Clinical verification of treatment planning dose calculation in lung SBRT with GATE Monte Carlo simulation code

PurposeThis study aims to use GATE/Geant4 simulation code to evaluate the performance of dose calculations with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) in the context of lung SBRT for complex treatments considering images of patients.MethodsFour cases of non-small cell lung cancer treated with SBRT were selected for this study. Irradiation plans were created with AAA and recalculated end to end using Monte Carlo (MC) method maintaining field configurations identical to the original plans. Each treatment plan was evaluated in terms of PTV and organs at risk (OARs) using dose-volume histograms (DVH). Dosimetric parameters obtained from DVHs were used to compare AAA and MC.ResultsThe comparison between the AAA and MC DVH using gamma analysis with the passing criteria of 3%/3% showed an average passing rate of more than 90% for the PTV structure and 97% for the OARs. Tightening the criteria to 2%/2% showed a reduction in the average passing rate of the PTV to 86%. The agreement between the AAA and MC dose calculations for PTV dosimetric parameters (V₁₀₀; V₉₀; Homogeneity index; maximum, minimum and mean dose; CI_Paddick and D_2cm) was within 18.4%. For OARs, the biggest differences were observed in the spinal cord and the great vessels.ConclusionsIn general, we did not find significant differences between AAA and MC. The results indicate that AAA could be used in complex SBRT cases that involve a larger number of small treatment fields in the presence of tissue heterogeneities.     

Relations between doses cumulated in bone marrow and dose delivery techniques during radiation therapy of cervical and endometrial cancer

PurposeTo compare normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and average doses in the bone marrow (BM), obtained for five different radiotherapy delivery and planning strategies of cervical and endometrial cancer.Material/methods50 patients were taken to analysis. For each case, 3 different dose delivery techniques were used: 4-field, X15MV, 3DCRT; 7-field, X6MV, IMRT; and 2-arc, X6MV, VMAT. Two optimization scenarios were used for the IMRT and VMAT plans generation: with (+) and without (−) the inclusion of the BM as an optimized structure. Average doses and dose-volume histogram parameters for the PTV, BM, bladder, rectum, bowels and femoral heads were compared. In addition, the BM doses were analyzed with respect to the PTV and/or volume of the BM, and NTCP for the BM were computed.ResultsThe dose in PTV for evaluated plans was similar. The worst doses in organs at risk were obtained for 3DCRT. Using the BM during the optimization of IMRT and VMAT reduces an average dose in BM without increasing the doses in the bladder, rectum and bowels. Differences between doses in BM for IMRT(+) and VMAT(+) plans were similar while NTCP was lower for VMAT(+). A correlation between average dose in BM and the volume ratio of BM and PTV was found for each technique.ConclusionUsing the BM during the optimization of the IMRT and VMAT plans effectively reduces the dose in BM without increasing the dose in the bladder, rectum and bowels. The VMAT(+) plans were characterized by the lowest NTCP.     

Optimization of treatment planning parameters used in tomotherapy for prostate cancer patients

Background and purposeTomotherapy treatment planning depends on parameters that are not used conventionally such as: field width (FW), pitch factor (PF) and modulation factor (MF). The aim of this study is to analyze the relationship between these parameters and their influence on the quality of treatment plans and beam-on time.Material and methodsTen prostate cancer patients were included in the study. For each patient, two cases of irradiation were considered depending on the target volume: PTV1 included the prostate gland, seminal vesicles, pelvic lymph nodes and a 1 cm margin, whereas PTV2 included only the prostate gland with a 1 cm margin. For each patient and each case of irradiation (PTV1 and PTV2) 8 treatment plans were created – all consisted of a different combination of planning parameters (FW = 1.05, 2.5, 5 cm; PF = 0.107, 0.215, 0.43; MF = 1.5, 2.5, 3.5). Default values used in this study were FW = 2.5 cm, PF = 0.215 and MF = 2.5. Hence, for plans with different FWs, parameters of PF and MF were 0.215 and 2.5, respectively; for different PFs, FW and MF were 2.5 and 2.5, respectively; finally for different MFs, FW and PF were 2.5 and 0.215, respectively. The reference plan was optimized for FW = 1.05 cm, PF = 0.107 and MF = 3.5, which was assumed to result in the best dose distribution and the longest treatment time. As a result, 160 plans were created. Each plan was analyzed for dose distribution and execution time.Results and conclusion: Treatment plans with FW of 5 cm resulted in the shortest execution time compromising the dose distribution. Moreover, the dose fall off in the longitudinal direction was not sharp. FW of 1.05 cm and PF of 0.107 were not recommended for routine prostate plans due to long execution time, which was 3 times longer than for plans with FW = 5 cm. There was no substantial decrease of irradiation time when PF was increased from 0.215 to 0.43 for both cases (PTV1 and PTV2); however, the dose distribution was slightly compromised. Finally, decreasing MF from 2.5 to 1.5 was useless because it did not change the beam-on time; however, it did remarkably decrease the dose distribution. Nevertheless, increasing MF up to 3.5 could be considered. The lowest EUD for the rectum and intestines, could be observed for PF = 0.107. For the other plans the differences were rather small (the EUD was almost the same). By reducing PF from 0.43 to 0.107 or FW from 5 to 1.05 the EUD for bladder (in PTV1 case) decreased by 3.13% and 2.60%. When PTV2 was a target volume, the EUD for bladder decreased by 4.54% and 3.43% when FW was changed from 5 to 1.05 and MF from 1.5 to 3.5, respectively. For optimal balance between beam-on time and dose distribution in OARs for routine patients, the authors would suggest to use: FW = 2.5, PF = 0.215 and MF = 2.5.     

A convolution neural network for higher resolution dose prediction in prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy

PurposeThis study aims to investigate the feasibility of using convolutional neural networks to predict an accurate and high resolution dose distribution from an approximated and low resolution input dose.MethodsSixty-six patients were treated for prostate cancer with VMAT. We created the treatment plans using the Acuros XB algorithm with 2 mm grid size, followed by the dose calculated using the anisotropic analytical algorithm with 5 mm grid with the same plan parameters. U-net model was used to predict 2 mm grid dose from 5 mm grid dose. We investigated the two models differing for the training data used as input, one used just the low resolution dose (D model) and the other combined the low resolution dose with CT data (DC model). Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) was calculated to ascertain how well the shape of the dose-volume is matched. We conducted gamma analysis for the following: DVH from the two models and the reference DVH for all prostate structures.ResultsThe DSC values in the DC model were significantly higher than those in the D model (p < 0.01). For the CTV, PTV, and bladder, the gamma passing rates in the DC model were significantly higher than those in the D model (p < 0.002–0.02). The mean doses in the CTV and PTV for the DC model were significantly better matched to those in the reference dose (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsThe proposed U-net model with dose and CT image used as input predicted more accurate dose.     

Adaptive volumetric modulated arc treatment planning for esophageal cancers using cone beam computed tomography

PurposeTo assess the potential of cone beam CT (CBCT) derived adaptive RapidArc treatment for esophageal cancers in reducing the dose to organs at risk (OAR).Methods and materialsTen patients with esophageal cancer were CT scanned in free breathing pattern. The PTV is generated by adding a 3D margin of 1 cm to the CTV as per ICRU 62 recommendations. The double arc RapidArc plan (Clin_RA) was generated for the PTV. Patients were setup using kV orthogonal images and kV-CBCT scan was acquired daily during first week of therapy, then weekly. These images were exported to the Eclipse TPS. The adaptive CTV which includes tumor and involved nodes was delineated in each CBCT image set for the length of the PTV. The composite CTV from first week CBCT was generated using Boolean union operator and 5 mm margin was added circumferentially to generate adaptive PTV (PTV1). Adaptive RapidArc plan (Adap_RA) was generated. NTCP and DVH of the OARs of the two plans were compared. Similarly, PTV2 was generated from weekly CBCT. PTV2 was evaluated for the coverage of 95% isodose of Adap_RA plan.ResultsThe PTV1 and PTV2 volumes covered by 95% isodose in adaptive plans were 93.51 ± 1.17% and 94.59 ± 1.43% respectively. The lung V_10Gy, V_20Gy and mean dose in Adap_RA plan was reduced by 17.43% (p = 0.0012), 34.64% (p = 0.0019) and 16.50% (p = 0.0002) respectively compared to Clin_RA. The Adap_RA plan reduces the heart D_35% and mean dose by 17.35% (p = 0.0011) and 17.16% (p = 0.0012). No significant reduction in spinal cord and liver doses were observed. NTCP for the lung (0.42% vs. 0.08%) and heart (1.39% vs. 0.090%) was reduced significantly in adaptive plans.ConclusionThe adaptive re-planning strategy based on the first week CBCT dataset significantly reduces the doses and NTCP to OARs.     

Feasibility of intensity-modulated radiotherapy to treat gastric cancer

AimTo present a proposed gastric cancer intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning protocol for an institution that have not introduced volumetric modulated arc therapy in clinical practice. A secondary aim was to determine the impact of 2DkV set-up corrections on target coverage and organ at risk (OAR).Methods and MaterialsTwenty consecutive patients were treated with a specially-designed non-coplanar 7-field IMRT technique. The isocenter-shift method was used to estimate the impact of 2DkV-based set-up corrections on the original base plan (BP) coverage. An alternative plan was simulated (SP) by taking into account isocenter shifts. The SP and BP were compared using dose-volume histogram (DVH) plots calculated for the internal target volume (ITV) and OARs.ResultsBoth plans delivered a similar mean dose to the ITV (100.32 vs. 100.40%), with no significant differences between the plans in internal target coverage (5.37 vs. 4.96%). Similarly, no significant differences were observed between the maximal dose to the spinal cord (67.70 and 67.09%, respectively) and volume received 50% of the prescribed dose of: the liver (62.11 vs. 59.84%), the right (17.62 vs. 18.58%) and left kidney (29.40 vs. 30.48%). Set-up margins (SM) were computed as 7.80 mm, 10.17 mm and 6.71 mm in the left-right, cranio-caudal and anterior-posterior directions, respectively.ConclusionPresented IMRT protocol (OAR dose constraints with selected SM verified by 2DkV verification) for stomach treatment provided optimal dose distribution for the target and the critical organs. Comparison of DVH for the base and the modified plan (which considered set-up uncertainties) showed no significant differences.     

Static and rotational intensity modulated techniques for head-neck cancer radiotherapy: A planning comparison

PurposeTo compare helical Tomotherapy (HT), two volumetric-modulated arc techniques and conventional fixed-field intensity modulated techniques (S-IMRT) for head-neck (HN) cancers.Methods and materialsEighteen HN patients were considered. Four treatment plans were generated for each patient: HT, S-IMRT optimised with Eclipse treatment planning system and two volumetric techniques using Elekta–Oncentra approach (VMAT) and Varian-RapidArc (RA), using two full arcs. All techniques were optimised to simultaneously deliver 66Gy to PTV1 (GTV and enlarged nodes) and 54Gy to PTV2 (subclinical and electively treated nodes). Comparisons were assessed on several dosimetric parameters and, secondarily, on planned MUs and delivery time.ResultsConcerning PTV coverage, significantly better results were found for HT and RA. HT significantly improved the target coverage both compared to S-IMRT and VMAT. No significant differences were found between S-IMRT and volumetric techniques in terms of dose homogeneity. For OARs, all the techniques were able to satisfy all hard constraints; significantly better results were found for HT, especially in the intermediate dose range (15–30 Gy). S-IMRT reached a significantly better OARs sparing with respect to VMAT and RA. No significant differences were found for body mean dose, excepting higher values of V5–V10 for HT. A reduction of planned MUs and delivery treatment time was found with volumetric techniques.ConclusionsThe objectives of satisfying target coverage and sparing of critical structures were reached with all techniques. S-IMRT techniques were found more advantageous compared to RA and VMAT for OARs sparing. HT reached the best overall treatment plan quality.     

An automated Monte Carlo QC system for volumetric modulated arc therapy: Possibilities and challenges

PurposeTo develop and implement an automated Monte Carlo (MC) system for patient specific VMAT quality control in a patient geometry that generates treatment planning system (TPS) compliant DICOM objects and includes a module for 3D analysis of dose deviations. Also, the aims were to recommend diagnose specific tolerance criteria and an evaluation procedure.MethodsThe EGSnrc code package formed the basis for development of the MC system. The workflow consists of a number of modules connected to a TPS by means of manual DICOM exports and imports which were executed sequentially without user interaction. DVH comparison was performed in the TPS. In addition, MC- and TPS dose distributions were analysed by applying the normalized dose difference (NDD) formalism. NDD failure maps and a pass rate for a certain threshold were obtained. 170 clinical plans (prostate, thorax, head-and-neck and gynecological) were selected for analysis.ResultsAgreement within 1.5% was found between clinical- and MC data for the mean dose to the target volumes and within 3% for parameters more sensitive to the shape of the DVH e.g. D_98% PTV. Regarding the NDD analysis, tolerance criteria 2%/3 mm were established for prostate plans and 3%/3 mm for the rest of the cases.ConclusionsAn automated MC system was developed and implemented. Evaluation procedure is recommended with NDD-analysis as a first step. For pass rate < 95%, the evaluation continues with comparison of DVH parameters. For deviations larger than 2%, a visual inspection of the clinical- and MC dose distributions is performed.     

Patient-specific quality assurance and plan dose errors on breast intensity-modulated proton therapy

PurposeTo investigate, in proton therapy, whether the Gamma passing rate (GPR) is related to the patient dose error and whether MU scaling can improve dose accuracy.MethodsAmong 20 consecutively treated breast patients selected for analysis, two IMPT plans were retrospectively generated: (1) the pencil-beam (PB) plan and (2) the Monte Carlo (MC) plan. Patient-specific QA was performed. A 3%/3-mm Gamma analysis was conducted to compare the TPS-calculated PB algorithm dose distribution with the measured 2D dose. Dose errors were compared between the plans that passed the Gamma testing and those that failed. The MU was then scaled to obtain a better GPR. MU-scaled PB plan dose errors were compared to the original PB plan.ResultsOf the 20 PB plans, 8 were passed Gamma testing (G_pass_group) and 12 failed (G_fail_group). Surprisingly, the G_pass_group had a greater dose error than the G_fail_group. The median (range) of the PTV DVH RMSE and PTV ΔDmean were 1.36 (1.00–1.91) Gy vs 1.18 (1.02–1.80) Gy and 1.23 (0.92–1.71) Gy vs 1.10 (0.87–1.49) Gy for the G_pass_group and the G_fail_group, respectively. MU scaling reduced overall dose error. However, for PTV D99 and D95, MU scaling worsened some cases.ConclusionFor breast IMPT, the PB plans that passed the Gamma testing did not show smaller dose errors compared to the plans that failed. For individual plans, the MU scaling technique leads to overall smaller dose errors. However, we do not suggest use of the MU scaling technique to replace the MC plans when the MC algorithm is available.     

Geometric and dosimetric quality assurance using logfiles and a 3D helical diode detector for Dynamic WaveArc

PurposeTo conduct patient-specific geometric and dosimetric quality assurance (QA) for the Dynamic WaveArc (DWA) using logfiles and ArcCHECK (Sun Nuclear Inc., Melbourne, FL, USA).MethodsTwenty DWA plans, 10 for pituitary adenoma and 10 for prostate cancer, were created using RayStation version 4.7 (RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden). Root mean square errors (RMSEs) between the actual and planned values in the logfiles were evaluated. Next, the dose distributions were reconstructed based on the logfiles. The differences between dose-volumetric parameters in the reconstructed plans and those in the original plans were calculated. Finally, dose distributions were assessed using ArcCHECK. In addition, the reconstructed dose distributions were compared with planned ones.ResultsThe means of RMSEs for the gantry, O-ring, MLC position, and MU for all plans were 0.2°, 0.1°, 0.1 mm, and 0.4 MU, respectively. Absolute means of the change in PTV D_99% were 0.4 ± 0.4% and 0.1 ± 0.1% points between the original and reconstructed plans for pituitary adenoma and prostate cancer, respectively. The mean of the gamma passing rate (3%/3 mm) between the measured and planned dose distributions was 97.7%. In addition, that between the reconstructed and planned dose distributions was 99.6%.ConclusionsWe have demonstrated that the geometric accuracy and gamma passing rates were within AAPM 119 and 142 criteria during DWA. Dose differences in the dose-volumetric parameters using the logfile-based dose reconstruction method were also clinically acceptable in DWA.     

Virtual Tangential-fields Arc Therapy (ViTAT) for whole breast irradiation: Technique optimization and validation

PurposeTo test the performances of a volumetric arc technique named ViTAT (Virtual Tangential-fields Arc Therapy) mimicking tangential field irradiation for whole breast radiotherapy.MethodsViTAT plans consisted in 4 arcs whose starting/ending position were established based on gantry angle distribution of clinical plans for right and left-breast. The arcs were completely blocked excluding the first and last 20°. Different virtual bolus densities and thicknesses were preliminarily evaluated to obtain the best plan performances. For 40 patients with tumor laterality equally divided between right and left sides, ViTAT plans were optimized considering the clinical DVHs for OARs (resulting from tangential field manual planning) to constrain them: ViTAT plans were compared with the clinical tangential-fields in terms of DVH parameters for both PTV and OARs.ResultsDistal angle values were suggested in the ranges [220°,240°] for the right-breast and [115°,135°] for the left-breast cases; medial angles were [60°,40°] for the right side and [295°,315°] for the left side, limiting the risk of collision. The optimal virtual bolus had −500 HU density and 1.5 cm thickness. ViTAT plans generated dose distributions very similar to the tangential-field plans, with significantly improved PTV homogeneity. The mean doses of ipsilateral OARs were comparable between the two techniques with minor increase of the low-dose spread in the range 2–15 Gy (few % volume); contralateral OARs were slightly better spared with ViTAT.ConclusionViTAT dose distributions were similar to tangential-fields. ViTAT should allow automatic plan optimization by developing knowledge-based DVH prediction models of patients treated with tangential-fields.     

Impact of different optimization strategies on the compatibility between planned and delivered doses during radiation therapy of cervical cancer

PurposeTo analyse the impact of different optimization strategies on the compatibility between planned and delivered doses during radiotherapy of cervical cancer.Material/methodsFour treatment plans differing in optimisation strategies were prepared for ten cervical cancer cases. These were: volumetric modulated arc therapy with (_OPT) and without optimization of the doses in the bone marrow and for two sets of margins applied to the clinical target volume that arose from image guidance based on the bones (IG(B)) and soft tissues (IG(ST)). The plans were subjected to dosimetric verification by using the ArcCHECK system and 3DVH software. The planned dose distributions were compared with the corresponding measured dose distributions in the light of complexity of the plans and its deliverability.ResultsThe clinically significant impact of the plans complexity on their deliverability is visible only for the gamma passing rates analysis performed in a local mode and directly in the organs. While more general analyses show statistically significant differences, the clinical relevance of them has not been confirmed. The analysis showed that IG(ST)_OPT and IG(B)_OPT significantly differ from IG(ST) and IG(B). The clinical acceptance of IG(ST)_OPT obtained for hard combinations of gamma acceptance criteria (2%/2 mm) confirm its satisfactory deliverability. In turn, for IG(B)_OPT in the case of the rectum, the combination of 2%/2 mm did not meet the criteria of acceptance.ConclusionDespite the complexity of the IG(ST)_OPT, the results of analysis confirm the acceptance of its deliverability when 2%/2 mm gamma acceptance criteria are used during the analysis.     

Evaluation of clinical benefits achievable by using different optimization algorithms during real-time prostate brachytherapy

Background and purposeHigh dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy is a clinically used procedure in prostate cancer treatment. The purpose of this study was to present the influence of using different optimization algorithms in 3D-CBRT planning on the treatment plan quality.Materials and methodsTreatment plans were calculated for 15 patients – three plans for each patient using: geometrical optimization (GO), inverse optimization (IO) and blind inverse optimization (BIO). For each patient, PTV and OAR volumes, number of needles and geometry of the implant were set equal. Differences between dose distributions were tracked using: D90, V100, V200, Dmax (for prostate); D10, Dmax (for urethra); D10, V100, Dmax (for rectum).ResultsThe analysis of mean values of D90 and V100 in the prostate showed that inverse algorithms gave the best results (mean D90 was 12.1% for BIO and 9.3% for IO better than for GO, mean V100 was 8.2% for BIO and 6.3% for IO better than for GO). From a clinical point of view, GO diminished the doses in the PTV and urethra in all analyzed parameters. The lowest mean doses in the rectum were achieved for plans optimized with IO and BIO (mean D10: 61.2% for GO, 58.1% for IO, 58.0% for BIO; mean Dmax: 92.8% for GO, 85.1% for IO, 83.6% for BIO).ConclusionsApplication of the blind inverse optimization (BIO) algorithm led to clinically best dose parameters for PTV and the rectum. Use of geometrical optimization (GO) led to smaller doses in the urethra, which was however associated with a certain dose decrease also in PTV.     

Evaluation of fully automated a priori MCO treatment planning in VMAT for head-and-neck cancer

PurposeAutomated planning techniques aim to reduce manual planning time and inter-operator variability without compromising the plan quality which is particularly challenging for head-and-neck (HN) cancer radiotherapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of an a priori-multicriteria plan optimization algorithm on a cohort of HN patients.MethodsA total of 14 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (upper-HN) and 14 “middle-lower indications” (lower-HN) previously treated in our institution were enrolled in this study. Automatically generated plans (autoVMAT) were compared to manual VMAT or Helical Tomotherapy planning (manVMAT-HT) by assessing differences in dose delivered to targets and organs at risk (OARs), calculating plan quality indexes (PQIs) and performing blinded comparisons by clinicians. Quality control of the plans and measurements of the delivery times were also performed.ResultsFor the 14 lower-HN patients, with equivalent planning target volume (PTV) dosimetric criteria and dose homogeneity, significant decrease in the mean doses to the oral cavity, esophagus, trachea and larynx were observed for autoVMAT compared to manVMAT-HT. Regarding the 14 upper-HN cases, the PTV coverage was generally significantly superior for autoVMAT which was also confirmed with higher calculated PQIs on PTVs for 13 out of 14 patients, whereas PQIs calculated on OARs were generally equivalent. Number of MUs and total delivery time were significantly higher for autoVMAT compared to manVMAT. All plans were considered clinically acceptable by clinicians.ConclusionsOverall superiority of autoVMAT compared to manVMAT-HT plans was demonstrated for HN cancer. The obtained plans were operator-independent and required no post-optimization or manual intervention.     

Incorrect dosimetric leaf separation in IMRT and VMAT treatment planning: Clinical impact and correlation with pretreatment quality assurance

PurposeDynamic treatment planning algorithms use a dosimetric leaf separation (DLS) parameter to model the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) characteristics. Here, we quantify the dosimetric impact of an incorrect DLS parameter and investigate whether common pretreatment quality assurance (QA) methods can detect this effect.Methods16 treatment plans with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique for multiple treatment sites were calculated with a correct and incorrect setting of the DLS, corresponding to a MLC gap difference of 0.5 mm. Pretreatment verification QA was performed with a bi-planar diode array phantom and the electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Measurements were compared to the correct and incorrect planned doses using gamma evaluation with both global (G) and local (L) normalization. Correlation, specificity and sensitivity between the dose volume histogram (DVH) points for the planning target volume (PTV) and the gamma passing rates were calculated.ResultsThe change in PTV and organs at risk DVH parameters were 0.4–4.1%. Good correlation (>0.83) between the PTV_mean dose deviation and measured gamma passing rates was observed. Optimal gamma settings with 3%L/3 mm (per beam and composite plan) and 3%G/2 mm (composite plan) for the diode array phantom and 2%G/2 mm (composite plan) for the EPID system were found. Global normalization and per beam ROC analysis of the diode array phantom showed an area under the curve <0.6.ConclusionsA DLS error can worsen pretreatment QA using gamma analysis with reasonable credibility for the composite plan. A low detectability was demonstrated for a 3%G/3 mm per beam gamma setting.     

Dosimetric comparison of dynamic conformal arc integrated with segment shape optimization and variable dose rate versus volumetric modulated arc therapy for liver SBRT

AimThe aim is a dosimetric comparison of dynamic conformal arc integrated with the segment shape optimization and variable dose rate (DCA_SSO_VDR) versus VMAT for liver SBRT and interaction of various treatment plan quality indices with PTV and degree of modulation (DoM) for both techniques.BackgroundThe DCA is the state-of-the-art technique but overall inferior to VMAT, and the DCA_SSO_VDR technique was not studied for liver SBRT.Materials and methodsTwenty-five patients of liver SBRT treated using the VMAT technique were selected. DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans were also generated for all patients in Monaco TPS using the same objective constraint template and treatment planning parameters as used for the VMAT technique. For comparison purpose, organs at risk (OARs) doses and treatment plans quality indices, such as maximum dose of PTV (D_max%), mean dose of PTV (D_mean%), maximum dose at 2 cm in any direction from the PTV (D_2cm%), total monitor units (MU’s), gradient index R_50%, degree of modulation (DoM), conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and healthy tissue mean dose (HTMD) were compared.ResultsSignificant dosimetric differences were observed in several OARs doses and lowered in VMAT plans. The D_2cm%, R_50%, CI, HI and HTMD are dosimetrically inferior in DCA_SSO_VDR plans. The higher DoM results in poor dose gradient and better dose gradient for DCA_SSO_VDR and VMAT treatment plans, respectively.ConclusionsFor liver SBRT, DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans are neither dosimetrically superior nor better alternative to the VMAT delivery technique. A reduction of 69.75% MU was observed in DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans. For the large size of PTV and high DoM, DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans result in poorer quality.     

Integration of Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Tractography into tomotherapy radiation treatment planning for high-grade gliomas

IntroductionFractionated radiotherapy in brain tumors is commonly associated with several detrimental effects, largely related to the higher radiosensitivity of the white matter (WM) with respect to gray matter. However, no dose constraints are applied to preserve WM structures at present. Magnetic Resonance (MR) Tractography is the only technique that allows to visualize in vivo the course of WM eloquent tracts in the brain. In this study, the feasibility of integrating MR Tractography in tomotherapy treatment planning has been investigated, with the aim to spare eloquent WM regions from the dose delivered during treatment.MethodsNineteen high grade glioma patients treated with fractionated radiotherapy were enrolled. All the patients underwent pre-treatment MR imaging protocol including Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) acquisitions for MR Tractography analysis. Bilateral tracts involved in several motor, language, cognitive functions were reconstructed and these fiber bundles were integrated into the Tomotherapy Treatment planning system. The original plans without tracts were compared with the optimized plans incorporating the fibers, to evaluate doses to WM structures in the two differently optimized plans.ResultsNo significant differences were found between plans in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage between the original plans and the optimized plans incorporating fiber tracts. Comparing the mean as well as the maximal dose (Dmean and Dmax), a significant dose reduction was found for most of the tracts. The dose sparing was more relevant for contralateral tracts (P < 0.0001).ConclusionThe integration of MR Tractography into radiotherapy planning is feasible and beneficial to preserve important WM structures without reducing the clinical goal of radiation treatment.