Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS

Treatment plan quality for stereotactic treatment of multiple cranial metastases: Comparison of C-arm and O-ring treatment platforms

C-arm linacs have been used widely to treat multiple cranial metastases using stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). A new generation of O-ring linacs offer several workflow advantages when compared to C-arm platforms. However, O-ring linacs are not able to employ couch rotations for noncoplanar beams used in SRS treatments. This study was conducted in order to simulate further possible developments of O-ring treatment units by assessing their geometrical efficiency. In this work we compare the plan quality for C-arm versus an O-ring platform including metrics that are relevant to SRS for multiple metastases. The comparison is conducted by incorporating tilted arcs on the O-ring platform therefore introducing noncoplanarity. Total 40 patients previously treated for SRS with 20 Gy single fraction were replanned for C-arm with a standard noncoplanar 5-arc arrangement and O-ring with both coplanar and noncoplanar beams. For the O-ring plans, we considered a default 3-arc coplanar arrangement, as well as 3- and 5-arc arrangements with arcs tipped up to 10 degrees from the axial plane. Target coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, monitor unit (MU) efficiency, conformity and gradient indices were assessed for all plans. For most metrics the O-ring geometries, even the coplanar arrangement, produced statistically comparable results to the C-arm. Small but significant differences were found for the 3 arc O-ring for PTV: D90%, D2% and MU/Gy and for the 5 arc O-ring at D2% when both were compared to the C-arm. Cumulative dose volume histograms (DVHs) for normal brain showed a cross-over between the C-arm and coplanar O-ring geometry at a low dose (2.3 ± 1.8 Gy), with O-ring associated with higher volumes above this cross-over dose. However, no statistical difference was seen in the brainstem, optic pathway and volumes of normal brain receiving 12 Gy or 20 Gy. This study has found that O-ring geometry linacs can produce SRS plans of comparable quality to those from a C-arm for multiple cranial metastases.

ISRS Technical Guidelines for Stereotactic Radiosurgery: Treatment of Small Brain Metastases (≤1 cm in Diameter)

PURPOSE

The objective of this literature review was to develop International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) consensus technical guidelines for the treatment of small, ≤1 cm in maximal diameter, intracranial metastases with stereotactic radiosurgery. Although different stereotactic radiosurgery technologies are available, most of them have similar treatment workflows and common technical challenges that are described.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the literature published between 2009 and 2020 was performed in Pubmed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodology. The search terms were limited to those related to radiosurgery of brain metastases and to publications in the English language.

RESULTS

From 484 collected abstract 37 articles were included into the detailed review and bibliographic analysis. An additional 44 papers were identified as relevant from a search of the references. The 81 papers, including additional 7 international guidelines, were deemed relevant to at least one of five areas that were considered paramount for this report. These areas of technical focus have been employed to structure these guidelines: imaging specifications, target volume delineation and localization practices, use of margins, treatment planning techniques, and patient positioning.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has demonstrated that Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) for small (1 cm) brain metastases can be safely performed on both Gamma Knife (GK) and CyberKnife (CK) as well as on modern LINACs, specifically tailored for radiosurgical procedures, However, considerable expertise and resources are required for a program based on the latest evidence for best practice.

The Incidence and Its Associated Factors Relevant to Brain Radionecrosis That Requires Intervention Following Single or Fractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery Using Vero4DRT for Brain Metastases

Purpose: Several factors, including the surrounding brain volume receiving specific doses, have hitherto been reported to correlate with brain radionecrosis (BR) after single or fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (sSRS or fSRS) for brain metastases (BMs); however, those, especially for fSRS, have not yet been fully elucidated. Furthermore, the clinical outcome data of patients with BM treated with SRS using Vero4DRT are extremely limited. Therefore, this study aimed to demonstrate the incidence of BR requiring intervention (BRRI) and its highly correlated factors.

Materials and Methods: Patients with BMs treated with sSRS or fSRS using Vero4DRT at Toyohashi Municipal Hospital between July 2017 and June 2021 were retrospectively reviewed, of whom patients were available for at least 20 weeks of magnetic resonance imaging follow-up from SRS were included, and analyzed. The prescribed dose fractionation schemes to the planning target volume (PTV) boundary included 24 Gy (sSRS), 35 Gy (5 fractions [fr]), 42 Gy (10 fr), and 30 Gy (3 fr), according to the tumor volume and location. The volume of the surrounding normal brain receiving 84 Gy (V84 Gy, biologically effective dose [BED₂] based on a linear-quadratic model with an alpha/beta ratio of 2, single-dose equivalent [SDE] to 12 Gy), V112 Gy (BED₂, SDE to 14 Gy) for all lesions, and all irradiated volume, including gross tumor volume (GTV) receiving 81.6 Gy (81.6 Gy vol., BED₂) for fSRS were calculated, for which cerebrospinal fluid and bone volumes were cautiously excluded. The diagnosis of tumor progression or BR dominance was based on serial T1/T2 matching.

Results: Sixty patients with 120 lesions (65 treated with sSRS and 55 treated with fSRS) were included in the final analysis, with a median follow-up period of 65 weeks. The local control rate at one year was 87.5%. The cumulative incidence of BRRI within two years was 11.5%. The risk of symptomatic BR was significantly higher for V84 Gy >10 cc (p <0.001) and V112 Gy >5 cc (p = 0.021). In the fSRS group, the cumulative incidence of Grade 3 BR and those requiring resection was significantly higher for 81.6 Gy vol. >14 cc (p = 0.003 and p = 0.004, respectively). The coexistence of viable tumor tissue and BR could not be ruled out for enlarging lesions after the nadir response, especially for fSRS, due to a lower BED₁₀ to GTV margin (<80 Gy, BED₁₀).

Conclusions: Stereotactic irradiation with Vero4DRT provided efficacy and safety comparable to previous linear accelerator series, and most of the dose-volume thresholds for BRRI presented in this study were notably lower than those reported in previous studies. This study suggests that the indication of single and up to 5 frSRS should be limited to far smaller tumors than previously acknowledged to ensure long-term safety and efficacy.

A new index for evaluating the fit of dose distribution to target volume: Dose distribution fix index

To develop a new dose evaluation index, fit index (FI), to help evaluate the fit between isodose surfaces at different percentages of the prescription dose and the target volume. Two types of FI, differential and cumulative, were defined. The differential fit index (dFI) was defined as the ratio of the integral dose of volume occupied by an isodose surface to the integral dose of the planning target volume. The cumulative fit index (cFI) was defined as the integral of dFI from the minimum dose of clinical significance to the 100% prescription dose. Performance of the cFI was evaluated with virtual dose distributions. In addition, non-coplanar and coplanar VMAT plans of 20 brain metastasis cases were evaluated using the FI, and the results were compared with results from the dose gradient index (GI) and conformity index (CI). Correlations between cFI and GI, and between cFI and CI were studied and Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated. dFI and cFI provided comprehensive and objective results in evaluating the dose fit between isodose surfaces at different percentages of the prescription dose and the target volume. Analysis showed a positive correlation between cFI and GI with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.928 (p < 0.01) and a negative correlation between cFI and CI with a Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.831 (p < 0.01). dFI and cFI were shown to be effective and convenient tools for evaluating the dose fit of a radiotherapy plan.

Monte Carlo simulation of 6-MV dynamic wave VMAT deliveries by Vero4DRT linear accelerator using EGSnrc moving sources

The commissioning and benchmark of a Monte Carlo (MC) model of the 6‐MV Brainlab‐Mitsubishi Vero4DRT linear accelerator for the purpose of quality assurance of clinical dynamic wave arc (DWA) treatment plans is reported. Open‐source MC applications based on EGSnrc particle transport codes are used to simulate the medical linear accelerator head components. Complex radiotherapy irradiations can be simulated in a single MC run using a shared library format combined with BEAMnrc “source20.” Electron energy tuning is achieved by comparing measured vs simulated percentage depth doses (PDDs) for MLC‐defined field sizes in a water phantom. Electron spot size tuning is achieved by comparing measured and simulated inplane and crossplane beam profiles. DWA treatment plans generated from RayStation (RaySearch) treatment planning system (TPS) are simulated on voxelized (2.5 mm³) patient CT datasets. Planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR) dose–volume histograms (DVHs) are compared to TPS‐calculated doses for clinically deliverable dynamic volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) trajectories. MC simulations with an electron beam energy of 5.9 MeV and spot size FWHM of 1.9 mm had the closest agreement with measurement. DWA beam deliveries simulated on patient CT datasets results in DVH agreement with TPS‐calculated doses. PTV coverage agreed within 0.1% and OAR max doses (to 0.035 cc volume) agreed within 1 Gy. This MC model can be used as an independent dose calculation from the TPS and as a quality assurance tool for complex, dynamic radiotherapy treatment deliveries. Full patient CT treatment simulations are performed in a single Monte Carlo run in 23 min. Simulations are run in parallel using the Condor High‐Throughput Computing software¹ on a cluster of eight servers. Each server has two physical processors (Intel Xeon CPU E5‐2650 0 @2.00 GHz), with 8 cores per CPU and two threads per core for 256 calculation nodes.

The gimbaled-head radiotherapy system: Rise and downfall of a dedicated system for dynamic tumor tracking with real-time monitoring and dynamic WaveArc

A gimbaled-head radiotherapy device was developed by industry-academic collaborations, with a concept of robust structures whilst maintaining high flexibilities, and its clinical application started in 2008. The unique structures with multi-image guidance functions initiated 2 new treatment modalities. One is dynamic tumor tracking radiotherapy with real time monitoring (DTTRM), which enables 4-D radiotherapy without prolongation of radiotherapy treatment time. This treatment has become clinically feasible for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung cancers and liver tumors, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for pancreatic cancers. The second one is Dynamic WaveArc therapy (DWA), the non-coplanar versatility of the SBRT system by combining the gantry-ring synchronized rotation with dynamic multileaf collimator optimization. DWA opens the possibility to create patient-individualized treatment plans, allowing additional flexibility in organ at risk sparing while preserving dosimetric robust delivery. The clinical usefulness of the DWA has been preliminary shown for those tumors in the prostate, breast and skull base. Prospective clinical trials are under way with a support of the national funding of Japan for DTTRM and DWA, respectively. Marketing of the system was terminated in 2016 due to a commercial decision. However, lessons can be learned from the development process of this device that might be useful for those who have interests in new technologies and clinical applications in radiation oncology. This review article aims to summarize the developments and achievements of a gimbaled-head radiotherapy device with a focus on DTTRM and DWA.

Intracranial Stereotactic Radiation Therapy With a Jawless Ring Gantry Linear Accelerator Equipped With New Dual Layer Multileaf Collimator

Purpose

To test the feasibility of a simplified, robust, workflow for intracranial stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) using a ring gantry linear accelerator (RGLA) equipped with a dual-layer stacked, staggered, and interdigitating multileaf collimator.

Materials and Methods

Twenty recent clinical SRT cases treated using a radiosurgery c-arm linear accelerator were anonymized. From these data sets, a new planning workflow was developed and used to replan these cases, which then were compared to their clinical counterparts. Population-based dose-volume histograms were analyzed for target coverage and sparing of healthy brain. All plans underwent plan review and quality assurance and were delivered on an end-to-end verification phantom using image guidance to simulate treatment.

Results

The RGLA plans were able to meet departmental standards for target coverage and organ-at-risk sparing and showed plan quality similar to the clinical plans. RGLA plans showed increases in the 50% isodose in the axial plane but decreases in the sagittal and coronal planes. There were no statistically significant differences in the homogeneity index or number of monitor units between the 2 systems. There were statistically significant increases in conformity and gradient indices, with median values of 1.09 versus 1.11 and 2.82 versus 3.13, respectively, for the c-arm versus RGLA plans. These differences were not believed to be clinically significant because they met clinical goals. The population-based dose-volume histograms showed target coverage and organ-at-risk sparing similar to that of the clinical plans. All plans were able to meet the departmental quality assurance requirements and were delivered under image guidance on an end-to-end phantom with measurements agreeing within 3% of the expected value. RGLA plans showed a median reduction in delivery time of ≈50%.

Conclusions

This work describes a simplified and efficient workflow that could reduce treatment times and expand access to SRT to centers using an RGLA.

Single-isocenter volumetric-modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy for two brain metastases

PURPOSE

A new irradiation technique, volumetric-modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy (VMDWAT), based on sequential non-coplanar trajectories, can be performed using the Vero4DRT. This planning study compared the dose distribution and treatment time between single-isocenter volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with multiple straight non-coplanar arcs and single-isocenter VMDWAT in patients with two brain metastases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients with two planning target volumes exceeding 2.0 cm³ were included. Both VMAT and VMDWAT plans were created with single isocenter and a prescribed dose of 28 Gy delivered in five fractions. Target conformity was evaluated using indices modified from the RTOG-CI (mRTOG-CI) and IP-CI (mIP-CI).

RESULTS

VMDWAT significantly improved both mRTOG-CI and mIP-CI and reduced the volume of normal brain tissue receiving 25 and 28 Gy compared to VMAT. The two modalities did not significantly differ in terms of the volume of normal brain tissue receiving 5, 10, 12, 15, and 20 Gy. The mean treatment time was significantly shorter in the VMDWAT group.

CONCLUSION

VMDWAT significantly improved dose distribution in a shorter treatment time compared to VMAT in patients treated for two brain metastases. Single-isocenter VMDWAT may thus be a promising treatment for two brain metastases.

Dose calculation and verification of the Vero gimbal tracking treatment delivery

The Vero linear accelerator delivers dynamic tumor tracking (DTT) treatment using a gimbal motion. However, the availability of treatment planning systems (TPS) to simulate DTT is limited. This study aims to implement and verify the gimbal tracking beam geometry in the dose calculation. Gimbal tracking was implemented by rotating the reference CT outside the TPS according to the ring, gantry, and gimbal tracking position obtained from the tracking log file. The dose was calculated using these rotated CTs. The geometric accuracy was verified by comparing calculated and measured film response using a ball bearing phantom. The dose was verified by comparing calculated 2D dose distributions and film measurements in a ball bearing and a homogeneous phantom using a gamma criterion of 2%/2 mm. The effect of implementing the gimbal tracking beam geometry in a 3D patient data dose calculation was evaluated using dose volume histograms (DVH). Geometrically, the gimbal tracking implementation accuracy was  <0.94 mm. The isodose lines agreed with the film measurement. The largest dose difference of 9.4% was observed at maximum tilt positions with an isocenter and target separation of 17.51 mm. Dosimetrically, gamma passing rates were  >98.4%. The introduction of the gimbal tracking beam geometry in the dose calculation shifted the DVH curves by 0.05%-1.26% for the phantom geometry and by 5.59% for the patient CT dataset. This study successfully demonstrates a method to incorporate the gimbal tracking beam geometry into dose calculations. By combining CT rotation and MU distribution according to the log file, the TPS was able to simulate the Vero tracking treatment dose delivery. The DVH analysis from the gimbal tracking dose calculation revealed changes in the dose distribution during gimbal DTT that are not visible with static dose calculations.

Modifying the planning target volume to optimize the dose distribution in dynamic conformal arc therapy for large metastatic brain tumors

PURPOSE

When treating large metastatic brain tumors with stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT), high dose conformity to target is difficult to achieve. Employing a modified planning target volume (mPTV) instead of the original PTV may be one way to improve the dose distribution in linear accelerator-based SRT using a dynamic conformal technique. In this study, we quantitatively analyzed the impact of a mPTV on dose distribution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four tumors with a maximum diameter of >2 cm were collected. For each tumor, two plans were created: one used a mPTV and the other did not. The mPTV was produced by shrinking or enlarging the original PTV according to the dose distribution in the original plan. The dose conformity was evaluated and compared between the plans using a two-sided paired t test.

RESULTS

The conformity index defined by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group was 1.34 ± 0.10 and 1.41 ± 0.13, and Paddick's conformity index was 0.75 ± 0.05 and 0.71 ± 0.06, for the plans with and without a mPTV, respectively. All of these improvements were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The use of a mPTV can improve target conformity when planning SRT for large metastatic brain tumors.

Single fraction radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spine metastasis: A dosimetric comparison of multiple delivery platforms

There are numerous commercial radiotherapy systems capable of delivering single fraction spine radiosurgery/SBRT. We aim to compare the capabilities of several of these systems to deliver this treatment when following standardized criteria from a national protocol. Four distinct target lesions representing various case presentations of spine metastases were contoured in both the thoracic and lumbar spine of an anthropomorphic SBRT phantom. Single fraction radiosurgery/SBRT plans were designed for each target with each of our treatment platforms. Plans were prescribed to 16 Gy in one fraction to cover 90% of the target volume using normal tissue and target constraints from RTOG 0631. We analyzed these plans with priority on the dose to 10% of the partial spinal cord and dose to 0.03 cc of the spinal cord. Each system was able to maintain 90% target coverage while meeting all the constraints of RTOG 0631. On average, CyberKnife was able to achieve the lowest spinal cord doses overall and also generated the sharpest dose falloff as indicated by the Paddick gradient index. Treatment times varied widely depending on the modality utilized. On average, treatment can be delivered faster with Flattening Filter Free RapidArc and Tomotherapy, compared to Vero and Cyberknife. While all systems analyzed were able to meet the dose constraints of RTOG 0631, unique characteristics of individual treatment modalities may guide modality selection. Specifically, certain modalities performed better than the others for specific target shapes and locations, and delivery time varied significantly among the different modalities. These findings could provide guidance in determining which of the available modalities would be preferable for the treatment of spine metastases based on individualized treatment goals.

VERO® radiotherapy for low burden cancer: 789 patients with 957 lesions

Purpose

The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate patient profile, feasibility, and acute toxicity of RadioTherapy (RT) delivered by VERO® in the first 20 months of clinical activity.

Methods

Inclusion criteria: 1) adult patients; 2) limited volume cancer (M0 or oligometastatic); 3) small extracranial lesions; 4) treatment between April 2012 and December 2013 and 5) written informed consent. Two techniques were employed: intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Toxicity was evaluated using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (RTOG/EORTC) criteria.

Results

Between April 2012 and December 2013, 789 consecutive patients (957 lesions) were treated. In 84% of them one lesion was treated and in 16% more than one lesion were treated synchronously/metachronously; first radiotherapy course in 85%, re-irradiation in 13%, and boost in 2% of cases. The treated region included pelvis 46%, thorax 38%, upper abdomen 15%, and neck 1%. Radiotherapy schedules included <5 and >5 fractions in 75% and 25% respectively. All patients completed the planned treatment and an acceptable acute toxicity was observed.

Conclusions

RT delivered by VERO® was administrated predominantly to thoracic and pelvic lesions (lung and urologic tumours) using hypofractionation. It is a feasible approach for limited burden cancer offering short and well accepted treatment with favourable acute toxicity profile. Further investigation including dose escalation and other available VERO® functionalities such as real-time dynamic tumour tracking is warranted in order to fully evaluate this innovative radiotherapy system.