A study on conventional IMRT and RapidArc treatment planning techniques for head and neck cancers

AimTo evaluate the performance of volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc against conventional IMRT for head and neck cancers.BackgroundRapidArc is a novel technique that has recently been made available for clinical use. Planning study was done for volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc against conventional IMRT for head and neck cancers.Materials and methodsTen patients with advanced tumors of the nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx were selected for the planning comparison study. PTV was delineated for two different dose levels and planning was done by means of simultaneously integrated boost technique. A total dose of 70 Gy was delivered to the boost volume (PTV boost) and 57.7 Gy to the elective PTV (PTV elective) in 35 equal treatment fractions. PTV boost consisted of the gross tumor volume and lymph nodes containing visible macroscopic tumor or biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes, whereas the PTV elective consisted of elective nodal regions. Planning was done for IMRT using 9 fields and RapidArc with single arc, double arc. Beam was equally placed for IMRT plans. Single arc RapidArc plan utilizes full 360° gantry rotation and double arc consists of 2 co-planar arcs of 360° in clockwise and counter clockwise direction. Collimator was rotated from 35 to 45° to cover the entire tumor, which reduced the tongue and groove effect during gantry rotation. All plans were generated with 6 MV X-rays for CLINAC 2100 Linear Accelerator. Calculations were done in the Eclipse treatment planning system (version 8.6) using the AAA algorithm.ResultsDouble arc plans show superior dose homogeneity in PTV compared to a single arc and IMRT 9 field technique. Target coverage was almost similar in all the techniques. The sparing of spinal cord in terms of the maximum dose was better in the double arc technique by 4.5% when compared to the IMRT 9 field and single arc techniques. For healthy tissue, no significant changes were observed between the plans in terms of the mean dose and integral dose. But RapidArc plans showed a reduction in the volume of the healthy tissue irradiated at V_15 Gy (5.81% for single arc and 4.69% for double arc) and V_20 Gy (7.55% for single arc and 5.89% for double arc) dose levels when compared to the 9-Field IMRT technique. For brain stem, maximum dose was similar in all the techniques. The average MU (±SD) needed to deliver the dose of 200 cGy per fraction was 474 ± 80 MU and 447 ± 45 MU for double arc and single arc as against 948 ± 162 MU for the 9-Field IMRT plan. A considerable reduction in maximum dose to the mandible by 6.05% was observed with double arc plan. Double arc shows a reduction in the parotid mean dose when compared with single arc and IMRT plans.ConclusionRapidArc using double arc provided a significant sparing of OARs and healthy tissue without compromising target coverage compared to IMRT. The main disadvantage with IMRT observed was higher monitor units and longer treatment time.     

Gated carbon-ion scanning treatment for pancreatic tumour with field specific target volume and organs at risk

ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of treatment planning for pancreatic tumours subject to respiratory motion using field-specific target volumes (FTV) and field-specific organs at risk (FOAR) using four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT).MethodsFourteen pancreatic cancer patients underwent 4DCT. Radiation oncologists contoured the gross tumour volume (GTV), clinical target volume (CTV), spinal cord, duodenum, kidneys, and stomach. The gating duty cycle was set to 30 % around exhalation. FTV and FOAR were calculated using the 4DCT dataset. Planning target volumes (PTV) and planning organs at risk volumes (PRV) were defined as equal to FTV and FOAR, respectively. A dose of 55.2 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) was planned to target the PTV from four beam angles. A single field uniform dose (SFUD) plan was selected. The dose distribution, including intrafractional motion changes, was generated.ResultsThe mean volume of target receiving 95 % of the planned doses was 96.4 ± 4.1 % to the GTV and 94.7 ± 0.9 % to the CTV. The highest dose to 2 cc of duodenal volume was 27.5 Gy (RBE). The volume of the stomach receiving ⩾30 Gy (RBE) was <7.0 cc in all patients. All metrics for OARs satisfied dose constraints.ConclusionDose to the CTV was covered sufficiently by the 4DCT-generated FTV, and dose to OARs was reduced by 4DCT-generated FOAR. This methodology may prevent adverse reactions while preserving local tumour control.     

Image-guided IMRT for localized prostate cancer with daily repositioning: Inferring the difference between planned dose and delivered dose distribution

IntroductionTo investigate the dosimetric impact of daily on-line repositioning during a full course of IMRT for prostate cancer.Materials and methodsTwenty patients were treated with image-guided IMRT. Each pre-treatment plan (Plan A) was compared with a post-treatment plan sum (Plan B) based on couch shifts measured. The delivered dose to the prostate without a daily repositioning was inferred by considering each daily couch shift during the whole course of image-guided IMRT (i.e. plan B). Dose metrics were compared for prostate CTV (P-CTV) and PTV (P-PTV) and for organs at risk. Ten patients were treated with a 5 mm margin and 10 patients with a 10 mm margin.ResultsFor plan A vs plan B: the average D95, D98, D50, D mean and EUD were: 76.4 Gy vs 73.9 Gy (p = 0.0007), 75.4 Gy vs 72.3 Gy (p = 0.001), 78.9 Gy vs 78.4 Gy (p = 0.014), 78.7 Gy vs 77.8 Gy (p = 0.003) and 78.1 Gy vs 75.9 Gy (p = 0.002), respectively for P-CTV, and 73.2 Gy vs 69.3 Gy (p = 0.0006), 70.7 Gy vs 66.0 Gy (p = 0.0008), 78.3 Gy vs 77.5 Gy (p = 0.001), 77.8 Gy vs 76.4 Gy (p = 0.0002) and 74.4 Gy vs 69.2 Gy (p = 0.003), respectively for P-PTV. Margin comparison showed no differences in dose metrics between the two plans except for D98 of the rectum in plan B which was significantly higher with a 10 mm margin.ConclusionsThe absence of daily image-guided IMRT resulted in a significantly less uniform and less homogeneous dose distribution to the prostate. A reduction in PTV margin showed neither a lower target coverage nor a better spare of OAR with and without daily image-guided IMRT.     

Assessment of daily dose accumulation for robustly optimized intensity modulated proton therapy treatment of prostate cancer

PurposeTo implement a daily CBCT based dose accumulation technique in order to assess ideal robust optimization (RO) parameters for IMPT treatment of prostate cancer.MethodsTen prostate cancer patients previously treated with VMAT and having daily CBCT were included. First, RO-IMPT plans were created with ± 3 mm and ± 5 mm patient setup and ± 3% proton range uncertainties, respectively. Second, the planning CT (pCT) was deformably registered to the CBCT to create a synthetic CT (sCT). Both daily and weekly sampling strategies were employed to determine optimal dose accumulation frequency. Doses were recalculated on sCTs for both ± 3 mm/±3% and ± 5 mm/±3% uncertainties and were accumulated back to the pCT. Accumulated doses generated from ± 3 mm/±3% and ± 5 mm/±3% RO-IMPT plans were evaluated using the clinical dose volume constraints for CTV, bladder, and rectum.ResultsDaily accumulated dose based on both ± 3mm/±3% and ±5 mm/±3% uncertainties for RO-IMPT plans resulted in satisfactory CTV coverage (RO-IMPT_3mm/3% CTV_V95 = 99.01 ± 0.87% vs. RO-IMPT_5mm/3% CTV_V95 = 99.81 ± 0.2%, P = 0.002). However, the accumulated dose based on ± 3 mm/3% RO-IMPT plans consistently provided greater OAR sparing than ±5 mm/±3% RO-IMPT plans (RO-IMPT_3mm/3% rectum_V65Gy = 2.93 ± 2.39% vs. RO-IMPT_5mm/3% rectum_V65Gy = 4.38 ± 3%, P < 0.01; RO-IMPT_3mm/3% bladder_V65Gy = 5.2 ± 7.12% vs. RO-IMPT_5mm/3% bladder_V65Gy = 7.12 ± 9.59%, P < 0.01). The gamma analysis showed high dosimetric agreement between weekly and daily accumulated dose distributions.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that for RO-IMPT optimization, ±3mm/±3% uncertainty is sufficient to create plans that meet desired CTV coverage while achieving superior sparing to OARs when compared with ± 5 mm/±3% uncertainty. Furthermore, weekly dose accumulation can accurately estimate the overall dose delivered to prostate cancer patients.     

Effect of accounting for interfractional CTV shape variations in PTV margins on prostate cancer radiation treatment plans

PurposeThe aim of this study was to account for interfractional clinical target volume (CTV) shape variation and apply this to the planning target volume (PTV) margin for prostate cancer radiation treatment plans.MethodsInterfractional CTV shape variations were estimated from weekly cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images using statistical point distribution models. The interfractional CTV shape variation was taken into account in the van Herk’s margin formula. The PTV margins without and with the CTV shape variation, i.e., standard (PTV_ori) and new (PTV_shape) margins, were applied to 10 clinical cases that had weekly CBCT images acquired during their treatment sessions. Each patient was replanned for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk CTVs, using both margins. The dose indices (D98 and V70) of treatment plans with the two margins were compared on weekly pseudo-planning computed tomography (PCT) images, which were defined as PCT images registered using a deformable image registration technique with weekly CBCT images, including contours of the CTV, rectum, and bladder.ResultsThe percentage of treatment fractions of patients who received CTV D98 greater than 95% of a prescribed dose increased from 80.3 (PTV_ori) to 81.8% (PTV_shape) for low-risk CTVs, 78.8 (PTV_ori) to 87.9% (PTV_shape) for intermediate-risk CTVs, and 80.3 (PTV_ori) to 87.9% (PTV_shape) for high-risk CTVs. In most cases, the dose indices of the rectum and bladder were acceptable in clinical practice.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that interfractional CTV shape variations should be taken into account when determining PTV margins to increase CTV coverages.     

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.     

Performance of the eclipse monitor unit objective tool utilizing volumetric modulated arc therapy for rectal cancer

AimTo assess the performance of the monitor unit (MU) Objective tool in Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) utilizing volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for rectal cancer.BackgroundEclipse VMAT planning module includes a tool to control the number of MUs delivered: the MU Objective tool. This tool could be utilized to reduce the total number of MUs in rectal cancer treatments.Materials and methods20 rectal cancer patients were retrospectively studied using VMAT and the MU Objective tool. The baseline plan for each patient was selected as the one with no usage of the MU Objective tool. The number of MUs of this plan was set to be the reference number of MUs (MU_ref). Five plans were re-optimized for each patient only varying the Max MU parameter. The selected values were 30%, 60%, 90%, 120% and 150% of MU_ref for each patient. Differences with respect to the baseline plan were evaluated regarding MU number and parameters for PTVs coverage evaluation, PTVs homogeneity and OARs doses assessment. A two-tailed, paired-samples t-test was used to quantify these differences.ResultsAverage relative differences in MU number obtained was 10% for Max MU values of 30% and 60% of MU_ref, respectively (p < 0.03). PTVs coverage and homogeneity were not compromised and discrepancies obtained with respect to baseline plans were not significant. Furthermore, maximum OARs doses deviations were also not significant.ConclusionsA 10% reduction in the MU number could be obtained without an alteration of PTV coverage and OARs doses for rectal cancer.     

Adaptive SBRT by 1.5 T MR-linac for prostate cancer: On the accuracy of dose delivery in view of the prolonged session time

PurposeAdaptive Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) of prostate cancer (PC) by online 1.5 T MRi-guidance prolongs session-time, due to contouring and planning tasks, thus increasing the risk of prostate motion. Hence, the interest to verify the adequacy of the delivered dose.Material and methodsFor twenty PC patients treated by 35 Gy (D_p) in five fractions, daily pre- and post- delivery MRi scans were respectively used for adapt-to-shape (ATS) optimization, and re-computation of the delivered irradiation (D_rec). Two expansion recipes, from Clinical (CTV) to Planning target volume (PTV), which slightly differed in the posterior margin were used for groups I and II, of ten patients each. Plans had to assure D_95% ≥ 95%D_p to PTV, and D_1cc ≤ D_p to rectum, bladder, penile bulb, and urethral planning-risk-volume (urethral-PRV). The adequacy of the delivered dose was estimated by inter-fraction average (ifa) of dose-volume metrics computed from D_rec. A cumulative dose (D_sum) was calculated from the five daily D_rec deformed onto the simulation MRi.ResultsFor each patient, CTV coverage resulted in D_95% > 95%D_p when estimated as ifa by D_rec. No significant difference for D_95% and D_99% metrics to CTV resulted between groups I and II. D_1cc was < D_p for rectum, urethral-PRV, and penile bulb, whereas < 103.5%D_p for the bladder.Significant correlations resulted between metrics computed by D_sum and as ifa by D_rec, by both linear-correlation analysis, and Receiver-Operating-Characteristic curve analysis.ConclusionsOur results for PC-SBRT confirm the adequacy of the delivered dose by ATS with 1.5 T MR-linac, and the consistency between dose-volume metrics computed by D_rec and D_sum.     

NTCP modeling analysis of acute hematologic toxicity in whole pelvic radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies – A dosimetric comparison of IMRT and spot-scanning proton therapy (SSPT)

PurposeThis treatment planning study was conducted to determine whether spot scanning proton beam therapy (SSPT) reduces the risk of grade ⩾3 hematologic toxicity (HT3+) compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for postoperative whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT).Methods and materialsThe normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of the risk of HT3+ was used as an in silico surrogate marker in this analysis. IMRT and SSPT plans were created for 13 gynecologic malignancy patients who had received hysterectomies. The IMRT plans were generated using the 7-fields step and shoot technique. The SSPT plans were generated using anterior-posterior field with single field optimization. Using the relative biological effectives (RBE) value of 1.0 for IMRT and 1.1 for SSPT, the prescribed dose was 45 Gy(RBE) in 1.8 Gy(RBE) per fractions for 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). The homogeneity index (HI) and the conformity index (CI) of the PTV were also compared.ResultsThe bone marrow (BM) and femoral head doses using SSPT were significantly lower than with IMRT. The NTCP modeling analysis showed that the risk of HT3+ using SSPT was significantly lower than with IMRT (NTCP = 0.04 ± 0.01 and 0.19 ± 0.03, p = 0.0002, respectively). There were no significant differences in the CI and HI of the PTV between IMRT and SSPT (CI = 0.97 ± 0.01 and 0.96 ± 0.02, p = 0.3177, and HI = 1.24 ± 0.11 and 1.27 ± 0.05, p = 0.8473, respectively).ConclusionThe SSPT achieves significant reductions in the dose to BM without compromising target coverage, compared with IMRT. The NTCP value for HT3+ in SSPT was significantly lower than in IMRT.     

Novel knowledge-based treatment planning model for hypofractionated radiotherapy of prostate cancer patients

PurposeTo demonstrate the strength of an innovative knowledge-based model-building method for radiotherapy planning using hypofractionated, multi-target prostate patients.Material and methodsAn initial RapidPlan model was trained using 48 patients who received 60 Gy to prostate (PTV60) and 44 Gy to pelvic nodes (PTV44) in 20 fractions. To improve the model's goodness-of-fit, an intermediate model was generated using the dose-volume histograms of best-spared organs-at-risk (OARs) of the initial model. Using the intermediate model and manual tweaking, all 48 cases were re-planned. The final model, trained using these re-plans, was validated on 50 additional patients. The validated final model was used to determine any planning advantage of using three arcs instead of two on 16 VMAT cases and tested on 25 additional cases to determine efficacy for single-PTV (PTV60-only) treatment planning.ResultsFor model validation, PTV V_95% of 99.9% was obtained by both clinical and knowledge-based planning. D_1% was lower for model plans: by 1.23 Gy (PTV60, CI = [1.00, 1.45]), and by 2.44 Gy (PTV44, CI = [1.72, 3.16]). OAR sparing was superior for knowledge-based planning: ΔD_mean = 3.70 Gy (bladder, CI = [2.83, 4.57]), and 3.22 Gy (rectum, CI = [2.48, 3.95]); ΔD_2% = 1.17 Gy (bowel bag, CI = [0.64, 1.69]), and 4.78 Gy (femoral heads, CI = [3.90, 5.66]). Using three arcs instead of two, improvements in OAR sparing and PTV coverage were statistically significant, but of magnitudes < 1 Gy. The model failed at reliable DVH predictions for single PTV plans.ConclusionsOur knowledge-based model delivers efficient, consistent plans with excellent PTV coverage and improved OAR sparing compared to clinical plans.     

Dosimetric impact on changes in target volumes during intensity-modulated radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Background and purposeTo assess anatomic changes during intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and to determine its dosimetric impact.Patients and methodsTwenty patients treated with IMRT for NPC were enrolled in this study. A second CT was performed at 38 Gy. Manual contouring of the macroscopic tumor volumes (GTV) and the planning target volumes (PTV) were done on the second CT. We recorded the volumes of the different structures, D98 %, the conformity, and the homogeneity indexes for each PTV. Volume percent changes were calculated.ResultsWe observed a significant reduction in tumor volumes (58.56 % for the GTV N and 29.52 % for the GTV T). It was accompanied by a significant decrease in the D98 % for the 3 PTV (1.4 Gy for PTV H, p = 0.007; 0.3 Gy for PTV I, p = 0.03 and 1.15 Gy for PTV L, p = 0 0.0066). In addition, we observed a significant reduction in the conformity index in the order of 0.02 (p = 0.001) and 0.01 (p = 0.007) for PTV H and PTV I, respectively. The conformity variation was not significant for PTV L. Moreover, results showed a significant increase of the homogeneity index for PTV H (+ 0.03, p = 0.04) and PTV L (+ 0.04, p = 0.01).ConclusionTumor volume reduction during the IMRT of NPC was accompanied by deterioration of the dosimetric coverage for the different target volumes. It is essential that a careful adaptation of the treatment plan be considered during therapy for selected patients.     

Complication probability model for subcutaneous fibrosis based on published data of partial and whole breast irradiation

PurposeTo extend the application of current radiation therapy (RT) based normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models of radiation-induced fibrosis (RIF) of the breast to include the effects of fractionation, inhomogeneous dose, incomplete recovery, and time after the end of radiotherapy in partial breast irradiation (PBI).Materials and methodsAn NTCP Lyman model with biologically effective uniform dose (BEUD) with and without a correction for the effect of incomplete repair was used. The time to occurrence of RIF was also taken into account. The radiobiological parameters were determined by fitting incidences of moderate/severe RIF in published randomized studies on RT of the breast. The NTCP model was used to calculate the risk of toxicity in 35 patients treated with intensity modulated, non-accelerated PBI and the result was compared with observed incidence of RIF.ResultsWith α/β fixed at 3Gy the parameters of the model without correction for incomplete repair extracted from fitting were: 50% complication probability biologically effective dose BEUD₅₀ = 107.2 Gy (95%CI = 95.9–118.6 Gy), volume parameter n = 0.06 (95%CI = 0–0.23), and slope of dose response m = 0.22, (95%CI = 0.20–0.23). After including the correction for incomplete repair with repair halftime for subcutaneous tissue of τ = 4.4 h we obtained BEUD₅₀ = 105.8 Gy (95%CI = 96.9–114.6Gy), n = 0.15 (95%CI = 0–0.33), m = 0.22 (95%CI = 0.20–0.23). Average NTCP predicted by these models, 4.3% and 2.0% respectively, offered a good agreement with RIF incidence in our patients, 5.7%, after an average follow-up of 12 months.ConclusionThe NTCP models of RIF, incorporating the effects of fractionation, volume effect, and latency of toxicity look promising to model PBI. Clinical validation from a prospective PBI treatment study is under development and will help test this preliminary result.     

A dosimetric analysis comparing electron beam with the MammoSite brachytherapy applicator for intact breast boost

IntroductionElectron beam radiation is the modality most often used to deliver an operative bed boost to breast cancer patients after completing whole breast radiation. However, electrons can potentially provide inadequate coverage. The MammoSite breast brachytherapy applicator may provide dosimetric advantages in the delivery of an operative bed boost and its role in this setting is not yet defined.Materials and methodsThe study population consisted of 15 patients with early stage breast cancer treated with partial breast irradiation (PBI) using the MammoSite device. For each patient, a theoretical boost plan using electrons and a second theoretical boost plan using the MammoSite applicator were created. To assess the adequacy of each boost plan, the PTV V90, PTV V95, and PTV V100 were calculated. To assess dose to normal tissues, the ipsilateral breast V50, ipsilateral lung V30, and heart V20 were calculated.ResultsThe mean PTV V100 for the MammoSite boost was 95.5%, compared to 77.4% for the electron boost (p < 0.001). The mean PTV V95 was 97.8%, compared to 93.3% for the electron boost (p = 0.02). The mean PTV V90, mean breast V50, mean lung V30, and mean heart V20 were not statistically different for MammoSite compared to electrons.ConclusionsA tumor bed boost using the MammoSite breast brachytherapy applicator provides superior target coverage and delivers similar doses to the ipsilateral breast and lung compared to a boost delivered with electrons. More investigation into the role of balloon brachytherapy in the delivery of a breast boost is warranted.     

Characterization of robust optimization for VMAT plan for liver cancer

PurposeWe investigated the feasibility of robust optimization for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver cancer in comparison with planning target volume (PTV)-based optimized plans. Treatment plan quality, robustness, complexity, and accuracy of dose delivery were assessed.MethodsTen liver cancer patients were selected for this study. PTV-based optimized plans with an 8-mm PTV margin and robust optimized plans with an 8-mm setup uncertainty were generated. Plan perturbed doses were evaluated using a setup error of 8 mm in all directions from the isocenter. The dosimetric comparison parameters were clinical target volume (CTV) doses (D_98%, D_50%, and D_2%), liver doses, and monitor unit (MU). Plan complexity was evaluated using the modulation complexity score for VMAT (MCSv).ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two optimizations with respect to CTV doses and MUs. Robust optimized plans had a higher liver dose than did PTV-based optimized plans. Plan perturbed dose evaluations showed that doses to the CTV for the robust optimized plans had small variations. Robust optimized plans were less complex than PTV-based optimized plans. Robust optimized plans had statistically significant fewer leaf position errors than did PTV-based optimized plans.ConclusionsComparison of treatment plan quality, robustness, and plan complexity of both optimizations showed that robust optimization could be feasibile for VMAT of liver cancer.     

A dosimetric evaluation of IGART strategies for cervix cancer treatment

PurposeImage guided adaptive radiotherapy (IGART) strategies can be used to include the temporal aspects of radiotherapy treatment. A dosimetric evaluation of on- and off-line adaptive strategies are done in this study.MethodsA library of equivalent uniform dose (EUD)-based Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Treatment plans with incrementally increasing clinical target volume (CTV)-to-planning target volume (PTV) margins were developed for 10 patients. Utilizing daily computed tomography (CT) images an on-line strategy using a margin-of-the-day (MOD) concept that selects the best plan from the library was employed. This was compared to an off-line strategy with full analysis of accumulated dose between fractions where dosimetric deviations from the treatment intent triggered plan adaptation. A fixed margin treatment approach was used as benchmark.ResultsUsing fixed margins of <15 mm lead to under-dosages of more than 5 Gy in total delivered dose. The average CTV EUD for the off-line and on-line strategy was 50.0 ± 5.0 Gy and 50.4 ± 2.0 Gy respectively and OAR doses were comparable.ConclusionA fixed margin treatment approach yields a significant probability of CTV under-dosage. Using EUD dose metrics CTV coverage can be restored in both the off-line and on-line adaptive strategies at acceptable OAR dose levels. Considering the workload and time on the treatment machine, the off-line strategy proves to be sufficient and more practical.     

Automatic VMAT planning for post-operative prostate cancer cases using particle swarm optimization: A proof of concept study

ObjectiveTo investigate the potential of Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) for fully automatic VMAT radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning.Material and MethodsIn PSO a solution space of planning constraints is searched for the best possible RT plan in an iterative, statistical method, optimizing a population of candidate solutions. To identify the best candidate solution and for final evaluation a plan quality score (PQS), based on dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters, was introduced.Automatic PSO-based RT planning was used for N = 10 postoperative prostate cancer cases, retrospectively taken from our clinical database, with a prescribed dose of EUD = 66 Gy in addition to two constraints for rectum and one for bladder. Resulting PSO-based plans were compared dosimetrically to manually generated VMAT plans.ResultsPSO successfully proposed treatment plans comparable to manually optimized ones in 9/10 cases. The median (range) PTV EUD was 65.4 Gy (64.7–66.0) for manual and 65.3 Gy (62.5–65.5) for PSO plans, respectively. However PSO plans achieved significantly lower doses in rectum D_2% 67.0 Gy (66.5–67.5) vs. 66.1 Gy (64.7–66.5, p = 0.016). All other evaluated parameters (PTV D_98% and D_2%, rectum V_40Gy and V_60Gy, bladder D_2% and V_60Gy) were comparable in both plans. Manual plans had lower PQS compared to PSO plans with −0.82 (−16.43–1.08) vs. 0.91 (−5.98–6.25).ConclusionPSO allows for fully automatic generation of VMAT plans with plan quality comparable to manually optimized plans. However, before clinical implementation further research is needed concerning further adaptation of PSO-specific parameters and the refinement of the PQS.     

Dosimetric accuracy of dual isocenter irradiation in low magnetic field resonance guided radiotherapy system for extended abdominal tumours

PurposeDue to limited field size of Magnetic Resonance Linear Accelerators (MR-Linac), some treatments could require a dual-isocenter planning approach to achieve a complete target coverage and thus exploit the benefits of the online adaptation. This study evaluates the dosimetric accuracy of the dual-isocenter intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivery technique for MR-Linac.Material and MethodsDual-isocenter multi leaf collimator (MLC) and couch accuracy tests have been performed to evaluate the delivery accuracy of the system. A mono-isocenter plan delivered in clinical practice has then been retrospectively re-planned with dual-isocenter technique. The dual-isocenter plan has been re-calculated and delivered on a 3-dimensional (3D) ArcCHECK phantom and 2-dimensional (2D) films to assess its dosimetric accuracy in terms of gamma analysis. Clinical and planning target volume (CTV and PTV respectively) coverage robustness was then investigated after the introduction of ± 2 mm and ± 5 mm positioning errors by shifting the couch.ResultsMLC and couch accuracy tests confirmed the system accuracy in delivering a dual-isocenter irradiation.2D/3D gamma analysis results occurred always to be above 95% if considered a gamma criteria 1%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm respectively for the 2D and 3D analysis.The mean variations for CTV D98% and PTV V95% were 0.2% and 1.1% respectively when positioning error was introduced separately in each direction, while the maximum observed variations were 0.9% (CTV) and 3.7% (PTV).ConclusionThe dosimetric accuracy of dual-isocenter irradiation has been verified for MR-Linac, achieving accurate and robust treatment strategy and improving dose conformality also in presence of targets whose extension exceeds the nominal maximum field size.