Abstract
PurposePurpose of this study is to evaluate plan quality on the MRIdian (Viewray Inc., Oakwood Village, OH, USA) system for head and neck cancer (HNC) through comparison of planning approaches of several centers.MethodsA total of 14 planners using the MRIdian planning system participated in this treatment challenge, centrally organized by ViewRay, for one contoured case of oropharyngeal carcinoma with standard constraints for organs at risk (OAR). Homogeneity, conformity, sparing of OARs, and other parameters were evaluated according to The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) recommendations anonymously, and then compared between centers. Differences amongst centers were assessed by means of Wilcoxon test. Each plan had to fulfil hard constraints based on dose–volume histogram (DVH) parameters and delivery time. A plan quality metric (PQM) was evaluated. The PQM was defined as the sum of 16 submetrics characterizing different DVH goals.ResultsFor most dose parameters the median score of all centers was higher than the threshold that results in an ideal score. Six participants achieved the maximum number of points for the OAR dose parameters, and none had an unacceptable performance on any of the metrics. Each planner was able to achieve all the requirements except for one which exceeded delivery time. The number of segments correlated to improved PQM and inversely correlated to brainstem D0.1cc and to Planning Target Volume1 (PTV) D0.1cc. Total planning experience inversely correlated to spinal canal dose.ConclusionMagnetic Resonance Image (MRI) linac-based planning for HNC is already feasible with good quality. Generally, an increased number of segments and increasing planning experience are able to provide better results regarding planning quality without significantly prolonging overall treatment time.
Highlights
In recent years various advances in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) have led to improved precision and accuracy in radiation treatment delivery for head and neck cancer (HNC) [1,2,3]
The prescription was on three dose levels with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique in 33 factions: 69.96 Gy should be applied to the high-risk volume (PTV1), 59.4 Gy to the intermediaterisk volume (PTV2), and 54 Gy to the “elective,” low-risk volume (PTV3)
The median IMRT planning experience for HNC of all users amounted to 7 years (2–20) and the ViewRay planning experience 1 year (0–2)
Summary
We aimed to investigate application features and feasibility of this approach, with the ultimate goal to improve our plan quality and implement the benefits of MR linac technology in standard routine for the majority of HNC cases in the near future
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
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.