Dosimetric Evaluation of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy,Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy,and Helical Tomotherapy for Hippocampal-Avoidance Whole Brain Radiotherapy

Background

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is a vital tool in radiation oncology and beyond, but it can result in adverse health effects such as neurocognitive decline. Hippocampal Avoidance WBRT (HA-WBRT) is a strategy that aims to mitigate the neuro-cognitive side effects of whole brain radiotherapy treatment by sparing the hippocampi while delivering the prescribed dose to the rest of the brain. Several competing modalities capable of delivering HA-WBRT, include: Philips Pinnacle step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), Varian RapidArc volumetric modulated arc therapy (RapidArc), and helical TomoTherapy (TomoTherapy).

Methods

In this study we compared these methods using 10 patient datasets. Anonymized planning CT (computerized tomography) scans and contour data based on fused MRI images were collected. Three independent planners generated treatment plans for the patients using three modalities, respectively. All treatment plans met the RTOG 0933 criteria for HA-WBRT treatment.

Results

In dosimetric comparisons between the three modalities, TomoTherapy has a significantly superior homogeneity index of 0.15 ± 0.03 compared to the other two modalities (0.28 ± .04, p < .005 for IMRT and 0.22 ± 0.03, p < .005 for RapidArc). RapidArc has the fastest average delivery time of 2.5 min compared to the other modalities (15 min for IMRT and 18 min for TomoTherapy).

Conclusion

TomoTherapy is considered to be the preferred modality for HA-WBRT due to its superior dose distribution. When TomoTherapy is not available or treatment time is a concern, RapidArc can provide sufficient dose distribution meeting RTOG criteria and efficient treatment delivery.     

Cardiac Exposure in the Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy,Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy of Lung Cancer

Purpose

To retrospectively evaluate the cardiac exposure in three cohorts of lung cancer patients treated with dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) at our institution in the past seven years.

Methods and Materials

A total of 140 lung cancer patients were included in this institutional review board approved study: 25 treated with DCAT, 70 with IMRT and 45 with VMAT. All plans were generated in a same commercial treatment planning system and have been clinically accepted and delivered. The dose distribution to the heart and the effects of tumor laterality, the irradiated heart volume and the beam-to-heart distance on the cardiac exposure were investigated.

Results

The mean dose to the heart among all 140 plans was 4.5 Gy. Specifically, the heart received on average 2.3, 5.2 and 4.6 Gy in the DCAT, IMRT and VMAT plans, respectively. The mean heart doses for the left and right lung tumors were 4.1 and 4.8 Gy, respectively. No patients died with evidence of cardiac disease. Three patients (2%) with preexisting cardiac condition developed cardiac disease after treatment. Furthermore, the cardiac exposure was found to increase linearly with the irradiated heart volume while decreasing exponentially with the beam-to-heart distance.

Conclusions

Compared to old technologies for lung cancer treatment, modern radiotherapy treatment modalities demonstrated better heart sparing. But the heart dose in lung cancer radiotherapy is still higher than that in the radiotherapy of breast cancer and Hodgkin’s disease where cardiac complications have been extensively studied. With strong correlations of mean heart dose with beam-to-heart distance and irradiated heart volume, cautions should be exercised to avoid long-term cardiac toxicity in the lung cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy.     

Flattening Filter-Free Beams in Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Sinonasal Cancer

Purpose

To evaluate the dosimetric impacts of flattening filter-free (FFF) beams in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for sinonasal cancer.

Methods

For fourteen cases, IMRT and VMAT planning was performed using 6-MV photon beams with both conventional flattened and FFF modes. The four types of plans were compared in terms of target dose homogeneity and conformity, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, number of monitor units (MUs) per fraction, treatment time and pure beam-on time.

Results

FFF beams led to comparable target dose homogeneity, conformity, increased number of MUs and lower doses to the spinal cord, brainstem and normal tissue, compared with flattened beams in both IMRT and VMAT. FFF beams in IMRT resulted in improvements by up to 5.4% for sparing of the contralateral optic structures, with shortened treatment time by 9.5%. However, FFF beams provided comparable overall OAR sparing and treatment time in VMAT. With FFF mode, VMAT yielded inferior homogeneity and superior conformity compared with IMRT, with comparable overall OAR sparing and significantly shorter treatment time.

Conclusions

Using FFF beams in IMRT and VMAT is feasible for the treatment of sinonasal cancer. Our results suggest that the delivery mode of FFF beams may play an encouraging role with better sparing of contralateral optic OARs and treatment efficiency in IMRT, but yield comparable results in VMAT.     

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy vs. c-IMRT for the Treatment of Upper Thoracic Esophageal Cancer

Objective

To compare plans using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with conventional sliding window intensity-modulated radiation therapy (c-IMRT) to treat upper thoracic esophageal cancer (EC).

Methods

CT datasets of 11 patients with upper thoracic EC were identified. Four plans were generated for each patient: c-IMRT with 5 fields (5F) and VMAT with a single arc (1A), two arcs (2A), or three arcs (3A). The prescribed doses were 64 Gy/32 F for the primary tumor (PTV64). The dose-volume histogram data, the number of monitoring units (MUs) and the treatment time (TT) for the different plans were compared.

Results

All of the plans generated similar dose distributions for PTVs and organs at risk (OARs), except that the 2A- and 3A-VMAT plans yielded a significantly higher conformity index (CI) than the c-IMRT plan. The CI of the PTV64 was improved by increasing the number of arcs in the VMAT plans. The maximum spinal cord dose and the planning risk volume of the spinal cord dose for the two techniques were similar. The 2A- and 3A-VMAT plans yielded lower mean lung doses and heart V₅₀ values than the c-IMRT. The V₂₀ and V₃₀ for the lungs in all of the VMAT plans were lower than those in the c-IMRT plan, at the expense of increasing V₅, V₁₀ and V₁₃. The VMAT plan resulted in significant reductions in MUs and TT.

Conclusion

The 2A-VMAT plan appeared to spare the lungs from moderate-dose irradiation most effectively of all plans, at the expense of increasing the low-dose irradiation volume, and also significantly reduced the number of required MUs and the TT. The CI of the PTVs and the OARs was improved by increasing the arc-number from 1 to 2; however, no significant improvement was observed using the 3A-VMAT, except for an increase in the TT.     

Planning Study of Flattening Filter Free Beams for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Scalp

Purpose

Flattening filter free (FFF) beams show the potential for a higher dose rate and lower peripheral dose. We investigated the planning study of FFF beams with their role for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in squamous cell carcinoma of the scalp.

Methods and Materials

One patient with squamous cell carcinoma which had involvement of entire scalp was subjected to VMAT using TrueBeam linear accelerator. As it was a rare skin malignancy, CT data of 7 patients with brain tumors were also included in this study, and their entire scalps were outlined as target volumes. Three VMAT plans were employed with RapidArc form: two half-field full-arcs VMAT using 6 MV standard beams (HFF-VMAT-FF), eight half-field quarter-arcs VMAT using 6 MV standard beams (HFQ-VMAT-FF), and HFQ-VMAT using FFF beams (HFQ-VMAT-FFF). Prescribed dose was 25×2 Gy (50 Gy). Plan quality and efficiency were assessed for all plans.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences among the three VMAT plans in target volume coverage, conformity, and homogeneity. For HFQ-VMAT-FF plans, there was a significant decrease by 12.6% in the mean dose to the brain compared with HFF-VMAT-FF. By the use of FFF beams, the mean dose to brain in HFQ-VMAT-FFF plans was further decreased by 7.4% compared with HFQ-VMAT-FF. Beam delivery times were similar for each technique.

Conclusions

The HFQ-VMAT-FF plans showed the superiority in dose distributions compared with HFF-VMAT-FF. HFQ-VMAT-FFF plans might provide further normal tissue sparing, particularly in the brain, showing their potential for radiation therapy in squamous cell carcinoma of the scalp.     

Clinical Features of Brain Metastases in Small Cell Lung Cancer: an Implication for Hippocampal Sparing Whole Brain Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical features and distribution of brain metastases (BMs) of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the hippocampal and perihippocampal region, with the purpose of exploring the viability of hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiation therapy (HS-WBRT) on reducing neurocognitive deficits. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the clinical characteristics and patterns of BMs in patients with SCLC. Associations between the clinical characteristics and hippocampal metastases (HMs)/perihippocampal metastases (PHMs) were evaluated in univariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1594 brain metastatic lesions were identified in 180 patients. Thirty-two (17.8%) patients were diagnosed with BMs at the time of primary SCLC diagnosis. The median interval between diagnosis of primary SCLC and BMs was 9.3 months. There were 9 (5.0%) and 22 (12.2%) patients with HMs and PHMs (patients with BMs located in or within 5 mm around the hippocampus), respectively. In the univariate and multivariate analysis, the number of BMs was the risk factor for HMs and PHMs. Patients with BMs ≥ 5 had significantly higher risk of HMs (odds ratio [OR] 7.892, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.469-42.404, P = .016), and patients with BMs ≥ 7 had significantly higher risk of PHMs (OR 5.162, 95% CI 2.017-13.213, P = .001). Patients with extracranial metastases are also associated with HMs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that patients with nonoligometastatic disease are significantly associated with HMs and PHMs. The incidence of PHMs may be acceptably low enough to perform HS-WBRT for SCLC. Our findings provide valuable clinical data to assess the benefit of HS-WBRT in SCLC patients with BMs.