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.     

Dosimetric comparison of left-sided whole-breast irradiation with 3DCRT,forward-planned IMRT,inverse-planned IMRT,helical tomotherapy,and volumetric arc therapy

PurposeThis study evaluated the dose distribution and homogeneity of four different types of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in comparison with standard wedged tangential-beam three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) of the left breast in patients who had undergone lumpectomy.Materials and methodsFive radiotherapy treatment plans, including 3DCRT, forward-planned IMRT (for-IMRT), inverse IMRT (inv-IMRT), helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), were created for 15 consecutive patients.ResultsAll modalities presented similar target coverage. Target max doses were reduced with for-IMRT compared to 3DCRT, and these doses were further reduced with inv-IMRT and HT. HT resulted in the lowest max doses delivered to the heart, left anterior descending artery (LAD), and ipsilateral lung, but had higher mean, max, and low doses delivered to contralateral breast. HT resulted in increased low doses to a large volume of healthy tissue. Compared to other techniques, all inverse-planned modalities significantly improved conformity number; however, VMAT had worse homogeneity. The for-IMRT plan significantly lowered monitor unit (MU) compared to the inverse-planned techniques.ConclusionAll modalities evaluated provide adequate coverage of the whole breast. For-IMRT improves target homogeneity compared with 3DCRT, but to a lesser degree than the inverse-planned inv-IMRT and HT. HT decreases the ipsilateral OAR volumes receiving higher and mean doses with an increase in the volumes receiving low doses, which is known to lead to an increased rate of radiation-induced secondary malignancies.     

Dosimetric study of a hybrid plan technique for external beam radiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a hybrid technique which results from combining intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the treatment of cervical cancer patients. Plans made with the hybrid technique and pure IMRT and VMAT were retrospectively compared in 20 patients with cervical cancer at different stages. All plans were made using the same contours based on the original computed tomography (CT) scans. Conformity (CI) and homogeneity (HI) indices of the planning target volumes (PTVs) were calculated for each technique in order to evaluate plan quality. All techniques were compared in terms of dose to organs at risk (OARs), number of monitor units (MUs) and treatment time. It turned out that plans made with the hybrid technique had improved dose conformity and homogeneity compared to plans made only with IMRT and VMAT (p < 0.001). Regarding the OARs, the maximum dose (D_max) delivered to the bladder, rectum and femoral heads was lower for the hybrid plans compared to the IMRT and VMAT plans (p < 0.001). The volumes irradiated to doses of 50 Gy (V_50Gy) for rectum, bladder and bowel were lower for the hybrid plans (p < 0.001, p = 0.002). Furthermore, the treatment time and MU values for the hybrid plans were found to be between of the values for the IMRT and VMAT plans. It is concluded that, as compared to IMRT and VMAT plans, the hybrid plan technique allowed a better conformity and homogeneity for the dose distribution in the PTV and a dose reduction to the OARs.

     

Radiobiological evaluation of prostate cancer IMRT and conformal-RT plans using different treatment protocols

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of both step-and-shoot IMRT and 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy modalities (CRT) in treating prostate cancer using radiobiological measures. Another aim was to estimate the risks for developing secondary malignancies in bladder and rectum due to radiotherapy from the corresponding modalities. The treatment plans of ten prostate cancer patients were developed using IMRT and CRT. For the IMRT plans, two beam energies and two treatment protocols were used (the RTOG 0415 and a most restrictive one proposed by Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC)). For the evaluation of these plans, the complication-free tumor control probability, the total probability of injury, the total probability of control/benefit, and the biologically effective uniform dose were employed. Furthermore, based on the dosimetric data of IMRT and CRT, the risk for secondary malignancies was calculated for bladder and rectum. The average risk for secondary malignancy was lower for the bladder (0.37%) compared to the rectum (0.81%) based on all the treatment plans of the ten prostate cancer patients. The highest average risk for secondary malignancy for bladder and rectum was for the CRT-6X modality (0.46% and 1.12%, respectively) and the lowest was for the IMRT RTOG-18X modality (0.33% and 0.56%, respectively). The ≥ Grade 2 LENT/SOMA response probability was lower for the bladder than for the rectum in all the plans. For the bladder the highest average value was for the IMRT RTOG-18X (0.9%) and the lowest was for the CRT-18X modality (0.1%). For the rectum, the highest average value was for the IMRT RTOG-6X (11.9%) and the lowest was for the IMRT FCCC-18X modality (2.2%). By using radiobiological measures it is shown that the IMRT FCCC plans had the lowest risks for normal tissue complications, whereas the IMRT RTOG had the highest. Regarding the risk for secondary malignancies, the CRT plans showed the highest values for both bladder and rectum.     

Hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy for chest wall irradiation: For a good plan,get the right mixture

PurposeTo find the optimal dose weighting for hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT), a combination of conventional 3DCRT and VMAT plans for left sided chest wall and supraclavicular radiation therapy.Methods & materials20 left-sided breast cancer patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy were considered for this study. To find the optimal weighting, 5 H-VMAT plans were generated for each study case by combining different dose proportions of 3DCRT and VMAT plans including: 90% 3DCRT/10% VMAT, 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT, 70% 3DCRT/30% VMAT, 60% 3DCRT/40% VMAT, 50% 3DCRT/50% VMAT. Further field-in-field, optimal H-VMAT and VMAT alone plans were compared.ResultsAll H-VMAT plans achieved the expected target coverage. A higher conformity index was achieved for 50% 3DCRT/50% VMAT plan, while better homogeneity index was achieved for 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT plan. Mean and low doses were less in 90% 3DCRT/10% VMAT plan. Compared with other proportions, 80% 3DCRT/20% VMAT and 70% 3DCRT/30% VMAT weighted H-VMAT plans achieved balanced results for PTVs and OARs.ConclusionThe optimal dose mixture for H-VMAT technique is 70% to 80% for 3DCRT and 20% to 30% for VMAT. The optimal H-VMAT achieved balanced results for the PTVs and OARs compared with field-in-field and VMAT alone plans.     

Volumetric modulated arc therapy in prostate cancer patients with metallic hip prostheses in a UK centre

AimThis study aimed to investigate whether IMRT using VMAT is a viable and safe solution in dose escalated RT in these patients.BackgroundAn increasing number of prostate cancer patients are elderly and have hip prostheses. These implants pose challenges in radiotherapy treatment planning. Although intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is commonly used, there is a lack of clinical studies documenting its efficacy and toxicities in this subgroup of patients.Materials and methodsThe data from 23 patients with hip prostheses and non-metastatic prostate cancer treated with VMAT (volumetric modulated arc therapy) between 2009 and 2011, were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline characteristics, treatment details and outcome data were collected on all patients. The median follow up was 40.9 months. MRI-CT image fusion was performed and the treatment plans were created using RapidArc™ (RA) techniques utilizing 1 or 2 arcs and 10 MV photon beams.Results96% of patients were treated with a dose of 72 Gy/32 fractions over 44 days. 21/23 plans met the PTV targets. The mean homogeneity index was 1.07. 20/23 plans met all OAR constraints (rectum, bladder). Two plans deviated from rectal constraints, four from bladder constraints; all were classed as minor deviations. One patient experienced late grade 3 genitourinary toxicity. Three other patients experienced late grade 2 or lower gastrointestinal toxicity. One patient had biochemical failure and one had a non-prostate cancer related death.ConclusionsVMAT provides an elegant solution to deliver dose escalated RT in patients with unilateral and bilateral hip replacements with minimal acute and late toxicities.     

Comparison of dosimetric variation between prostate IMRT and VMAT due to patient's weight loss: Patient and phantom study

Aim

This study compared the dosimetric impact between prostate IMRT and VMAT due to patient''s weight loss.

Background

Dosimetric variation due to change of patient''s body contour is difficult to predict in prostate IMRT and VMAT, since a large number of small and irregular segmental fields is used in the delivery.

Materials and methods

Five patients with prostate volumes ranging from 32.0 to 86.5 cm³ and a heterogeneous pelvis phantom were used for prostate IMRT and VMAT plans using the same set of dose–volume constraints. Doses in IMRT and VMAT plans were recalculated with the patient''s and phantom''s body contour reduced by 0.5–2 cm to mimic size reduction. Dose coverage/criteria of the PTV and CTV and critical organs (rectum, bladder and femoral heads) were compared between IMRT and VMAT.

Results

In IMRT plans, increases of the D99% for the PTV and CTV were equal to 4.0 ± 0.1% per cm of reduced depth, which were higher than those in VMAT plans (2.7 ± 0.24% per cm). Moreover, increases of the D30% of the rectum and bladder per reduced depth in IMRT plans (4.0 ± 0.2% per cm and 3.5 ± 0.5% per cm) were higher than those of VMAT (2.2 ± 0.2% per cm and 2.0 ± 0.6% per cm). This was also true for the increase of the D5% for the right femoral head in a patient or phantom with size reduction due to weight loss.

Conclusions

VMAT would be preferred to IMRT in prostate radiotherapy, when a patient has potential to suffer from weight loss during the treatment.     

Dosimetric comparison of normal breathing and deep inspiration breath hold technique for synchronous bilateral breast cancer using 6MV flattened beam and flattening filter free beam

BackgroundThe present study was to investigate the usefulness of deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) in bilateral breast patients using 6MV flattened beam (FB) and flattening filter free beam (FFFB).Materials and methodsTwenty bilateral breast cancer patients were simulated, using left breast patients treated with DIBH technique. CT scans were performed in the normal breathing (NB) and DIBH method. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated.ResultsIn our study the best organ at risk (OAR) sparing is achieved in the 3DCRT DIBH plan with adequate PTV coverage (V₉₅ ≥ 47.5 Gy) as compared to 6MV FB and FFFB VMAT DIBH plans. The DIBH scan plan reduces the heart mean dose significantly at the rate of 49% in 3DCRT (p = 0.00) and 22% in VMAT (p = 0.010). Similarly, the DIBH scan plan produces lesser common lung mean dose of 18% in 3DCRT (p = 0.011) and 8% in VMAT (0.007) as compared to the NB scan. The conformity index is much better in VMAT FB (1.04 ± 0.04 vs. 1.04 ± 0.05), p =1.00 and VMAT FFFB (1.04 ± 0.05 vs. 1 ± 0.24, p = 0.345) plans as compared to 3DCRT (1.63 ± 0.2 vs. 1.47 ± 0.28, p = 0.002). The homogeneity index of all the plans is less than 0.15. The global dmax is more in VMAT FFFB DIBH plan (113.7%). The maximum MU noted in the NB scan plan (478 vs. 477MU, 1366 vs. 1299 MU and 1853 vs. 1788 MU for 3DCRT, VMAT FB and VMAT FFFB technique as compared to DIBH scan.ConclusionWe recommend that the use of DIBH techniques for bilateral breast cancer patients significantly reduces the radiation doses to OARs in both 3DCRT and VMAT plans.     

Individually selected teletherapy technique for accelerated partial breast irradiation

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to individualize accelerated partial breast irradiation based on optimal dose distribution, protect risk organ and predict most advantageous technique.Materials and methods138 breast cancer patients receiving postoperative APBI were enrolled. APBI plans were generated using 3D-conformal (3D-CRT), sliding window intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). In the case of superficial tumours, additional plans were developed by adding electron beam. To planning target volume (PTV) 37.5 Gy/10 fractions, 1 fraction/day was prescribed. A novel plan quality index (PQI) served as the basis for comparisons.ResultsIMRT was the most advantageous technique regarding homogeneity. VMAT provided best conformity, 3D-CR T — the lowest lung and heart exposure. PQI was the best in 45 (32.61%) VMAT, 13 (9.42%) IMRT, 9 (6.52%) 3D-CRT plans. In 71 cases (51.45%) no difference was detected. In patients with large PTV, 3D-CRT was the most favourable. Additional electron beam improved PQI of 3D-CRT plans but had no meaningful effect on IMRT or VMAT. IMRT was superior to VMAT if the tumour was superficial (p < 0.001), situated in the medial (p = 0.032) or upper quadrant (p = 0.046).ConclusionsIn half of all cases, individually selected teletherapy techniques provide superior results over others; relevance of a certain technique may be predicted by volume and PTV localization.     

Dosimetric and physical comparison of IMRT and CyberKnife plans in the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Aim

The aim of our study was the dosimetric and physical evaluation of the CK and IMRT treatment plans for 16 patients with localized prostate cancer.

Background

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is one of the recent technical advances in radiotherapy. The prostate is a well suited site to be treated with IMRT. The challenge of accurately delivering the IMRT needs to be supported by new advances such as image-guidance and four-dimensional computed conformal radiation therapy (4DCRT) tomography. CyberKnife (CK) provides real time orthogonal X-ray imaging of the patient during treatment course to follow gold fiducials installed into the prostate and to achieve motion correlation between online acquired X-ray imaging and digital reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) which are obtained from planning computed tomography images by translating and rotating the treatment table in five directions.

Methods and materials

Sixteen IMRT and CK plans were performed to be compared in terms of conformity (CI), heterogeneity indices (HI), percentage doses of 100% (V100), 66% (V66), 50% (V50), 33% (V33) and 10% (V10) volumes of the bladder and rectum. Dose-volume histograms for target and critical organs, (CI) and indices (HI) and isodose lines were analyzed to evaluate the treatment plans.

Results

Statistically significant differences in the percentage rectal doses delivered to V10, V33, and V50 of the rectum were detected in favor of the CK plans (p values; <0.001, <0.001 and 0.019, respectively). The percentage doses for V66 and V100 of the rectum were larger in CK plans (13%, 2% in IMRT and 21%, 3% in CK plans, respectively). Percentage bladder doses for V10 and V33 were significantly lower in CK plans [96% in IMRT vs 48% in CK (p < 0.001) and 34% in IMRT vs 24% in CK (p = 0.047)]. Lower percentage doses were observed for V50, V66 of the bladder for the IMRT. They were 5.4% and 3.45% for IMRT and 13.4% and 8.05% for CK, respectively. Median CI of planning target volume (PTV) for IMRT and CK plans were 0.94 and 1.23, respectively (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Both systems have a very good ability to create highly conformal volumetric dose distributions. Median HI of PTV for IMRT and CK plans were 1.08 and 1.33, respectively (p < 0.001).     

A comparison of a moderately hypofractionated IMRT planning technique used in a randomised UK external beam radiotherapy trial with an in-house technique for localised prostate cancer

AimTo compare the radiotherapy technique used in a randomised trial with VMAT and an in-house technique for prostate cancer.BackgroundTechniques are evolving with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) commonly used. The CHHiP trial used a 3 PTV forward planned IMRT technique (FP_CH). Our centre has adopted a simpler two PTV technique with locally calculated margins.Materials and methods25 patients treated with FP_CH to 60 Gy in 20 fractions were re-planned with VMAT (VMAT_CH) and a two PTV protocol (VMAT_60/52 and VMAT_60/48). Target coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), monitor units (MU) and dose to the rectum, bladder, hips and penile bulb were compared.ResultsPTV coverage was high for all techniques. VMAT_CH plans had better CI than FP_CH (p ≤  0.05). VMAT_60/52/48 plans had better CI than VMAT_CH. FP_CH had better HI and fewer MU than VMAT (p ≤  0.05). More favourable rectum doses were found for VMAT _CH than FP_CH (V_48.6, V_52.8, V₅₇, p ≤  0.05) with less difference for bladder (p ≥  0.05). Comparing VMAT_CH to VMAT_60/52/48 showed little differences for the bladder and rectum but VMAT_CH had larger penile bulb doses (V_40.8, V_48.6, mean, D_2, p ≤  0.05). Femoral head doses (V_40.8) were similarly low for all techniques (p = ≥ 0.05).ConclusionVMAT produced more conformal plans with smaller rectum doses compared to FP_CH albeit worse HI and more MU. VMAT_60/52 and VMAT_60/48 plans had similar rectal and bladder doses to VMAT_CH but better CI and penile bulb doses which may reduce toxicity.     

Analysis of the planned,delivered dose distributions and quality assurance for helical tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BackgroundWith full access to both helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), we compared locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) treatment plans and verified the plans using patient-specific pretreatment quality assurance (PSQA).Materials and methodsFor each of the seventeen patients included in the study, two treatment plans (i.e. HT and VMAT) were created. Optimized plans were evaluated following the ICRU 83 criteria. Planned quality indexes and dosimetric parameters were compared. Lastly, all plans were subjected to PSQA assessment by determining the gamma passing rate (GPR).ResultsAll dosimetry results obtained from the planning target volume passed the ICRU 83 criteria. With regard to similar homogeneity indices, VMAT produced better conformity number values than HT (0.78 vs. 0.64), but differences in the values were insignificant. Furthermore, VMAT was associated with a significantly shorter mean treatment time (1.91 minutes vs. 6.66 minutes). For PSQA assessment, both techniques resulted in adequate GPR values (> 90% at the 3%/3 mm criteria).ConclusionBoth HT and VMAT techniques led to the generation of clinically satisfactory and reliable radiotherapy plans. However, the VMAT plan was associated with a non-significantly better degree of conformity and a significantly shorter treatment time. Thus, VMAT was determined to be a better choice for LA-NSCLC.     

Photon beam energy dependent single-arc volumetric modulated arc optimization

PurposeThe purpose of this work was to present a new single-arc mixed photon (6&18MV) VMAT (SAMP) optimization framework that concurrently optimizes for two photon energies with corresponding partial arc lengths.Methods and materialsOwing to simultaneous optimization of energy dependent intensity maps and corresponding arc locations, the proposed model poses nonlinearity. Unique relaxation constraints based on McCormick approximations were introduced for linearization. Energy dependent intensity maps were then decomposed to generate apertures. Feasibility of the proposed framework was tested on a sample of ten prostate cancer cases with lateral separation ranging from 34 cm (case no.1) to 52 cm (case no.6). The SAMP plans were compared against single energy (6MV) VMAT (SE) plans through dose volume histograms (DVHs) and radiobiological parameters including normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and equivalent uniform dose (EUD).ResultsThe contribution of higher energy photon beam optimized by the algorithm demonstrated an increase for cases with a lateral separation >40 cm. SAMP–VMAT notably improved bladder and rectum sparing in large size cases. Compared to single energy, SAMP–VMAT plans reduced bladder and rectum NTCP in cases with large lateral separation. With the exception of one case, SAMP–VMAT either improved or maintained femoral heads compared to SE–VMAT. SAMP–VMAT reduced the nontarget tissue integral dose in all ten cases.ConclusionsA single-arc VMAT optimization framework comprising mixed photon energy partial arcs was presented. Overall results underline the feasibility and potential of the proposed approach for improving OAR sparing in large size patients without compromising the target homogeneity and coverage.     

Quality assurance-based optimization (QAO): Towards improving patient-specific quality assurance in volumetric modulated arc therapy plans using machine learning

IntroductionPrevious literature has shown general trade-offs between plan complexity and resulting quality assurance (QA) outcomes. However, existing solutions for controlling this trade-off do not guarantee corresponding improvements in deliverability. Therefore, this work explored the feasibility of an optimization framework for directly maximizing predicted QA outcomes of plans without compromising the dosimetric quality of plans designed with an established knowledge-based planning (KBP) technique.Materials and MethodsA support vector machine (SVM) was developed – using a database of 500 previous VMAT plans – to predict gamma passing rates (GPRs; 3%/3mm percent dose-difference/distance-to-agreement with local normalization) based on selected complexity features. A heuristic, QA-based optimization (QAO) framework was devised by utilizing the SVM model to iteratively modify mechanical treatment features most commonly associated with suboptimal GPRs. Specifically, leaf gaps (LGs) <50 mm were widened by random amounts, which impacts all aperture-based complexity features. 13 prostate KBP-guided VMAT plans were optimized via QAO using user-specified maximum LG displacements before corresponding changes in predicted GPRs and dose were assessed.ResultsPredicted GPRs increased by an average of 1.14 ± 1.25% (p = 0.006) with QAO using a 3 mm maximum random LG displacement. There were small differences in dose, resulting in similarly small changes in tumor control probability (maximum increase = 0.05%) and normal tissue complication probabilities in the bladder, rectum, and femoral heads (maximum decrease = 0.2% in the rectum).ConclusionThis study explored the feasibility of QAO and warrants future investigations of further incorporating QA endpoints into plan optimization.     

VMAT-like plans for magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy: Addressing unmet needs

PurposeVMAT delivery technique is currently not applicable to Magnetic Resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) hybrid systems. Aim of this study is to evaluate an innovative VMAT-like (VML) delivery technique.Material and methodsFirst, planning and dosimetric evaluation of the MRgRT VML treatment have been performed on 10 different disease sites and the results have been compared with the corresponding IMRT plans. Then, in the second phase, 10 of the most dosimetrically challenging locally advanced pancreas treatment plans have been retrospectively re-planned using the VML approach to explore the potentiality of this new delivery technique. Finally, VML robustness was evaluated and compared with the IMRT plans, considering a lateral positioning error of ± 5 mm.ResultsIn phase one, all VML plans were within constraint for all OARs. When PTV coverage is considered, in the 50% of the cases VML PTV coverage is equal or higher than in IMRT plan. In the remaining 50%, the highest target under coverage difference in comparison with IMRT plan is −1.71%. The mean and maximum treatment time differences (VML-IMRT) is 0.2 min and 3.1 min respectively. In phase two, the treatment time variation (VML-IMRT), shows a mean, maximum and minimum variations of 1.3, 4.6 and −0.6 min respectively. All VML plans have a better target coverage if compared with IMRT plans, keeping in any case the OARs constraints within tolerance. VML doesn’t increase plan robustness.ConclusionVMAT-like treatment approach appeared to be an efficient planning solution and it was decided to clinically implement it in daily practice, especially in the frame of hypo fractionated treatments.     

Critical Structure Sparing in Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Central Lung Lesions: Helical Tomotherapy vs. Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy

Background

Helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are both advanced techniques of delivering intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Here, we conduct a study to compare HT and partial-arc VMAT in their ability to spare organs at risk (OARs) when stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is delivered to treat centrally located early stage non-small-cell lung cancer or lung metastases.

Methods

12 patients with centrally located lung lesions were randomly chosen. HT, 2 & 8 arc (Smart Arc, Pinnacle v9.0) plans were generated to deliver 70 Gy in 10 fractions to the planning target volume (PTV). Target and OAR dose parameters were compared. Each technique’s ability to meet dose constraints was further investigated.

Results

HT and VMAT plans generated essentially equivalent PTV coverage and dose conformality indices, while a trend for improved dose homogeneity by increasing from 2 to 8 arcs was observed with VMAT. Increasing the number of arcs with VMAT also led to some improvement in OAR sparing. After normalizing to OAR dose constraints, HT was found to be superior to 2 or 8-arc VMAT for optimal OAR sparing (meeting all the dose constraints) (p = 0.0004). All dose constraints were met in HT plans. Increasing from 2 to 8 arcs could not help achieve optimal OAR sparing for 4 patients. 2/4 of them had 3 immediately adjacent structures.

Conclusion

HT appears to be superior to VMAT in OAR sparing mainly in cases which require conformal dose avoidance of multiple immediately adjacent OARs. For such cases, increasing the number of arcs in VMAT cannot significantly improve OAR sparing.     

Advanced optimization methods for whole pelvic and local prostate external beam therapy

PurposeRadiation treatment planning inherently involves multiple conflicting planning goals, which makes it a suitable application for multicriteria optimization (MCO). This study investigates a MCO algorithm for VMAT planning (VMAT–MCO) for prostate cancer treatments including pelvic lymph nodes and uses standard inverse VMAT optimization (sVMAT) and Tomotherapy planning as benchmarks.MethodsFor each of ten prostate cancer patients, a two stage plan was generated, consisting of a stage 1 plan delivering 22 Gy to the prostate, and a stage 2 plan delivering 50.4 Gy to the lymph nodes and 56 Gy to the prostate with a simultaneous integrated boost. The single plans were generated by three planning techniques (VMAT–MCO, sVMAT, Tomotherapy) and subsequently compared with respect to plan quality and planning time efficiency.ResultsPlan quality was similar for all techniques, but sVMAT showed slightly better rectum (on average D_mean −7%) and bowel sparing (D_mean −17%) compared to VMAT–MCO in the whole pelvic treatments. Tomotherapy plans exhibited higher bladder dose (D_mean +42%) in stage 1 and lower rectum dose (D_mean −6%) in stage 2 than VMAT–MCO. Compared to manual planning, the planning time with MCO was reduced up to 12 and 38 min for stage 1 and 2 plans, respectively.ConclusionMCO can generate highly conformal prostate VMAT plans with minimal workload in the settings of prostate-only treatments and prostate plus lymph nodes irradiation. In the whole pelvic plan manual VMAT optimization led to slightly improved OAR sparing over VMAT–MCO, whereas for the primary prostate treatment plan quality was equal.     

Analysis of a volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) single phase prostate template as a class solution

AimTo assess a class solution template for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer using plan analysis software.BackgroundVMAT is a development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with potential advantages for the delivery of radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer. Class solutions are increasingly used for facilitating RT planning. Plan analysis software provides an objective tool for evaluating class solutions.Materials and methodsThe class solution for VMAT was based on the current static field IMRT template. The plans of 77 prostate cancer patients were evaluated using a set of in-house plan quality metrics (scores) (PlanIQ™, Sun Nuclear Corporation). The metrics compared the class solution for VMAT planning with the IMRT template and the delivered clinical plan (CP). Eight metrics were associated with target coverage and ten with organs-at-risk (OAR). Individual metrics were summed and the combined scores were subjected to non-parametric analysis. The low-dose wash for both static IMRT and VMAT plans were evaluated using 40 Gy and 25 Gy isodose volumes.ResultsVMAT plans were of equal or better quality than the IMRT template and CP for target coverage (combined score) and OAR combined score. The 40 Gy isodose volume was marginally higher with VMAT than IMRT (4.9%) but lower than CP (−6.6%)(P = 0.0074). The 25 Gy volume was significantly lower with VMAT than both IMRT (−32.7%) and CP (−34.4%)(P < 0.00001).ConclusionsAutomated VMAT planning for prostate cancer is feasible and the plans are equal to or better than the current IMRT class solution and the delivered clinical plan.     

Evaluation of the ability of three commercially available dosimeters to detect systematic delivery errors in step-and-shoot IMRT plans

BackgroundThere is limited data on error detectability for step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT) plans, despite significant work on dynamic methods. However, sIMRT treatments have an ongoing role in clinical practice. This study aimed to evaluate variations in the sensitivity of three patient-specific quality assurance (QA) devices to systematic delivery errors in sIMRT plans.Materials and methodsFour clinical sIMRT plans (prostate and head and neck) were edited to introduce errors in: Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) position (increasing field size, leaf pairs offset (1–3 mm) in opposite directions; and field shift, all leaves offset (1–3 mm) in one direction); collimator rotation (1–3 degrees) and gantry rotation (0.5–2 degrees). The total dose for each plan was measured using an ArcCHECK diode array. Each field, excluding those with gantry offsets, was also measured using an Electronic Portal Imager and a MatriXX Evolution 2D ionisation chamber array. 132 plans (858 fields) were delivered, producing 572 measured dose distributions. Measured doses were compared to calculated doses for the no-error plan using Gamma analysis with 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm criteria (1716 analyses).ResultsGenerally, pass rates decreased with increasing errors and/or stricter gamma criteria. Pass rate variations with detector and plan type were also observed. For a 3%/3 mm gamma criteria, none of the devices could reliably detect 1 mm MLC position errors or 1 degree collimator rotation errors.ConclusionsThis work has highlighted the need to adapt QA based on treatment plan type and the need for detector specific assessment criteria to detect clinically significant errors.