SU‐E‐T‐830: A Plan Comparison Study between Three Different Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy Techniques

Abstract

Purpose: Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy (IMAT) is gaining widespread attention from various radiation oncology vendors and several centers are implementing them clinically. The aim of this study is to compare Plan quality between Rapid Arc (Varian), Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (Elekta) and Smart Arc (Pinnacle) for the same dataset and plan objectives. Methods: 3 anonymized prostate cancer cases with the same DICOM RT structure set were used to compare between the 3 IMAT delivery schemes. The Rapid Arc plans were generated using Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS), the VMAT plans were generated using MONACO TPS, and the Smart Arc plans were generated using Pinnacle TPS. The Dose Volume Histograms (DVH) was exported for each plan and plotted together to compare the DVH between 3 different TPS for each patient. In each case the plan objectives were kept the same. Also, the RT dose files were compared from the 3 different delivery methods by importing them into a 3rd party software. Results: To achieve the same plan quality, the Rapid Arc plans were generated using 2 arcs. There was no substantial improvement in plan quality when 2 arcs were used in VMAT plans using MONACO, therefore plans were generated using only one 360 degree arc for both VMAT and Smart Arc plans. The VMAT plans have more dose heterogeneity across the target volume while organs at risk sparing varied depending on the case. The Smart Arc plans had the lowest total monitor units among the 3 delivery methods while the Rapid Arc plans had the largest because 2 arcs were needed to achieve same plan quality.Conclusion: All 3 IMAT methods produced acceptable plans for Prostate IMRT. The relative strengths of each system varied depending on the complexity of the case and there is a trade off between each delivery method.