Abstract
Currently dynamic conformal arcs (DCA) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are two popular planning techniques to treat lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) patients. Of the two, DCA has advantages in terms of multi‐leaf collimator (MLC) motion, positioning error, and delivery efficiency. However, VMAT is often the choice when critical organ sparing becomes important. We developed a hybrid strategy to incorporate DCA component into VMAT planning, results were compared with DCA and VMAT plans. Four planning techniques were retrospectively simulated for 10 lung SBRT patients: DCA, Hybrid‐DCA (2/3 of the doses from DCA beams), Hybrid‐VMAT (2/3 of the doses from VMAT beams) and VMAT. Plan complexity was accessed by modulation complexity score (MCS). Conformity index (CI) for the planning target volume (PTV), V 20 and V 5 for the lung, V 30 for the chestwall, and maximum dose to all other critical organs were calculated. Plans were compared with regard to these metrics and measured agreement between the planned and delivered doses. DCA technique did not result in acceptable plan quality due to target location for five patients. Hybrid‐DCA produced one unacceptable plan, and Hybrid‐VMAT and VMAT produced no unacceptable plans. The CI improved with increasing VMAT usage, as did the dose sparing to critical structures. Compared to the VMAT technique, a total MU reduction of 14%, 25% and 37% were found for Hybrid‐VMAT, Hybrid‐DCA and DCA techniques for 54 Gy patient group, and 9%, 23% and 34% for 50 Gy patient group, suggesting improvement in delivery efficiency with increasing DCA usage. No significant variations of plan complexity were observed between Hybrid‐DCA and Hybrid‐VMAT (P = 0.46 from Mann–Whitney U‐test), but significant differences were found among DCA, Hybrid and VMAT (P < 0.05). Better agreements between the planned and delivered doses were found with more DCA contributions. By adding DCA components to VMAT planning, hybrid technique offers comparable dosimetry to full VMAT, while increasing delivery efficiency and minimizing MLC complexity.
Highlights
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an advanced technique that is becoming the treatment choice for medically inoperable and many high‐risk surgical non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients
The modulation complexity score (MCS) values were compared among the four techniques for each individual patient, and the results show that MCS values decrease with increasing contribution of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) (Fig. 1)
No significant differences were found between Hybrid‐dynamic conformal arcs (DCA) and Hybrid‐ VMAT techniques (P > 0.05)
Summary
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an advanced technique that is becoming the treatment choice for medically inoperable and many high‐risk surgical non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Compared to conventional radiation therapy treatment, SBRT offers superior outcomes, lower costs and greater patient convenience.[1–5]. Three‐dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D‐CRT), dynamic conformal arcs (DCA), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) have been used as delivery options for Linac‐based SBRT treatments. DCA and VMAT have become more and more popular due to their delivery efficiency compared to 3D‐CRT and IMRT. DCA is a forward planning technique, where the planner defines arc geometries (gantry start/stop angles, couch and collimator angles, relative arc weightings, etc.) and the multi‐leaf collimator (MLC) are shaped to conform to the target in the beam's eye view (BEV) as the gantry rotates around the patient. The gantry speed and dose rate remain constant during the DCA delivery
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have