SU‐E‐T‐489: Plan Comparisons of Re‐Irradiation Treatment of Three Intensity Modulated Techniques

Abstract

Purpose:There have been controversial reports on the comparison of dosimetric quality of TomoTherapy (Tomo), VMAT and IMRT. One of the main reasons is the sampled cases are often not dosimetrically challenging enough to test the limit of optimization/delivery modalities. We chose difficult re‐irradiation cases when certain organ at risk (OAR) requires extremely low dose to examine the ability of OAR sparing of three main intensity modulated techniques.Methods:Three previous treated patients with disease site on head and neck (HN), brain and lung are planned for reirradiation treatment. The Tomo planning used jaw 2.5cm and pitch 0.3. VMAT and IMRT were planned on Pinnacle for a Varian 21iX Linac with MLC leaf width 5mm. VMAT plan used 2 Arcs and IMRT plan had beams 11–13. The dosimetric endpoints and treatment time were compared for each technique of each patient.Results:Plans of three techniques cover PTV similarly. The HN case requires PTV dose 60Gy but to limit dose of cord which is 8mm away <12Gy. The cord dose of Tomo, VMAT and IMRT plan is 11.6Gy, 11.3Gy and 11.0Gy, respectively. The brain case has PTV prescription 50.4 Gy while requiring the dose of brainstem < 28Gy. Tomo, VMAT and IMRT plan generate brainstem dose 27.6Gy, 27.6Gy and 27.1Gy respectively. For the lung case, PTV was prescribed 42.5Gy but cord dose constraint was 22.5Gy. The cord dose is optimized to 22.3Gy, 20.8Gy and 21.4Gy by Tomo, VMAT and IMRT, respectively. The delivery time if normalized to Tomo is 47.0%/145.6% (VMAT/IMRT), 33.3%/106.3% and 74.1%/245.4% for HN, brain and lung case, respectively.Conclusion:Difficult re‐irradiation cases were used to test the limit of three intensity modulated techniques. Tomo, VMAT and IMRT show similar dosimetry while VMAT is the most efficient one and IMRT is the least.