the result had no statistical significance (P < 0.05) for the maximum dose of lens. Compared with 7F-IMRT, dual arc VMAT reduced the average number of MU by 67% and the average treatment time by 74%. Therefore, treatment time was shortened by dual arc VMAT.

CONCLUSION

With regards to the patients with brain metastases from lung cancer under the whole brain radiotherapy, the PTV-HA conformity and homogeneity of dual arc VMAT were superior to those of 7F-IMRT under the precise of meeting the clinical requirements. In addition, dual arc VMAT remarkably reduced the irradiation dose to OARs (hippocampus, eyes and optic nerves), MU and treatment time, as well, guaranteed patients with better protection.

Implementation of Constant Dose Rate and Constant Angular Spacing Intensity-modulated Arc Therapy for Cervical Cancer by Using a Conventional Linear Accelerator

BACKGROUND

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) can only be implemented on the new generation linacs such as the Varian Trilogy® and Elekta Synergy®. This prevents most existing linacs from delivering VMAT. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using a conventional linear accelerator delivering constant dose rate and constant angular spacing intensity-modulated arc therapy (CDR-CAS-IMAT) for treating cervical cancer.

METHODS

Twenty patients with cervical cancer previously treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using Varian Clinical 23EX were retreated using CDR-CAS-IMAT. The planning target volume (PTV) was set as 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. Plans were evaluated based on the ability to meet the dose volume histogram. The homogeneity index (HI), target volume conformity index (CI), the dose to organs at risk, radiation delivery time, and monitor units (MUs) were also compared. The paired t-test was used to analyze the two data sets. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 19.0 software.

RESULTS

Compared to the IMRT group, the CDR-CAS-IMAT group showed better PTV CI (0.85 ± 0.03 vs. 0.81 ± 0.03, P = 0.001), clinical target volume CI (0.46 ± 0.05 vs. 0.43 ± 0.05, P = 0.001), HI (0.09 ± 0.02 vs. 0.11 ± 0.02, P = 0.005) and D95 (5196.33 ± 28.24 cGy vs. 5162.63 ± 31.12 cGy, P = 0.000), and cord D2 (3743.8 ± 118.7 cGy vs. 3806.2 ± 98.7 cGy, P = 0.017) and rectum V40 (41.9 ± 6.1% vs. 44.2 ± 4.8%, P = 0.026). Treatment time (422.7 ± 46.7 s vs. 84.6 ± 7.8 s, P = 0.000) and the total plan Mus (927.4 ± 79.1 vs. 787.5 ± 78.5, P = 0.000) decreased by a factor of 0.8 and 0.15, respectively. The IMRT group plans were superior to the CDR-CAS-IMAT group plans considering decreasing bladder V50 (17.4 ± 4.5% vs. 16.6 ± 4.2%, P = 0.049), bowel V30 (39.6 ± 6.5% vs. 36.6 ± 7.5%, P = 0.008), and low-dose irradiation volume; there were no significant differences in other statistical indexes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cervical cancer treated with CDR-CAS-IMAT using Varian Clinical 23EX can get equivalent or superior dose distribution compared to those treated with IMRT. CDR-CAS-IMAT has a less treatment time and MU, which can reduce the uncertainty factor and patient discomfort in treatment.

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”.

Successful salvage treatment of myxoid liposarcoma with multiple peritoneal seeding using helical tomotherapy-based intraperitoneal radiotherapy: a case report

Background

Myxoid liposarcoma is the most common soft-tissue sarcoma that metastasizes to the peritoneal cavity. Recently, an advanced intensity-modulated radiotherapy, known as helical tomotherapy, has been introduced to improve target coverage, while reducing normal tissue radiation. Here, we report a case of myxoid liposarcoma with multiple peritoneal seeding that was chemotherapy-refractory, but was successfully salvaged by helical tomotherapy-based intraperitoneal radiotherapy.

Case presentation

A 71-year-old East-Asian male was initially diagnosed with myxoid liposarcoma in his left thigh by excision. Six years later, the patient underwent a left pneumonectomy for metastatic myxoid liposarcoma in the left lung. Since then, the patient was treated with two segmental resections, and multiple lines of chemotherapy, for repeated recurrences in the peritoneal cavity. The patient underwent intraperitoneal radiotherapy followed by tumor boost radiotherapy, as salvage treatment for chemotherapy-resistant metastatic peritoneal myxoid liposarcoma. The prescribed dose was 24 Gy delivered in 15 fractions of 1.6 Gy over 3 weeks, followed by a 16 Gy boost dose administered in eight fractions of 2 Gy, to multifocal peritoneal lesions. A positron emission tomography scan obtained 8 weeks after completion of radiotherapy, showed a complete metabolic response of metastatic peritoneal lesions. Radiotherapy was well tolerated, without any side effects. In a computed tomography scan obtained 20 weeks after completion of radiotherapy, most of the peritoneal metastatic lesions had disappeared, except for two small residual nodules.

Conclusion

This case suggests that low fraction-sized intraperitoneal radiotherapy (1.6 Gy administered once daily), followed by a focal boost using helical tomotherapy, is a feasible treatment without side effects. It produced an excellent tumor response, and durable intraperitoneal control for metastatic peritoneal myxoid liposarcoma.

Whole abdominopelvic radiotherapy in the palliative treatment of pseudomyxoma peritonei

BACKGROUND

Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is a rare clinical syndrome characterized by mucinous peritoneal disease arising from disseminated peritoneal adenomucinosis. Primary treatment involves a combination of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). There is no consensus on the proper treatment of recurrent PMP. In selected patients, repeated cytoreductive surgery with or without HIPEC might improve outcome. However, every repeated debulking procedure becomes less effective with increased morbidity.

CASE REPORT

We present a case of a patient with intestinal obstruction caused by recurrent pseudomyxoma peritonei. We treated the patient with whole abdominopelvic radiotherapy (WAPRT) using intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) to a total dose of 33 Gy, delivered in 22 daily fractions. The treatment was well tolerated and resulted in resolution of the obstruction for a period of 24 months.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, we present the first case report showing the possibility of resolving intestinal obstruction with WAPRT in a patient with recurrent PMP. It is our opinion that WAPRT delivered by IMAT, in analogy with ovarian cancer, should be considered as a palliative treatment option in managing patients with recurrent PMP especially in case of obstruction.

Comparison of two different IMRT planning techniques in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Effect on parotid gland radiation doses

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of two different intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning techniques on parotid gland doses in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Radiotherapy for 10 NPC patients referred to the University of Istanbul Cerrahpasa Medical School was planned with arc- and static seven-field IMRT. The simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique was used to deliver 70 Gy (2.12 Gy per fraction) to the primary tumor and involved nodes; 60 Gy (1.81 Gy per fraction) to the entire nasopharynx and 54 Gy (1.63 Gy per fraction) to elective lymph nodes in 33 fractions. Plans also aimed to keep the mean parotid dose below 26 Gy and limit the maximum doses to the spinal cord and brain stem to 45 and 54 Gy, respectively. Mean parotid gland doses for the two planning techniques were compared using a paired t-test. Target coverage and dose inhomogeneity were evaluated by calculating conformity- (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) values.

RESULTS

Target coverage and dose homogeneity were identical and good for both planning techniques: CI = 1.05 ± 0.08 and 1.05 ± 0.08; HI = 1.08 ± 0.02 and 1.07 ± 0.01 for arc- and static field IMRT, respectively. Mean doses to contralateral parotid glands were 25.73 ± 4.27 and 27.73 ± 3.5 Gy(p = 0.008) for arc- and static field IMRT plans, respectively, whereas mean ipsilateral parotid doses were 30.65 ± 6.25 and 32.55 ± 5.93 Gy (non-significant p-value), respectively. Mean monitor units (MU) per fraction for the 10 patients were considerably lower for arc- than for static field treatments-540.5 ± 130.39 versus 1288.4 ± 197.28 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Normal tissues--particularly the parotid glands--are better spared with the arc technique in patients with NPC. MU and treatment times are considerably reduced in arc IMRT plans.

[Is volumetric modulated arctherapy the final evolution of conformal radiotherapy?]

Technology development in radiotherapy has improved significantly during the last decade. The rapid evolution of 3D radiotherapy to intensity-modulated radiotherapy was possible thanks to inverse planning systems. Intensity modulated radiotherapy improved in its turn by possibilities of volumetric irradiation during a single rotation, reducing therefore the overall treatment. This article presents the technical parameters of this volumetric irradiation technique and a review of miscellaneous clinical indications.

Treatment planning and dosimetric comparison study on two different volumetric modulated arc therapy delivery techniques

AIM

To compare and evaluate the performance of two different volumetric modulated arc therapy delivery techniques.

BACKGROUND

Volumetric modulated arc therapy is a novel technique that has recently been made available for clinical use. Planning and dosimetric comparison study was done for Elekta VMAT and Varian RapidArc for different treatment sites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten patients were selected for the planning comparison study. This includes 2 head and neck, 2 oesophagus, 1 bladder, 3 cervix and 2 rectum cases. Total dose of 50 Gy was given for all the plans. All plans were done for RapidArc using Eclipse and for Elekta VMAT with Monaco treatment planning system. All plans were generated with 6 MV X-rays for both RapidArc and Elekta VMAT. Plans were evaluated based on the ability to meet the dose volume histogram, dose homogeneity index, radiation conformity index, estimated radiation delivery time, integral dose and monitor units needed to deliver the prescribed dose.

RESULTS

RapidArc plans achieved the best conformity (CI95% = 1.08 ± 0.07) while Elekta VMAT plans were slightly inferior (CI95% = 1.10 ± 0.05). The in-homogeneity in the PTV was highest with Elekta VMAT with HI equal to 0.12 ± 0.02 Gy when compared to RapidArc with 0.08 ± 0.03. Significant changes were observed between the RapidArc and Elekta VMAT plans in terms of the healthy tissue mean dose and integral dose. Elekta VMAT plans show a reduction in the healthy tissue mean dose (6.92 ± 2.90) Gy when compared to RapidArc (7.83 ± 3.31) Gy. The integral dose is found to be inferior with Elekta VMAT (11.50 ± 6.49) × 10(4) Gy cm(3) when compared to RapidArc (13.11 ± 7.52) × 10(4) Gy cm(3). Both Varian RapidArc and Elekta VMAT respected the planning objective for all organs at risk. Gamma analysis result for the pre-treatment quality assurance shows good agreement between the planned and delivered fluence for 3 mm DTA, 3% DD for all the evaluated points inside the PTV, for both VMAT and RapidArc techniques.

CONCLUSION

The study concludes that a variable gantry speed with variable dose rate is important for efficient arc therapy delivery. RapidArc presents a slight improvement in the OAR sparing with better target coverage when compared to Elekta VMAT. Trivial differences were noted in all the plans for organ at risk but the two techniques provided satisfactory conformal avoidance and conformation.

Radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma using simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) protocol: a comparison planning study between intensity modulated arc radiotherapy vs. intensity modulated radiotherapy

The aim of this paper is to compare the dosimetric difference between intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) and conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) using simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) protocol. Ten patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma underwent SIB protocol were retrospectively studied. The plan target volume (PTV) of NPC contained nasopharynx gross target volume and the positive neck lymph nodes, PTV1 contained the high-risk sites of microscopic extension and the whole nasopharynx and PTV2 contained the low-risk sites. The prescription dose of PTV was 66 Gy/30 fractions, and for PTV1 60 Gy/30 fractions and for PTV2 54 Gy/30 fractions. IMAT (two 358° arcs) and IMRT (7 fields) plans were designed for each patients using SIB strategies. The monitor unit (MU), treatment time (T) and dosimetric difference between IMRT and IMAT were compared. IMAT can achieve better conformal index (CI) than IMRT (P < 0.05) for all PTVs, while no significant difference were found in homogeneity index (HI) (P > 0.05). There's no significant difference found in radiation dose of brain stem, lenses and parotids, while the maximum dose of spinal cord of IMAT was higher than IMRT (P < 0.05). The monitor unit of IMRT (1308 ± 213) was more than IMAT (606 ± 96) (P < 0.05), while the treatment time of IMRT (540 ± 160S) was more than IMAT (160 ± 10S). This study shows that IMAT using SIB strategies for NPC radiotherapy can achieve similar target coverage with better conformity with less MU and delivery time comparing to IMRT.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy: a review of current literature and clinical use in practice

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a novel radiation technique, which can achieve highly conformal dose distributions with improved target volume coverage and sparing of normal tissues compared with conventional radiotherapy techniques. VMAT also has the potential to offer additional advantages, such as reduced treatment delivery time compared with conventional static field intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The clinical worldwide use of VMAT is increasing significantly. Currently the majority of published data on VMAT are limited to planning and feasibility studies, although there is emerging clinical outcome data in several tumour sites. This article aims to discuss the current use of VMAT techniques in practice and review the available data from planning and clinical outcome studies in various tumour sites including prostate, pelvis (lower gastrointestinal, gynaecological), head and neck, thoracic, central nervous system, breast and other tumour sites.

Comparative analysis of SmartArc-based dual arc volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and quantify the planning performance of SmartArc‐based volumetric‐modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) versus fixed‐beam intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) using a sequential mode treatment plan. The plan quality and performance of dual arc‐VMAT (DA‐VMAT) using the Pinnacle3 Smart‐Arc system (clinical version 9.0; Philips, Fitchburg, WI, USA) were evaluated and compared with those of seven‐field (7F)‐IMRT in 18 consecutive NPC patients. Analysis parameters included the conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for the planning target volume (PTV), maximum and mean dose, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for the specified organs at risk (OARs), and comprehensive quality index (CQI) for an overall evaluation in the 11 OARs. Treatment delivery time, monitor units per fraction (MU/fr), and gamma (Γ3mm,3%) evaluations were also analyzed. DA‐VMAT achieved similar target coverage and slightly better homogeneity than conventional 7F‐IMRT with a similar CI and HI. NTCP values were only significantly lower in the left parotid gland (for xerostomia) for DA‐VMAT plans. The mean value of CQI at 0.98±0.02 indicated a 2% benefit in sparing OARs by DA‐VMAT. The MU/fr used and average delivery times appeared to show improved efficiencies in DA‐VMAT. Each technique demonstrated high accuracy in dose delivery in terms of a high‐quality assurance (QA) passing rate (>98%) of the (Γ3mm,3%) criterion. The major difference between DA‐VMAT and 7F‐IMRT using a sequential mode for treating NPC cases appears to be improved efficiency, resulting in a faster delivery time and the use of fewer MU/fr.

PACS number: 87.53.Tf, 87.55.x, 87.55.D, 87.55.dk

Commissioning and benchmarking a 3D dosimetry system for clinical use

PURPOSE

A 3D dosimetry system is described which consists of two parts: a radiochromic plastic dosimeter PRESAGE (which responds to absorbed dose with a linear change in optical-density) and the Duke large-field-of-view optical-CT scanner (DLOS). The DLOS/PRESAGE system has recently been commissioned and benchmarked for clinical use and, in particular, for verification and commissioning of complex radiation treatments.

METHODS

DLOS commissioning involved determining the dynamic range, spatial resolution, noise, temporal, and other characteristics of the light source and imaging components. Benchmarking tests were performed on the combined DLOS/PRESAGE system to establish baseline dosimetric performance. The tests consisted of delivering simple radiation treatments to PRESAGE dosimeters, and comparing the measured 3D relative dose distributions with the known gold standard. The gold standard distribution was obtained from machine beam-data or the treatment planning system (TPS). All studies used standardized procedures to ensure consistency.

RESULTS

For commissioning, isotropic spatial resolution was submillimeter (MTF > 0.5 for frequencies of 1.5 lp/mm) and the dynamic range was -60 dB. Flood field uniformity was within 10% and stable after 45 min of warm-up. Stray-light is small, due to telecentricity, but even the residual can be removed through deconvolution by a point-spread-function. For benchmarking, the mean 3D passing NDD (normalized dose distribution) rate (3%, 3mm, 5% dose threshold) over the benchmark data sets was 97.3% +/- 0.6% (range 96%-98%), which is on par with other planar dosimeters used in external beam radiation therapy indicating excellent agreement. Noise was low at < 2% of maximum dose (4-12 Gy) for 2 mm reconstructions. The telecentric design was critical to enabling fast imaging with minimal stray-light artifacts.

CONCLUSIONS

This work presents the first comprehensive benchmarking of a 3D dosimetry system for clinical use. The DLOS/PRESAGE benchmark tests show consistently good agreement to simple known distributions. The system produces accurate isotropic 2 mm dose data over clinical volumes (e.g., 16 cm diameter phantoms, 12 cm height), in under 15 min. It represents a uniquely useful and versatile new tool for commissioning and verification of complex therapy treatments.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy: effective and efficient end-to-end patient-specific quality assurance

PURPOSE

To explore an effective and efficient end-to-end patient-specific quality-assurance (QA) protocol for volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) and to evaluate the suitability of a stationary radiotherapy QA device (two-dimensional [2D] ion chamber array) for VMAT QA.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Three methods were used to analyze 39 VMAT treatment plans for brain, spine, and prostate: ion chamber (one-dimensional absolute, n = 39), film (2D relative, coronal/sagittal, n = 8), and 2D ion chamber array (ICA, 2D absolute, coronal/sagittal, n = 39) measurements. All measurements were compared with the treatment planning system dose calculation either via gamma analysis (3%, 3- to 4-mm distance-to-agreement criteria) or absolute point dose comparison. The film and ion chamber results were similarly compared with the ICA measurements.

RESULTS

Absolute point dose measurements agreed well with treatment planning system computed doses (ion chamber: median deviation, 1.2%, range, -0.6% to 3.3%; ICA: median deviation, 0.6%, range, -1.8% to 2.9%). The relative 2D dose measurements also showed good agreement with computed doses (>93% of pixels in all films passing gamma, >90% of pixels in all ICA measurements passing gamma). The ICA relative dose results were highly similar to those of film (>90% of pixels passing gamma). The coronal and sagittal ICA measurements were statistically indistinguishable by the paired t test with a hypothesized mean difference of 0.1%. The ion chamber and ICA absolute dose measurements showed a similar trend but had disparities of 2-3% in 18% of plans.

CONCLUSIONS

After validating the new VMAT implementation with ion chamber, film, and ICA, we were able to maintain an effective yet efficient patient-specific VMAT QA protocol by reducing from five (ion chamber, film, and ICA) to two measurements (ion chamber and single ICA) per plan. The ICA (Matrixx®, IBA Dosimetry) was validated for VMAT QA, but ion chamber measurements are recommended for absolute dose comparison until future developments correct the ICA angular dependence.

Intensity-modulated arc therapy: principles, technologies and clinical implementation

Intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) was proposed by Yu (1995 Phys. Med. Biol. 40 1435-49) as an alternative to tomotherapy. Over more than a decade, much progress has been made. The advantages and limitations of the IMAT technique have also been better understood. In recent years, single-arc forms of IMAT have emerged and become commercially adopted. The leading example is the volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), a single-arc form of IMAT that delivers apertures of varying weights with a single-arc rotation that uses dose-rate variation of the treatment machine. With commercial implementation of VMAT, wide clinical adoption has quickly taken root. However, there remains a lack of general understanding for the planning of such arc treatments, as well as what delivery limitations and compromises are made. Commercial promotion and competition add further confusion for the end users. It is therefore necessary to provide a summary of this technology and some guidelines on its clinical implementation. The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the works from the radiotherapy community that led to wide clinical adoption, and point out the issues that still remain, providing some perspective on its further developments. Because there has been vast experience in IMRT using multiple intensity-modulated fields, comparisons between IMAT and IMRT are also made in the review within the areas of planning, delivery and quality assurance.

Phase II study evaluating consolidation whole abdominal intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer stage FIGO III--the OVAR-IMRT-02 Study

BACKGROUND

The prognosis for patients with advanced FIGO stage III epithelial ovarian cancer remains poor despite the aggressive standard treatment, consisting of maximal cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. The median time to recurrence is less than 2 years, with a 5-years survival rate of -20-25%. Recurrences of the disease occur mostly intraperitoneally.Ovarian cancer is a radiosensitive tumor, so that the use of whole abdominal radiotherapy (WAR) as a consolidation therapy would appear to be a logical strategy. WAR used to be the standard treatment after surgery before the chemotherapy era; however, it has been almost totally excluded from the treatment of ovarian cancer during the past decade because of its high toxicity. Modern intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has the potential of sparing organs at risk like kidneys, liver, and bone marrow while still adequately covering the peritoneal cavity with a homogenous dose.Our previous phase I study showed for the first time the clinical feasibility of intensity-modulated WAR and pointed out promising results concerning treatment tolerance. The current phase-II study succeeds to the phase-I study to further evaluate the toxicity of this new treatment.

METHODS/DESIGN

The OVAR-IMRT-02 study is a single-center one arm phase-II trial. Thirty seven patients with optimally debulked ovarian cancer stage FIGO III having a complete remission after chemotherapy will be treated with intensity-modulated WAR as a consolidation therapy.A total dose of 30 Gy in 20 fractions of 1.5 Gy will be applied to the entire peritoneal cavity including the liver surface and the pelvic and para-aortic node regions. Organ at risk are kidneys, liver (except the 1 cm-outer border), heart, vertebral bodies and pelvic bones.Primary endpoint is tolerability; secondary objectives are toxicity, quality of life, progression-free and overall survival.

DISCUSSION

Intensity-modulated WAR provides a new promising option in the consolidation treatment of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a complete pathologic remission after adjuvant chemotherapy. Further consequent studies will be needed to enable firm conclusions regarding the value of consolidation radiotherapy within the multimodal treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01180504.

Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases: a dosimetric and treatment efficiency comparison between volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiotherapy

A treatment planning comparison study was performed to evaluate the dosimetric characteristic and treatment efficiency of volumetric modulated arc therapy with step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for the hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HFSRT) in patients with multiple brain metastases. CT datasets of 10 patients with two to four brain metastases were selected for the comparison. Three plans were generated for each case: seven-field step-and-shoot IMRT, single (RA1) and double (RA2) arcs with RapidArc technique (RA, Varian Medical System). The prescribed dose was 50 Gy in 10 fractions and plans were all normalized to the mean dose to the PTV. For PTV, plans aim to achieve at least 98% of PTV was covered with the 95% of prescription dose, at least 95% of PTV was encompassed by the prescription dose, and an over-dosage of 110% of the prescription dose was allowed to 5% volume of the PTV. The plans generated using three techniques were clinically acceptable. The target conformity and homogeneity were improved slightly with RA2 compared to IMRT and RA1. The Paddick CI was 0.868 (IMRT), 0.863 (RA1) and 0.895 (RA2), and HI was 7.7 (IMRT), 7.5 (RA1) and 6.5 (RA2), respectively. Compared with IMRT, the maximum dose in RA2 plans to the brainstem, left and right optic nerves, left and right lens was reduced by 1.6 Gy, 6 Gy, 3 Gy, 1.5 Gy, 1.3 Gy, respectively. The percentage of healthy tissue volume receiving 5 Gy was larger with RA1 (56.7%) and RA2 (57.1%) than with IMRT (52.9%), while the percentages of volume receiving 15 Gy and 20 Gy were smaller with RA1 (27.1%, 18.7%) and RA2 (25%, 16.3%) than with IMRT (28.8%, 19.1%). No significant difference was observed between RA1 and RA2. The mean number of MU per fraction of 5 Gy was 1944 +/- 374 (IMRT), 1199 +/- 173 (RA1) and 1387 +/- 186 (RA2), respectively. Compared with IMRT, the MUs were reduced by 36.8% and 27.2% with RA1 and RA2. The pure beam-on time needed per fraction was 6.5 +/- 1.2 min (IMRT), 1.25 min (RA1) and 2.5 min (RA2), respectively. The beam-on time for RA1 and RA2 was approximately 80% and 40% less compared to IMRT. In conclusion, RA, single arc or double arcs, is a feasible technique with highly conformal dose distribution for the HFSRT in patients with oligo brain metastases. Compared with IMRT, RA1 provides similar plan quality, while RA2 achieves slight improvements in PTV coverage and sparing of organs at risk. The treatment efficiency, using less monitor units and shorter treatment delivery time, is the most obvious advantage.

Whole abdomen radiation therapy in ovarian cancers: a comparison between fixed beam and volumetric arc based intensity modulation

Purpose

A study was performed to assess dosimetric characteristics of volumetric modulated arcs (RapidArc, RA) and fixed field intensity modulated therapy (IMRT) for Whole Abdomen Radiotherapy (WAR) after ovarian cancer.

Methods and Materials

Plans for IMRT and RA were optimised for 5 patients prescribing 25 Gy to the whole abdomen (PTV_WAR) and 45 Gy to the pelvis and pelvic nodes (PTV_Pelvis) with Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) technique. Plans were investigated for 6 MV (RA6, IMRT6) and 15 MV (RA15, IMRT15) photons. Objectives were: for both PTVs V_90% > 95%, for PTV_Pelvis: D_max < 105%; for organs at risk, maximal sparing was required. The MU and delivery time measured treatment efficiency. Pre-treatment Quality assurance was scored with Gamma Agreement Index (GAI) with 3% and 3 mm thresholds.

Results

IMRT and RapidArc resulted comparable for target coverage. For PTV_WAR, V_90% was 99.8 ± 0.2% and 93.4 ± 7.3% for IMRT6 and IMRT15, and 98.4 ± 1.7 and 98.6 ± 0.9% for RA6 and RA15. Target coverage resulted improved for PTV_Pelvis. Dose homogeneity resulted slightly improved by RA (Uniformity was defined as U_5-95% = D_5%-D_95%/D_mean). U₅-_95% for PTV_WAR was 0.34 ± 0.05 and 0.32 ± 0.06 (IMRT6 and IMRT15), 0.30 ± 0.03 and 0.26 ± 0.04 (RA6 and RA15); for PTV_Pelvis, it resulted equal to 0.1 for all techniques. For organs at risk, small differences were observed between the techniques. MU resulted 3130 ± 221 (IMRT6), 2841 ± 318 (IMRT15), 538 ± 29 (RA6), 635 ± 139 (RA15); the average measured treatment time was 18.0 ± 0.8 and 17.4 ± 2.2 minutes (IMRT6 and IMRT15) and 4.8 ± 0.2 (RA6 and RA15). GAI_IMRT6 = 97.3 ± 2.6%, GAI_IMRT15 = 94.4 ± 2.1%, GAI_RA6 = 98.7 ± 1.0% and GAI_RA15 = 95.7 ± 3.7%.

Conclusion

RapidArc showed to be a solution to WAR treatments offering good dosimetric features with significant logistic improvements compared to IMRT.

Quality assurance methodology for Varian RapidArc treatment plans

With the commercial introduction of the Varian RapidArc, a new modality for treatment planning and delivery, the need has arisen for consistent and efficient techniques for performing patient‐specific quality assurance (QA) tests. In this paper we present our methodology for a RapidArc treatment plan QA procedure. For our measurements we used a 2D diode array (MapCHECK) embedded at 5 cm water equivalent depth in MapPHAN 5 phantom and an Exradin A16 ion chamber placed in six different positions in a cylindrical homogeneous phantom (QUASAR). We also checked the MUs for the RapidArc plans by using independent software (RadCalc). The agreement between Eclipse calculations and MapCHECK/MapPHAN 5 measurements was evaluated using both absolute distance‐to‐agreement (DTA) and gamma index with 10% dose threshold (TH), 3% dose difference (DD), and 3 mm DTA. The average agreement was 94.4% for the DTA approach and 96.3% for the gamma index approach. In high‐dose areas, the discrepancy between calculations and ion chamber measurements using the QUASAR phantom was within 4.5% for prostate cases. For the RadCalc calculations, we used the average SSD along the arc; however, for some patients the agreement for the MUs obtained with RadCalc versus Eclipse was inadequate (discrepancy>5%). In these cases, the plan was divided into partial arc plans so that RadCalc could perform a better estimation of the MUs. The discrepancy was further reduced to within ~4% using this approach. Regardless of the variation in prescribed dose and location of the treated areas, we obtained very good results for all patients studied in this paper.

PACS number: 87.55.Qr

[RapidArc technology: first year of experience at the Montpellier comprehensive cancer centre]

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has highly impacted on the dose delivery thanks to inverse-planning dosimetry. Conformal isodoses to target volumes and critical organ protection have led to treatment possibilities which were unrealizable with conventional 3D technique. Nevertheless, time delivery using IMRT was in some cases longer than 3D radiotherapy. In order to compensate for this limitation, we have developed since 2007 a volumetric modulated arctherapy (RapidArc) in partnership with Varian. The technique, the results of the dosimetry plans, and quality control of the 142 first patients treated since November 2008 are presented in this review.

Whole abdominopelvic radiotherapy using intensity-modulated arc therapy in the palliative treatment of chemotherapy-resistant ovarian cancer with bulky peritoneal disease: a single-institution experience

PURPOSE

To retrospectively review our experience with whole abdominopelvic radiotherapy (WAPRT) using intensity-modulated arc therapy in the palliative treatment of chemotherapy-resistant ovarian cancer with bulky peritoneal disease.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between April 2002 and April 2008, 13 patients were treated with WAPRT using intensity-modulated arc therapy. We prescribed a dose of 33 Gy to be delivered in 22 fractions of 1.5 Gy to the abdomen and pelvis. All patients had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage III or IV ovarian cancer at the initial diagnosis. At referral, the median age was 61 years, and the patients had been heavily pretreated with surgery and chemotherapy. All patients had symptoms from their disease, including gastrointestinal obstruction or subobstruction in 6, minor gastrointestinal symptoms in 2, pain in 4, ascites in 1, and vaginal bleeding in 2. A complete symptom or biochemical response required complete resolution of the patient's symptoms or cancer antigen-125 level. A partial response required ≥50% resolution of these parameters. The actuarial survival was calculated from the start of radiotherapy.

RESULTS

The median overall survival was 21 weeks, with a 6-month overall survival rate of 45%. The 9 patients who completed treatment obtained a complete symptom response, except for ascites (partial response). The median and mean response duration (all symptoms grouped) was 24 and 37 weeks, respectively. Of the 6 patients presenting with obstruction or subobstruction, 4 obtained a complete symptom response (median duration, 16 weeks).

CONCLUSION

WAPRT delivered using intensity-modulated arc therapy offers important palliation in the case of peritoneal metastatic ovarian cancer. WAPRT resolved intestinal obstruction for a substantial period.

Polymer gel dosimetry

Polymer gel dosimeters are fabricated from radiation sensitive chemicals which, upon irradiation, polymerize as a function of the absorbed radiation dose. These gel dosimeters, with the capacity to uniquely record the radiation dose distribution in three-dimensions (3D), have specific advantages when compared to one-dimensional dosimeters, such as ion chambers, and two-dimensional dosimeters, such as film. These advantages are particularly significant in dosimetry situations where steep dose gradients exist such as in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery. Polymer gel dosimeters also have specific advantages for brachytherapy dosimetry. Potential dosimetry applications include those for low-energy x-rays, high-linear energy transfer (LET) and proton therapy, radionuclide and boron capture neutron therapy dosimetries. These 3D dosimeters are radiologically soft-tissue equivalent with properties that may be modified depending on the application. The 3D radiation dose distribution in polymer gel dosimeters may be imaged using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), optical-computerized tomography (optical-CT), x-ray CT or ultrasound. The fundamental science underpinning polymer gel dosimetry is reviewed along with the various evaluation techniques. Clinical dosimetry applications of polymer gel dosimetry are also presented.

Polymer gel dosimetry

Polymer gel dosimeters are fabricated from radiation sensitive chemicals which, upon irradiation, polymerize as a function of the absorbed radiation dose. These gel dosimeters, with the capacity to uniquely record the radiation dose distribution in three-dimensions (3D), have specific advantages when compared to one-dimensional dosimeters, such as ion chambers, and two-dimensional dosimeters, such as film. These advantages are particularly significant in dosimetry situations where steep dose gradients exist such as in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery. Polymer gel dosimeters also have specific advantages for brachytherapy dosimetry. Potential dosimetry applications include those for low-energy x-rays, high-linear energy transfer (LET) and proton therapy, radionuclide and boron capture neutron therapy dosimetries. These 3D dosimeters are radiologically soft-tissue equivalent with properties that may be modified depending on the application. The 3D radiation dose distribution in polymer gel dosimeters may be imaged using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), optical-computerized tomography (optical-CT), x-ray CT or ultrasound. The fundamental science underpinning polymer gel dosimetry is reviewed along with the various evaluation techniques. Clinical dosimetry applications of polymer gel dosimetry are also presented.

Clinical applications of volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

To present treatment planning case studies for several treatment sites for which volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) could have a positive impact; and to share an initial clinical experience with VMAT for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Four case studies are presented to show the potential benefit of VMAT compared with conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques in pediatric cancer, bone marrow-sparing whole-abdominopelvic irradiation (WAPI), and SBRT of the lung and spine. Details of clinical implementation of VMAT for SBRT are presented. The VMAT plans are compared with conventional techniques in terms of dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency.

RESULTS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy reduced the treatment time of spine SBRT by 37% and improved isodose conformality. Conformal and VMAT techniques for lung SBRT had similar dosimetric quality, but VMAT had improved target coverage and took 59% less time to deliver, although monitor units were increased by 5%. In a complex pediatric pelvic example, VMAT reduced treatment time by 78% and monitor units by 25% compared with IMRT. A double-isocenter VMAT technique for WAPI can spare bone marrow while maintaining good delivery efficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy is a new technology that may benefit different patient populations, including pediatric cancer patients and those undergoing concurrent chemotherapy and WAPI. Volumetric modulated arc therapy has been used and shown to be beneficial for significantly improving delivery efficiency of lung and spine SBRT.

Intensity-modulated arc therapy with simultaneous integrated boost in the treatment of primary irresectable cervical cancer. Treatment planning, quality control, and clinical implementation

PURPOSE

To report on the planning procedure, quality control, and clinical implementation of intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) delivering a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in patients with primary irresectable cervix carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Six patients underwent PET-CT (positron emission tomography-computed tomography) and MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) before treatment planning. Prescription (25 fractions) was (1) a median dose (D(50)) of 62, 58 and 56 Gy to the primary tumor (GTV_cervix), primary clinical target volume (CTV_cervix) and its planning target volume (PTV_cervix), respectively; (2) a D(50) of 60 Gy to the PET-positive lymph nodes (GTV_nodes); (3) a minimal dose (D(98)) of 45 Gy to the planning target volume of the elective lymph nodes (PTV_nodes). IMAT plans were generated using an anatomy-based exclusion tool with the aid of weight and leaf position optimization. The dosimetric delivery of IMAT was validated preclinically using radiochromic film dosimetry.

RESULTS

Five to nine arcs were needed to create valid IMAT plans. Dose constraints on D(50) were not met in two patients (both GTV_cervix: 1 Gy and 3 Gy less). D(98) for PTV_nodes was not met in three patients (1 Gy each). Film dosimetry showed excellent gamma evaluation. There were no treatment interruptions.

CONCLUSION

IMAT allows delivering an SIB to the macroscopic tumor without compromising the dose to the elective lymph nodes or the organs at risk. The clinical implementation is feasible.

A fast radiotherapy paradigm for anal cancer with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Radiotherapy (RT) volumes for anal cancer are large and of moderate complexity when organs at risk (OAR) such as testis, small bowel and bladder are at least partially to be shielded. Volumetric intensity modulated arc therapy (VMAT) might provide OAR-shielding comparable to step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for this tumor entity with better treatment efficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on treatment planning CTs of 8 patients, we compared dose distributions, comformality index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), number of monitor units (MU) and treatment time (TTT) for plans generated for VMAT, 3D-CRT and step-and-shoot-IMRT (optimized based on Pencil Beam (PB) or Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation) for typical anal cancer planning target volumes (PTV) including inguinal lymph nodes as usually treated during the first phase (0-36 Gy) of a shrinking field regimen.

RESULTS

With values of 1.33 +/- 0.21/1.26 +/- 0.05/1.3 +/- 0.02 and 1.39 +/- 0.09, the CI's for IMRT (PB-Corvus/PB-Hyperion/MC-Hyperion) and VMAT are better than for 3D-CRT with 2.00 +/- 0.16. The HI's for the prescribed dose (HI36) for 3D-CRT were 1.06 +/- 0.01 and 1.11 +/- 0.02 for VMAT, respectively and 1.15 +/- 0.02/1.10 +/- 0.02/1.11 +/- 0.08 for IMRT (PB-Corvus/PB-Hyperion/MC-Hyperion). Mean TTT and MU's for 3D-CRT is 220s/225 +/- 11MU and for IMRT (PB-Corvus/PB-Hyperion/MC-Hyperion) is 575s/1260 +/- 172MU, 570s/477 +/- 84MU and 610s748 +/- 193MU while TTT and MU for two-arc-VMAT is 290s/268 +/- 19MU.

CONCLUSION

VMAT provides treatment plans with high conformity and homogeneity equivalent to step-and-shoot-IMRT for this mono-concave treatment volume. Short treatment delivery time and low primary MU are the most important advantages.

Treatment planning of epithelial ovarian cancers using helical tomotherapy

Whole abdomen radiotherapy (WAR) for epithelial ovarian cancer, though effective, has been used sparingly due to inadequate target coverage and poor sparing of organs at risk (OAR) leading to significantly higher toxicities. Newer radiation techniques have shown potential for significant improvement in the therapeutic ratio. The purpose of this study was to evaluate helical tomotherapy (HT) for WAR. The objective parameters were to obtain uniform and adequate target coverage with maximum OAR sparing. HT plans were generated for five patients with field width of 5.0/2.5 cm, modulation factor of 3.5/3.0, and a pitch of 0.3. A dose of 25 Gy in 25 fractions was prescribed to the abdomen with a simultaneous boost of 45 Gy in 25 fractions to the pelvis. Dose‐volume parameters and various indices were analyzed and compared. Mean volume (standard deviation) of abdominal and pelvic PTV (planning target volume) was 6630 ± 450 cm3 and 1235 ± 98 cm3, respectively. Mean length of PTV in cranio‐caudal direction was 41 ± 4 cm. Volume receiving 95% and 107% of the prescription dose (V95% and V107%) was 95.6 ± 2.7% and 2.6 ± 0.5% for abdominal‐PTV, and 95.7±2.4% and 0% for pelvic‐PTV, respectively. Homogeneity and conformity indices were 17.5±1.7,1.2±0.03 for abdominal PTV, and 5.2±0.7,1.1±0.02 for pelvic‐PTV, respectively. Median dose received by the kidneys, liver and bone marrow was 9.6±1.2Gy,17±2.7Gy and 22±1.4Gy, respectively. HT achieves an excellent coverage of WAR target with simultaneous pelvic boost and better organ (kidneys and liver) sparing. HT for WAR has the potential as consolidative therapy; this is being evaluated further in a phase II cohort study in epithelial ovarian cancers.

PACS number: 87.53 Kn, 87.55. D‐, 87.55.dk.

Comparing planning time, delivery time and plan quality for IMRT, RapidArc and Tomotherapy

The purpose of this study is to examine plan quality, treatment planning time, and estimated treatment delivery time for 5- and 9-field sliding window IMRT, single and dual arc RapidArc, and tomotherapy. For four phantoms, 5- and 9-field IMRT, single and dual arc RapidArc and tomotherapy plans were created. Plans were evaluated based on the ability to meet dose-volume constraints, dose homogeneity index, radiation conformity index, planning time, estimated delivery time, integral dose, and volume receiving more than 2 and 5 Gy. For all of the phantoms, tomotherapy was able to meet the most optimization criteria during planning (50% for P1, 67% for P2, 0% for P3, and 50% for P4). RapidArc met less of the optimization criteria (25% for P1, 17% for P2, 0% for P3, and 0% for P4), while IMRT was never able to meet any of the constraints. In addition, tomotherapy plans were able to produce the most homogeneous dose. Tomotherapy plans had longer planning time, longer estimated treatment times, lower conformity index, and higher integral dose. Tomotherapy plans can produce plans of higher quality and have the capability to conform dose distributions better than IMRT or RapidArc in the axial plane, but exhibit increased dose superior and inferior to the target volume. RapidArc, however, is capable of producing better plans than IMRT for the test cases examined in this study.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs. serial tomotherapy, step-and-shoot IMRT and 3D-conformal RT for treatment of prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), a complex treatment strategy for intensity-modulated radiation therapy, may increase treatment efficiency and has recently been established clinically. This analysis compares VMAT against established IMRT and 3D-conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) delivery techniques.

METHODS

Based on CT datasets of 9 patients treated for prostate cancer step-and-shoot IMRT, serial tomotherapy (MIMiC), 3D-CRT and VMAT were compared with regard to plan quality and treatment efficiency. Two VMAT approaches (one rotation (VMAT1x) and one rotation plus a second 200 degrees rotation (VMAT2x)) were calculated for the plan comparison. Plan quality was assessed by calculating homogeneity and conformity index (HI and CI), dose to normal tissue (non-target) and D(95%) (dose encompassing 95% of the target volume). For plan efficiency evaluation, treatment time and number of monitor units (MU) were considered.

RESULTS

For MIMiC/IMRT(MLC)/VMAT2x/VMAT1x/3D-CRT, mean CI was 1.5/1.23/1.45/1.51/1.46 and HI was 1.19/1.1/1.09/1.11/1.04. For a prescribed dose of 76 Gy, mean doses to organs-at-risk (OAR) were 50.69 Gy/53.99 Gy/60.29 Gy/61.59 Gy/66.33 Gy for the anterior half of the rectum and 31.85 Gy/34.89 Gy/38.75 Gy/38.57 Gy/55.43 Gy for the posterior rectum. Volumes of non-target normal tissue receiving > or =70% of prescribed dose (53 Gy) were 337 ml/284 ml/482 ml/505 ml/414 ml, for > or =50% (38 Gy) 869 ml/933 ml/1155 ml/1231 ml/1993 ml and for > or =30% (23 Gy) 2819 ml/3414 ml/3340 ml/3438 ml /3061 ml. D(95%) was 69.79 Gy/70.51 Gy/71,7 Gy/71.59 Gy/73.42 Gy. Mean treatment time was 12 min/6 min/3.7 min/1.8 min/2.5 min.

CONCLUSION

All approaches yield treatment plans of improved quality when compared to 3D-conformal treatments, with serial tomotherapy providing best OAR sparing and VMAT being the most efficient treatment option in our comparison. Plans which were calculated with 3D-CRT provided good target coverage but resulted in higher dose to the rectum.

Development and evaluation of an efficient approach to volumetric arc therapy planning

An efficient method for volumetric intensity modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning was developed, where a single arc (360 degrees or less) is delivered under continuous variation of multileaf collimator (MLC) segments, dose rate, and gantry speed. Plans can be generated for any current linear accelerator that supports these degrees of freedom. MLC segments are derived from fluence maps at relatively coarsely sampled angular positions. The beam segments, dose rate, and gantry speed are then optimized using direct machine parameter optimization based on dose volume objectives and leaf motion constraints to minimize arc delivery time. The method can vary both dose rate and gantry speed or alternatively determine the optimal plan at constant dose rate and gantry speed. The method was used to retrospectively generate variable dose rate VMAT plans to ten patients (head and neck, prostate, brain, lung, and tonsil). In comparison to step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy, dosimetric plan quality was comparable or improved, estimated delivery times ranged from 70 to 160 s, and monitor units were consistently reduced in nine out of the ten cases by an average of approximately 6%. Optimization and final dose calculation took between 5 and 35 min depending on plan complexity.

Intensity-modulated whole abdominal radiotherapy after surgery and carboplatin/taxane chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer: phase I study

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility and toxicity of consolidative intensity-modulated whole abdominal radiotherapy (WAR) after surgery and chemotherapy in high-risk patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten patients with optimally debulked ovarian cancer International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage IIIc were treated in a Phase I study with intensity-modulated WAR up to a total dose of 30 Gy in 1.5-Gy fractions as consolidation therapy after adjuvant carboplatin/taxane chemotherapy. Treatment was delivered using intensity-modulated radiotherapy in a step-and-shoot technique (n = 3) or a helical tomotherapy technique (n = 7). The planning target volume included the entire peritoneal cavity and the pelvic and para-aortal node regions. Organs at risk were kidneys, liver, heart, vertebral bodies, and pelvic bones.

RESULTS

Intensity-modulated WAR resulted in an excellent coverage of the planning target volume and an effective sparing of the organs at risk. The treatment was well tolerated, and no severe Grade 4 acute side effects occurred. Common Toxicity Criteria Grade III toxicities were as follows: diarrhea (n = 1), thrombocytopenia (n = 1), and leukopenia (n = 3). Radiotherapy could be completed by all the patients without any toxicity-related interruption. Median follow-up was 23 months, and 4 patients had tumor recurrence (intraperitoneal progression, n = 3; hepatic metastasis, n = 1). Small bowel obstruction caused by adhesions occurred in 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this Phase I study showed for the first time, to our knowledge, the clinical feasibility of intensity-modulated whole abdominal radiotherapy, which could offer a new therapeutic option for consolidation treatment of advanced ovarian carcinoma after adjuvant chemotherapy in selected subgroups of patients. We initiated a Phase II study to further evaluate the toxicity of this intensive multimodal treatment.

Treatment of lung cancer using volumetric modulated arc therapy and image guidance: a case study

BACKGROUND

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a radiotherapy technique in which the gantry rotates while the beam is on. Gantry speed, multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf position and dose rate vary continuously during the irradiation. For optimum results, this type of treatment should be subject to image guidance. The application of VMAT and image guidance to the treatment of a lung cancer patient is described.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In-house software AutoBeam was developed to facilitate treatment planning for VMAT beams. The algorithm consisted of a fluence optimisation using the iterative least-squares technique, a segmentation and then a direct-aperture optimisation. A dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions was planned, using a single arc with 35 control points at 10 degrees intervals. The resulting plan was transferred to a commercial treatment planning system for final calculation. The plan was verified using a 0.6 cm(3) ionisation chamber and film in a rectangular phantom. The patient was treated supine on a customised lung board and imaged daily with cone-beam CT for the first three days then weekly thereafter.

RESULTS

The VMAT plan provided slightly improved coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) and slightly lower volume of lung irradiated to 20 Gy (V(20)) than a three-field conformal plan (PTV minimum dose 85.0 Gy vs. 81.8 Gy and lung V(20) 31.5% vs. 34.8%). The difference between the measured and planned dose was -1.1% (measured dose lower) and 97.6% of the film passed a gamma test of 3% and 3mm. The VMAT treatment required 90 s for delivery of a single fraction of 2 Gy instead of 180 s total treatment time for the conformal plan.

CONCLUSION

VMAT provides a quality dose distribution with a short treatment time as shown in an example of a lung tumour. The technique should allow for more efficient delivery of high dose treatments, such as used for hypofractionated radiotherapy of small volume lung tumours, and the technique may also be used in conjunction with Active Breathing Control, where fewer breath holds will be required.