Abstract
PurposeWe investigated the feasibility of thoracic spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the Elekta Unity magnetic resonance‐guided linear accelerator (MRL) in patients who received prior radiotherapy. We hypothesized that Monaco treatment plans can improve the gross tumor volume minimum dose (GTVmin) with spinal cord preservation and maintain consistent plan quality during daily adaptation.MethodsPinnacle clinical plans for 10 patients who underwent thoracic spine SBRT (after prior radiotherapy) were regenerated in the Monaco treatment planning system for the Elekta Unity MRL using 9 and 13 intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) beams. Monaco adapt‐to‐position (ATP) and adapt‐to‐shape (ATS) workflow plans were generated using magnetic resonance imaging with a simulated daily positional setup deviation, and these adaptive plans were compared with Monaco reference plans. Plan quality measures included target coverage, Paddick conformity index, gradient index, homogeneity index, spinal cord D0.01cc, esophagus D0.01cc, lung V10, and skin D0.01cc.ResultsGTVmin values from the Monaco 9‐beam and 13‐beam plans were significantly higher than those from Pinnacle plans (p < 0.01) with similar spinal cord dose. Spinal cord D0.01cc, esophagus D0.01cc, and lung V10 did not statistically differ among the three plans. The electron‐return effect did not induce remarkable dose effects around the lungs or skin. While in the ATP workflow, a large increase in GTVmin was observed at the cost of a 10%–50% increase in spinal cord D0.01cc, in the ATS workflow, the spinal cord dose increase was maintained within 3% of the reference plan.ConclusionThese findings show that MRL plans for thoracic spine SBRT are safe and feasible, allowing tumor dose escalation with spinal cord preservation and consistent daily plan adaptation using the ATS workflow. Careful plan review of hot spots and lung dose is necessary for safe MRL‐based treatment.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
More From: Journal of applied clinical medical physics
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
