Effect of composite sector collimation on average dose fall-off for Gamma Knife Perfexion

Possible Overcoming of Tumor Hypoxia with Adaptive Hypofractionated Radiosurgery of Large Brain Metastases: A Biological Modeling Study

OBJECTIVE

The present biological modeling study evaluated possible application of adaptive hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (HSRS), which involves escalation of the prescription dose according to the gradual decrease in the tumor volume between treatment sessions separated by 2- to 3-week intervals, in the management of large brain metastases.

METHODS

To investigate the effects of dose escalation during three-stage adaptive HSRS, a generalized biologically effective dose (gBED) model was applied. Accounting for both a nonuniform dose distribution inside the target and tumor hypoxia was implemented, and normal brain radiation dose distributions were assessed.

RESULTS

In comparison with conventional three-stage HSRS (with an identical prescription dose of 10 Gy at each treatment session), adaptive HSRS resulted in a 30-40% increase in gBED. This effect was especially prominent in late-responding targets (with α/β ratios from 3 to 10 Gy) and in neoplasms containing a high percentage of hypoxic cells. Despite dose escalation in the target, irradiation of the adjacent normal brain tissue was kept within safe limits at a level similar to that applied in conventional three-stage HSRS.

CONCLUSION

Adaptive HSRS theoretically results in significant enhancement of gBED in the target and may possibly overcome resistance to irradiation, which is caused by tumor hypoxia. These advantages may translate into higher treatment efficacy in cases of large brain metastases.

Inter- and intrafractional dose uncertainty in hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery

The purpose of this study is to evaluate inter‐ and intrafractional dose variations resulting from head position deviations for patients treated with the Extend relocatable frame system utilized in hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS). While previous reports characterized the residual setup and intrafraction uncertainties of the system, the dosimetric consequences have not been investigated. A digital gauge was used to measure the head position of 16 consecutive Extend patients (62 fractions) at the time of simulation, before each fraction, and immediately following each fraction. Vector interfraction (difference between simulation and prefraction positions) and intrafraction (difference between postfraction and prefraction positions) shifts in patient position were calculated. Planned dose distributions were shifted by the offset to determine the time‐of‐treatment dose. Variations in mean and maximum target and organ at risk (OAR) doses as a function of positional shift were evaluated. The mean vector interfraction shift was 0.64 mm (Standard Deviation (SD): 0.25 mm, maximum: 1.17 mm). The mean intrafraction shift was 0.39 mm (SD: 0.25 mm, maximum: 1.44 mm). The mean variation in mean target dose was 0.66% (SD: 1.15%, maximum: 5.77%) for interfraction shifts and 0.26% (SD: 0.34%, maximum: 1.85%) for intrafraction shifts. The mean variation in maximum dose to OARs was 7.15% (SD: 5.73%, maximum: 30.59%) for interfraction shifts and 4.07% (SD: 4.22%, maximum: 17.04%) for intrafraction shifts. Linear fitting of the mean variation in maximum dose to OARs as a function of position yielded dose deviations of 10.58%/mm for interfractional shifts and 7.69%/mm for intrafractional shifts. Positional uncertainties when performing hypofractionated Gamma Knife radiosurgery with the Extend system are small and comparable to frame‐based uncertainties (<1 mm). However, the steep dose gradient characteristics of GKRS mean that the dosimetric consequences of positional uncertainties should be considered as part of treatment planning. These dose uncertainties should be evaluated in the context of tumor response and OAR tolerance for hypofractionated treatment scenarios where any increase in dose may be tempered by the increased protection hypofractionation provides to normal tissue.

PACS number(s): 87.52.‐g

Clinical realization of sector beam intensity modulation for Gamma Knife radiosurgery: a pilot treatment planning study

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the clinical feasibility and potential benefits of sector beam intensity modulation (SBIM) specific to Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

SBIM is based on modulating the confocal beam intensities from individual sectors surrounding an isocenter in a nearly 2π geometry. This is in contrast to conventional GKSRS delivery, in which the beam intensities from each sector are restricted to be either 0% or 100% and must be identical for any given isocenter. We developed a SBIM solution based on available clinical planning tools, and we tested it on a cohort of 12 clinical cases as a proof of concept study. The SBIM treatment plans were compared with the original clinically delivered treatment plans to determine dosimetric differences. The goal was to investigate whether SBIM would improve the dose conformity for these treatment plans without prohibitively lengthening the treatment time.

RESULTS

A SBIM technique was developed. On average, SBIM improved the Paddick conformity index (PCI) versus the clinically delivered plans (clinical plan PCI = 0.68 ± 0.11 vs SBIM plan PCI = 0.74 ± 0.10, P=.002; 2-tailed paired t test). The SBIM plans also resulted in nearly identical target volume coverage (mean, 97 ± 2%), total beam-on times (clinical plan 58.4 ± 38.9 minutes vs SBIM 63.5 ± 44.7 minutes, P=.057), and gradient indices (clinical plan 3.03 ± 0.27 vs SBIM 3.06 ± 0.29, P=.44) versus the original clinical plans.

CONCLUSION

The SBIM method is clinically feasible with potential dosimetric gains when compared with conventional GKSRS.

A theoretical investigation of optimal target-dose conformity in gamma knife radiosurgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to suggest guidelines for target-dose conformity in gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GKSRS) by taking into account factors that have been linked to GKSRS complications. We also suggest an explanation for the failure of previous studies to find a correlation between improved conformity index and reduced risk of GKSRS toxicity, where the conformity index, C(S), is defined as the ratio of the prescription volume, V(P), to the target volume, V(T).

METHODS

Previous investigations have shown that symptomatic toxicity in GKSRS is correlated with the volume of nontarget tissue receiving the prescription dose, D(P). In this study, we formulated the volume of nontarget tissue, V(NTD), receiving dose D < or = D(P) as a function of the target volume, prescription volume, and prescription dose. We verified the model for D = 12-15 Gy by comparing VNTD calculated from the model versus VNTD calculated directly for 114 tumors in 63 consecutive patients treated at our institution. Once verified, we used this formulation of V(NTD) to calculate the volume of nontarget tissue receiving doses between 12 and 15 Gy from published data reported for patients experiencing varying degrees of GKSRS toxicity. Next, assuming that the VNTD values calculated for those patients who had either no toxicity or mild neurological symptoms in the published study represented safe levels of normal tissue irradiated to the dose in question, we substituted these V(NTD) values into an equation expressing C(S) in terms of V(NTD), V(T), and D(P), and examined how C(S) varied as a function of V(T) and D(P).

RESULTS

The R2 value for the correlation between VNTD calculated directly or calculated with the proposed formula for VNTD ranged from 0.98 to 0.99, indicating that the formula accurately models the behavior of the nontarget volume receiving dose D. Applying this formulation of VNTD to historical data suggested that the requirements V(NT15) < or = 2.2 cm3, V(NT14) < or = 2.6 cm3, V(NT13) < or = 3.1 cm3 and V(NT12) < or = 3.8 cm3 minimize the risk of severe complications following GKSRS. Imposing these criteria imply that as the target size increases, delivering a given prescription dose requires increasing target-dose conformity. For tumor sizes >5 cm3 C(S) must be < or = 1.2 to restrict V(NTD) to the values listed above. For very small targets, on the other hand, nearly any reasonable conformity index will lead to acceptable values of V(NTD). These observations may explain why previous investigations failed to show a correlation between improved conformity and decreased toxicity in GKSRS, because in these earlier studies the range of conformity indices represented was not wide enough, in particular C(S) values <1.3 were not represented for large tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our model suggests that for target volumes > or = 3 cm3, high levels of target-dose conformity (C(S) < 1.3) are required for typical GKSRS prescription doses in order to limit VNTD to levels associated with either no toxicity or mild neurological symptoms in a previous investigation.

Comparative clinical dosimetry with X-knife and gamma knife

X-knife and gamma knife techniques are well-established for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Due to differences in their radiation delivery methods, some of the dosimetric parameters of these two techniques differ which may have clinical significance. There are many dosimetric studies comparing linear accelerator based techniques such as X-knife with gamma knife but generally from different institutions. We carried out a retrospective comparative study of the dosimetric parameters of the SRS treatments performed at our centre with X-knife (circular cones) and gamma knife. Our results indicate that the dose conformity and dose fall-off in the vicinity of the target volumes were better for patients treated with gamma knife as compared to X-knife. However, the dose fall-off pattern shows a reversal at a larger distance from the target. It was better for the X-knife as compared to gamma knife in the low dose region.

Target and peripheral dose from radiation sector motions accompanying couch repositioning of patient coordinates with the Gamma Knife(®) Perfexion(™)

BACKGROUND

The GammaPlan(™) treatment planning system (TPS) does not fully account for shutter dose when multiple shots are required to deliver a patient's treatment. The unaccounted exposures to the target site and its periphery are measured in this study. The collected data are compared to a similar effect from the Gamma Knife(®) model 4C. MATERIALS AND METHODS.: A stereotactic head frame was attached to a Leksell(®) 16 cm diameter spherical phantom; using a fiducial-box, CT images of the phantom were acquired and registered in the TPS. Measurements give the relationship of measured dose to the number of repositions with the patient positioning system (PPS) and to the collimator size. An absorbed dose of 10 Gy to the 50% isodose line was prescribed to the target site and all measurements were acquired with an ionization chamber.

RESULTS

Measured dose increases with frequency of repositioning and with collimator size. As the radiation sectors transition between the beam on and beam off states, the target receives more shutter dose than the periphery. Shutter doses of 3.53±0.04 and 1.59±0.04 cGy/reposition to the target site are observed for the 16 and 8 mm collimators, respectively. The target periphery receives additional dose that varies depending on its position relative to the target.

CONCLUSIONS

The radiation sector motions for the Gamma Knife(®) Perfexion(™) result in an additional dose due to the shutter effect. The magnitude of this exposure is comparable to that measured for the model 4C.

A quantitative comparison of radiosurgical treatment parameters in vestibular schwannomas: the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion versus Model 4C

PURPOSE

The world's first Gamma Knife Perfexion (PFX)was installed in Marseille in July 2006. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the PFX technology on the quality of dose planning for vestibular schwannomas (VS).

METHODS

When the PFX was first introduced, a comparative randomized prospective study of 200 patients was conducted.Seventy-eight of the 200 patients in that study had VS, of whom 38 were randomized to treatment with the Gamma Knife Model 4C (group 4C) and 40 were randomized to treatment with PFX (group P1). The authors also incorporated a matched group of 40 patients with VS consecutively treated with PFX after the initial learning curve period (group P2). Dose planning was compared and evaluated by measuring the conformity index (CI), selectivity index (SI), gradient index(GI), energy index (EI), unit isocenters (UI) and cochlear dose. Patients were also stratified into subgroups according to target volume (> or = 0.5 ml).

RESULTS

In the whole population, CI, EI and cochlear dose were significantly better in group P2 (CI=0.917, EI=1.35,cochlear dose=3.55) than in group 4C (CI=0.864, EI=1.27,cochlear dose=5.10). In the subgroup of lesions > or = 0.5 ml, CI,GI, EI, UI and cochlear dose in group P2 (CI=0.929, GI=2.67, EI=1.37, UI=10.6, cochlear dose=3.55) were significantly better than in group 4C (CI=0.874, GI=2.85, EI=1.30, UI=14.5, cochlear dose=5.10).

CONCLUSIONS

The investigation of the dose planning capabilities of the PFX on a cohort of VS demonstrates a better conformity and energy distribution, with better cochlear sparing and without any particular drawback. In addition,there is an improvement in peripheral dose gradient in larger lesions. Further clinical studies will be required before drawing any conclusions about the clinical benefit achieved by these dose planning improvements.