Arc Plans Research Articles

Leisure planning process: systematic adhocracy

ABSTRACT Research Question Guided by literature, a leisure planning typology was developed with four phases to identify how ARCs were planned. The typology guided the deductive analysis to address our research question, How is a leisure planning process applied in ARC planning? Methodology A qualitative multiple-case study design was applied. Data from document analysis (n = 264) and semi-structured interviews (n = 19) were deductively analyzed based on a leisure planning typology. Findings A lack of adherence to specific planning models was evident. Instead, an ad hoc planning approach was applied, where planners relied on data collected to assist how an ARC should be planned. The characteristics associated with ad hoc planning led to this approach termed “systemic adhocracy”. Practical implications Planning, guided by a structured framework is crucial for maximising community benefits and addressing needs. Our study provides insight to the ARC planning process and the opportunity to apply the leisure planning typology to guide future investments, optimise planning, and enhance community outcomes.

HYBRID PLANNING A SIMPLE TECHNIQUE FOR CRANIOSPINAL IRRADIATION (CSI)

Purpose: A simple planning technique for craniospinal irradiation using Eclipse treatment planning system. Material and methods: In RT treatment planning, base plan optimization feature is used in sequential RT planning by anticipating the dose delivered to organ at risk (OAR) & planning target volume (PTV) in the base plan. In hybrid planning technique, the whole PTV is divided into two parts, Brain PTV & Spine PTV. Spine PTV is overlapped minimum 2-3 cm over the Brain PTV at their junction while creating structures for RT planning. Brain PTV is planned with conventional RT technique & the Spine PTV planned with rapid arc technique (VMAT). In the plan optimization process of spine PTV, first base plan is selected then the optimization parameter is set accordingly as per total prescribed dose of 36 Gy for both the PTVs. The base plan is the dose calculated plan which is incorporated in the rapid arc plan optimization hence the pre-existed doses of Brain PTV & OAR help to understand the plannerfor achieving desired planning objectives during Spine PTV, RT plan optimization. Finally for the dose calculation of Spine PTV RT plan, planner has to copy fields of Brain PTV & paste it in Spine PTV plan and need to calculate dose for these copied fields. The final plan contains a dose calculated of Brain PTV fields and Spine PTV fields termed as hybrid plan. Result: Reduction in the total number of monitor units is observed for the hybrid plan compared to single VMAT plan, which is statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: Present study introduced the hybrid planning technique which can exploit benefits of conventional and modern techniques.

Investigate potential clinical benefits and linear energy transfer sparing utilizing proton arc therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma

PurposeTo investigate the potential clinical benefits and dose-averaged Linear Energy Transfer (LETd) sparing, utilizing proton arc plan for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients in comparison with Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT). MethodsTen HCC patients have been retrospectively selected. Two planning groups were created: Proton Arc plans using Monaco ver. 6 and the clinical IMPT plan. Both planning groups used the same robustness parameters. The prescription dose is 67.5 Gy (RBE) in 15 fractions of the Clinical Target Volume (CTV). Robustness evaluations were performed to ensure dose coverage. Normal Tissue Complicated Probability (NTCP) model was utilized to predict the possibility of Radiation-Induced Liver Disease (RILD) and evaluate the potential benefit of proton arc therapy. LETd calculation and evaluation were performed as well. ResultsProton arc plan has shown better dosimetric improvements of most Organ-At-Risks (OARs). More specifically, the liver mean dose has been significantly reduced from 14.7 GyE to 10.62 GyE compared to the IMPT plan. The predicted possibility of RILD has also been significantly reduced for cases with a large and deep liver target where healthy liver tissue sparing is a challenge. Additionally, proton arc therapy could increase the average LETd in the target and reduce LETd in adjacent OARs. ConclusionsThe potential clinical benefit of utilizing proton arc therapy HCC varies depending on the patient-specific geometry. With more freedom, proton arc therapy can offer a better dosimetric plan quality in the challenge cases, which might not be feasible using the current IMPT technique.

Assessment of Organ-at-risk Sparing in Esophageal Cancer: A Comparative Dosimetric Evaluation of Hybrid, Noncoplanar, and Coplanar RapidArc Plans.

The purpose of this study is to improve the precision of radiation treatment and sparing of organ-at-risk (OAR) in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer (EC) affecting the heart, lung, and spinal cord. To improve and personalize cancer treatment plans, it assesses the dosimetric benefits of coplanar RapidArc (RAc), hybrid arc (RAHyb), and noncoplanar RapidArc (RAnc). Fourteen patients with EC were chosen for our investigation from our hospital's database. RapidArc (RA) plan patients had already received treatment. Retrospectively, additional RAnc and RAHyb plans were made with a prescription dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions for the planning target volume (PTV). A prescription dose of 95% of PTV was used, so that three different treatment planning procedures could be compared. The cumulative dose-volume histogram was used to analyze the plan quality indices homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), conformation number (CN) as well as the OARs doses to the lung, heart, and spinal cord. In comparison to RAc and RAnc techniques, the study indicated that RAHyb plans significantly increased D95%, CI and HI; Dmax and CN did not differ substantially. In addition, compared to RAc (lung: 16.15 ± 0.03 Gy and heart: 23.91 ± 4.67 Gy) and RAnc (lung: 15.24 ± 0.03 Gy and heart 23.82 ± 5.10 Gy) plans, RAHyb resulted in significantly lower mean lung doses (15.10 ± 0.03 Gy) and heart doses (21.33 ± 6.99 Gy). Moreover, the RAHyb strategy showed a statistically significant (P < 0.05) lower average MU (452.7) than both the RAc (517.5) and RAnc (566.2) plans. The D95%, conformity, and homogeneity indices were better for hybrid arc plans compared to RAc and RAnc plans. They also successfully managed to reduce the lung and heart doses as well as the mean MU per fraction.

Dosimetric impact of VMAT delivery angles for early glottic cancer treatment

This study investigates the dosimetric effects of different gantry rotation angles used in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for early glottic carcinoma. VMAT treatment plans using full-arc, half-arc, and partial-arc gantry rotation angles were generated from 22 computed tomography datasets of early-stage (T1-2N0) glottic laryngeal cancer. Dosimetric parameters associated with the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs), specifically the carotid arteries and thyroid, were compared. To assess the robustness of the VMAT plans, dose variations were analyzed by introducing positional shifts of 1, 3, and 5 mm from the isocenter of each plan along the superior-inferior, left-right, and anterior-posterior axes. Furthermore, we examined the size of the PTV, the air cavity volume within the PTV, and the variability of the beam path length through the gantry angles to investigate their correlations with PTV dose variations in the presence of positioning errors. Compared to full-arc and half-arc plans, the dosimetric parameters of partial-arc plans were found to be higher in PTV (D2%, D5%, D50%, and Dmean) and lower in OARs, while their dose variations of OAR parameters were greater for positioning errors. In addition, a correlation was observed between PTV size and PTV dose variations. Air cavity volume and depth variability were also correlated with some PTV parameters, depending on the arc plan. The results presented in this study suggest that the partial-arc gantry angles can allow higher PTV doses while minimizing OAR doses in VMAT treatment planning for early glottic cancer. However, the small delivery angles may lead to greater dose variations in the OARs when positioning errors occur.

Assessment of the Dosimetric Index from IMRT and Rapid arc Plan for Oropharyngeal Cancer with Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) Technique in Combination with EUD-based NTCP and TCP Radiobiological Models.

The current research compared radiobiological and dosimetric results for simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plans employing RapidArc and IMRT planning procedures in oropharyngeal cancer from head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients. The indigenously developed Python-based software was used in this study for generation and analysis. Twelve patients with forty-eight total plans with SIB were planned using Rapid arc (2 and 3 arcs) and IMRT (7 and 9 fields) and compared with radiobiological models Lyman, Kutcher, Burman (LKB) and EUD (Equivalent Uniform Dose) along with physical index such as homogeneity index(HI), conformity index(CI) of target volumes. These models' inputs are the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). The values obtained vary from one model to the other for the same technique and patient. The maximum dose to the brainstem and spinal cord and the mean dose to the parotids were analysed both dosimetrically and radiobiologically, such as the LKB model effective volume, equivalent uniform dose, EUD-based normal tissue complication probability, and normal tissue integral dose. The mean and max dose to target volume with conformity, homogeneity index, tumor control probability compared with treatment times, and monitor units. Rapid arc (3 arcs) resulted in significantly better OAR sparing, dose homogeneity, and conformity. The findings indicate that the rapid arc plan has improved dose distribution in the target volume compared with IMRT, but the tumor control probability obtained for the two planning methods, Rapid arc (3 arcs) and IMRT (7 fields), are similar. The treatment time and monitor units for the Rapid arc (3 arcs) were superior to other planning methods and considered to be standard in head & neck radiotherapy.

Lexicographic optimization-based planning for stereotactic radiosurgery of brain metastases

AimTo validate a fully-automated lexicographic optimization-planning system (mCycle, Elekta) for single-(SL) and multiple-(ML, up to 4 metastases) lesions in intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS, 21 Gy, single fraction). MethodsA pre-determined priority list, Wish-List (WL), represents a dialogue between planner and clinician, establishing strict constraints and pursuing objectives. In order to satisfy the clinical protocol without manual intervention, four patients were required to tweak and fine-tune each WL (SLp, MLp) for coplanar arcs. Thirty-five testing plans (20 SLp, 15 MLp) were automatically re-planned (mCP). Automatic and manual plans were compared including dose constraints, conformality, modulation complexity score (MCS), delivery time, and local gamma analysis (2%/2 mm). To ensure plan clinical acceptability, two radiation oncologists conducted an independent blind plan choice. ResultsEach WL-tuning took 3 days. Estimated median manual plans and mCP calculation time were 8 and 3 h, respectively. Significant increases in SLp and MLp target coverage and conformity were registered. mCP showed a not significant and clinically acceptable higher median brain V12Gy. SLp registered a −5.8% MU decrease with comparable median delivery time (MP 2.0 min, mCP 1.9 min) while MLp showed a +9.8% MU increase and longer delivery time (MP 3.5 min, mCP 4.4 min). mCP MCS resulted significantly higher without affecting gamma passing rates. At blind choice, mCP were preferred in the majority of cases. ConclusionsLexicographic optimization produced acceptable SRS plans with coplanar arcs significantly reducing the overall planning time in cases with up to 4 brain metastases. These planning improvements suggest further investigations by setting high-quality non-coplanar arc plans as a reference.

Optimizing the traversal time for gantry trajectories for proton arc therapy treatment plans

Background. Proton arc therapy (PAT) is an emerging radiation therapy technique where either the gantry or the patient continuously rotates during the irradiation treatment. One of the perceived advantages of PAT is the reduced treatment time, but it is still unclear exactly how long these treatment times will be, given that no machine capable of its delivery is available on the market at the time of writing. Objective. We introduce the algorithm arc trajectory optimization method (ATOM), which aims to determine an efficient velocity profile for the gantry for rapid delivery of a given proton arc treatment plan. This algorithm could be used to minimize the delivery time of a proton arc plan without changing the plan or updating the machine. Approach. ATOM computes the trajectory with the shortest delivery time while ensuring there is enough time to deliver all spots in each energy layer and switch energy between layers. The feasibility of the dynamic gantry movement was assured by enforcing maximum and minimum limits for velocity, acceleration, and jerk. This was achieved by discretizing the gantry velocity and combining the A* algorithm with the open-source motion generation library Ruckig. The algorithm was tested on a synthetic data set as well as a liver case, a prostate case and a head and neck case. Main results. Arc trajectories for plans with 360 energy layers were calculated in under a second using 256 discrete velocities. The delivery time of the liver case, the prostate case and the head and neck case were 284 s, 288 s and 309 s respectively, for 180 energy layers. Significance. ATOM is an open-source C++ library with a Python interface that rapidly generates velocity profiles, making it a highly efficient tool for determining proton arc delivery times, which could be integrated into the treatment planning process.

Generation of tissues outside the field of view (FOV) of radiation therapy simulation imaging based on machine learning and patient body outline (PBO)

BackgroundIt is not unusual to see some parts of tissues are excluded in the field of view of CT simulation images. A typical mitigation is to avoid beams entering the missing body parts at the cost of sub-optimal planning.MethodsThis study is to solve the problem by developing 3 methods, (1) deep learning (DL) mechanism for missing tissue generation, (2) using patient body outline (PBO) based on surface imaging, and (3) hybrid method combining DL and PBO. The DL model was built upon a Globally and Locally Consistent Image Completion to learn features by Convolutional Neural Networks-based inpainting, based on Generative Adversarial Network. The database used comprised 10,005 CT training slices of 322 lung cancer patients and 166 CT evaluation test slices of 15 patients. CT images were from the publicly available database of the Cancer Imaging Archive. Since existing data were used PBOs were acquired from the CT images. For evaluation, Structural Similarity Index Metric (SSIM), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) and Peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) were evaluated. For dosimetric validation, dynamic conformal arc plans were made with the ground truth images and images generated by the proposed method. Gamma analysis was conducted at relatively strict criteria of 1%/1 mm (dose difference/distance to agreement) and 2%/2 mm under three dose thresholds of 1%, 10% and 50% of the maximum dose in the plans made on the ground truth image sets.ResultsThe average SSIM in generation part only was 0.06 at epoch 100 but reached 0.86 at epoch 1500. Accordingly, the average SSIM in the whole image also improved from 0.86 to 0.97. At epoch 1500, the average values of RMSE and PSNR in the whole image were 7.4 and 30.9, respectively. Gamma analysis showed excellent agreement with the hybrid method (equal to or higher than 96.6% of the mean of pass rates for all scenarios).ConclusionsIt was first demonstrated that missing tissues in simulation imaging could be generated with high similarity, and dosimetric limitation could be overcome. The benefit of this study can be significantly enlarged when MR-only simulation is considered.

A multi-centre stereotactic radiosurgery planning study of multiple brain metastases using isocentric linear accelerators with 5 and 2.5mm width multi-leaf collimators, CyberKnife and Gamma Knife.

This study compared plans of high definition (HD), 2.5 mm width multi-leaf collimator (MLC), to standard, 5 mm width, isocentric linear accelerator (linacs), CyberKnife (CK), and Gamma Knife (GK) for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) techniques on multiple brain metastases. Eleven patients undergoing SRS for multiple brain metastases were chosen. Targets and organs at risk (OARs) were delineated and optimized SRS plans were generated and compared. The linacs delivered similar conformity index (CI) values, but the gradient index (GI) for HD MLCs was significantly lower (P-value <.001). Half the OARs received significantly lower dose using HD MLCs. CK delivered a significantly lower CI than HD MLC linac (P-value <.001), but a significantly higher GI (P-value <.001). CI was significantly improved with the HD MLC linac compared to GK (P-value = 4.591 × 10-3), however, GK delivered a significantly lower GI (P-value <.001). OAR dose sparing was similar for the HD MLC TL, CK, and GK. Comparing linacs for SRS, the preferred choice is HD MLCs. Similar results were achieved with the HD MLC linac, CK, or GK, with each delivering significant improvements in different aspects of plan quality. This article is the first to compare HD and standard width MLC linac plans using a combination of single isocentre volumetric modulated arc therapy and multi-isocentric dynamic conformal arc plans as required, which is a more clinically relevant assessment. Furthermore, it compares these plans with CK and GK, assessing the relative merits of each technique.

P086 - Dosimetric comparison of imrt vs. vmat - Single arc, dual arc and combination of dual and single arc plans for high risk prostate cancers

P086 - Dosimetric comparison of imrt vs. vmat - Single arc, dual arc and combination of dual and single arc plans for high risk prostate cancers

Cardiopulmonary Protection for Bilateral Breast Irradiation: A Dosimetric Comparison between Proton and Photon Plans

Recent advances in cancer treatment improve cancer survivorship. Cardiovascular disease has become the leading cause of non-cancer death in breast cancer survivors. Therefore, risk of cardiopulmonary toxicities during multimodality treatment should be assessed carefully. It remains to be defined the best scenario for proton therapy to confer meaningful cardiovascular protection in the setting of breast irradiation. We hypothesized proton therapy plan provides optimal cardiopulmonary protection during bilateral breast irradiation. The study aimed to compare cardiopulmonary dosimetric parameters of proton and photon radiotherapy plans. We conducted a retrospective study and patients with bilateral breast cancer indicated for radiotherapy between January 01, 2010 and December 31, 2020 were included. All patients received whole breast or chest wall irradiation with or without regional nodal irradiation. The dose scheme was 50-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions. Boost was allowed if patients receiving breast conserving surgery or known risk factors. The dosimetric parameters included planning target volume, mean dose to the heart, the volume of whole lung receiving 5 Gy, 10 Gy, and 20 Gy. For photon therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy using double partial arc plans was generated with Pinnacle 9.8, Elekta Synergy and tomotherapy helical plan was generated with Tomo Hi-Art planning system. For proton therapy, treatment planning was generated with Ray station 9A. All data was managed using SAS v.9.4 software. Analysis of variance (α = 0.05) was used to compute the dosimetry of different treatment modalities. The statistical significance was considered with a p-value <0.05. Thirty-one patients with bilateral breast cancer were included, including 12 bilateral breast irradiation patients and 6 bilateral chest wall irradiation patients. The mean dose of heart was 53.0±43.3 cGy in proton therapy while 736.6±225.1 cGy and 869.67±241.0 cGy in Tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy respectively. The volume of whole lung receiving 5 Gy was 15.4±7.91% in proton therapy while 46.1±10.8% and 46.3±2.5% in Tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy respectively. The volume of whole lung receiving 20 Gy was 7.7±4.3% in proton therapy while 15.4±5.6% and 19±3.5% in Tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy respectively. The effects of cardiopulmonary protection were more significant for chest wall irradiation over breast irradiation. Proton radiotherapy provided significant dose reduction for bilateral breast irradiation. The benefit is more significant is patients receiving bilateral chest wall irradiation. Further clinical validations will be warranted to confirm the clinical relevance of the finding.

Partitioning of discrete proton arcs into interlaced subplans can bring proton arc advances to existing proton facilities.

Proton arcs have shown potential to reduce the dose to organs at risks (OARs) by delivering the protons from many different directions. While most previous studies have been focused on dynamic arcs (delivery during rotation), an alternative approach is discrete arcs, where step-and-shoot delivery is used over a large number of beam directions. The major advantage of discrete arcs is that they can be delivered at existing proton facilities. However, this advantage comes at the expense of longer treatment times. To exploit the dosimetric advantages of proton arcs, while achieving reasonable delivery times, we propose a partitioning approach where discrete arc plans are split into subplans to be delivered over different fractions in the treatment course. For three oropharyngeal cancer patients, four different arc plans have been created and compared to the corresponding clinical IMPT plan. The treatment plans are all planned to be delivered in 35 fractions, but with different delivery approaches over the fractions. The first arc plan (1×30) has 30 directions to be delivered every fraction, while the others are partitioned into subplans with 10 and 6 beam directions, each to be delivered every third (3×10), fifth fraction (5×6), or seventh fraction (7×10). All plans are assessed with respect to delivery time, target robustness over the treatment course, doses to OARs and NTCP for dysphagia and xerostomia. The delivery time (including an additional delay of 30 s between the discrete directions to simulate manual interaction with the treatment control system) is reduced from on average 25.2min for the 1×30 plan to 9.2min for the 3×10 and 7×10 plans and 5.7min for the 5×6 plans. The delivery time for the IMPT plan is 7.9min. When accounting for the combination of delivery time, target robustness, OAR sparing, and NTCP reduction, the plans with 10 directions in each fraction are the preferred choice. Both the 3×10 and 7×10 plans show improved target robustness compared to the 1×30 plans, while keeping OAR doses and NTCP values at almost as low levels as for the 1×30 plans. For all patients the NTCP values for dysphagia are lower for the partitioned plans with 10 directions compared to the IMPT plans. NTCP reduction for xerostomia compared to IMPT is seen in two of the three patients. The best results are seen for the first patient, where the NTCP reductions for the 7×10 plan are 1.6 p.p. (grade 2 xerostomia) and 1.5 p.p. (grade 2 dysphagia). The corresponding NTCP reductions for the 1×30 plan are 2.7 p.p. (xerostomia, grade 2) and 2.0 p.p. (dysphagia, grade 2). Discrete proton arcs can be implemented at any proton facility with reasonable treatment times using a partitioning approach. The technique also makes the proton arc treatments more robust to changes in the patient anatomy.

PO-1986 Assesment of scenarios based and intrafractional robustness of dynamic proton arc plans

PO-1986 Assesment of scenarios based and intrafractional robustness of dynamic proton arc plans

A dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus rapid arc in gynecological malignancies: Dose beyond planning target volume, precisely 5Gy volume.

Aim of radiotherapy is precise dose delivery with objective of achieving maximum local control and minimal toxicity by decreasing dose to organ at risk (OAR).This aim can be achieved by technologies like intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric arc therapy. However, later offers comparable or even better plan quality with shorter treatment time. It is important to note that low dose regions are also a concern due long-term risk of developing a second cancer after radiotherapy. The objective of our study is to do dosimetric comparison of IMRT vs. Rapid arc (RA) plan in gynecology cancer and specifically to assess dose beyond planning target volume (PTV), precisely 5 Gy volume. Each 20 eligible patients underwent radiotherapy planning on eclipse by both IMRT and RA plans as per institution protocols. Comparative dosimetric analysis of both plans was done by paired sample t-test. PTV metrics compared were D95%, homogenecity index (HI), and conformity index (CI). OAR dose compared were bowel V40 Gy <30%, Rectum V30 Gy <60%, Bladder V45 Gy <35%, and bilateral femur head and neck V30 Gy < 50%. Futhermore, calculated monitor units (MUs) were also compared. Finally, volume of normal tissue beyond the PTV, specifically 5 Gy volume, was compared between plans. Dosimetric plan comparison showed statistically significant difference in RA and IMRT plans with improved PTV coverage and better OAR tolerance with RA plan. In addition, MU used were significantly less in RA plan, coupled with reduced V5 Gy volume. In sum, RA plans are dosimetrically significantly better compared to IMRT plans in gynecological malignancies in terms of PTV coverage and OAR sparing. Importantly, not only less MU used but also significantly less normal tissue V5 Gy volume is less in RA compared to IMRT plans.

Validation of esophageal cancer treatment methods from 3D-CRT, IMRT, and Rapid Arc plans using custom Python software to compare radiobiological plans to normal tissue integral dosage.

The aim was to develop in-house software that is able to calculate and generate the biological plan evaluation of the esophagus treatment plan using the Niemierko model for normal tissue complication probability and tumor control probability. The Niemierko model can be applied for esophagus cancer treatment plan to estimate the tumor control probability (TCP) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) using different planning techniques. The equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and effective volume parameters were compared with organ at risk. Subsequently, EUD and TCP parameter were compared with tumor volume for all five different planning techniques. Ten cases for esophageal cancer were included in this study. For each patient, five treatment plans were generated. The Anisotropic analytical algorithms (AAA) were used for dose calculation for the three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. The in-house developed radiobiological plan evaluation software using python programming is used for this study which takes a dose volume histogram (DVH) text file as an input file for biological plan evaluation. EUD, NTCP, TCP and effective volume were calculated from the Niemierko model using the in-house developed python based software and compared with treatment monitor units (MU) with all five different treatment plan. The best technique is quantified as benchmarked out of other different qualities of treatment. The four field 3D-CRT treatment plan is found to be the best suited from the perspective of biological plan index evaluation among the other planning techniques.

A plan comparison study between rapid arc and conventional intensity-modulated radiation treatment plans in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.

Head and neck cancers are one of the common malignancies in Indian population. It's entity, nasopharyngeal carcinoma is among the aggressive malignancies with its location and spread near very critical structures. Thus requires a highly conformal radiotherapy delivery techniques. The aim of the study is to dosimetrically evaluate and to compare Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans and RAPID ARC plans for irradiation of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. A retrospective study is done on 10 nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients, who were treated with Radiotherapy at ATRCTRI Bikaner. Radiotherapy was delivered by IMRT technique (Total of 70 Gy in 33 fractions). Same patients are now planned on Rapid arc technique. Dosimetric comparison is done in terms of PTV coverage, OAR dose, conformity index, homogeneity index. PTV coverage is similar with both the plans. Homogeneity index is higher for IMRT plans 0.119+/- 0.020 compared to 0.104 +/- 0.018 for Rapid arc plans (statistically significant).The Rapid arc plans achieved slightly better conformity 1.018+/-0.09, whereas 1.105+/-0.12 for IMRT plans. Rapid arc achieved better results for OAR, statistically significant for Brainstem (54.4 +/-10.4 Gy for IMRT and 49.7+/-4.2 Gy for Rapid Arc, Lens (Left lens and Right lens received 10.55+/-5.8 Gy and 9.44+/-9.08 by IMRT and 6.12+/-6.1 Gy and 5.45+/-6.05 Gy for Rapid Arc), optic nerves (Right and Left optic nerve received 34.36 and 35.01 Gy for IMRT plans and 30.06 and 30.05 Gy for Rapid Arc plans. However the gains are statistically insignificant for spinal cord and vestibulocochlear nerve. No major difference found for Right and left parotid between both the arms. Rapid Arc is better technique compared to IMRT for Nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatment, that provides better dose conformity, more homogeneous coverage and OAR sparing. However study is retrospective and has lesser patients, thus requires prospective study with more number of patients along with comparison of clinical outcome.

Evaluation of plan quality and treatment efficiency in cranial stereotactic radiosurgery treatment plans with a variable source-to-axis distance.

Radiotherapy deliveries with dynamic couch motions that shorten the source-to-axis distance (SAD) on a C-arm linac have the potential to increase treatment efficiency through the increase of the effective dose rate. In this investigation, we convert clinically deliverable volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans for cranial radiosurgery into virtual isocenter plans through implementation of couch trajectories that maintain the target at a shortened but variable SAD throughout treatment. A randomly sampled population of patients treated with cranial radiosurgery from within the last three years were separated into groups with one, two, and three lesions. All plans had a single isocenter (regardless of number of targets), and a single prescription dose. Patient treatment plans were converted from their original delivery at a standard isocenter to a dynamic virtual isocenter in MATLAB. The virtual isocenter plan featured a variable isocenter position based upon the closest achievable source-to-target distance (referred to herein as a virtual source-to-axis distance [vSAD]) which avoided collision zones on a TrueBeam STx platform. Apertures were magnified according to the vSAD and monitor units at a given control point were scaled based on the inverse square law. Doses were calculated for the plans with a virtual isocenter in the Eclipse (v13.6.23) treatment planning system (TPS) and were compared with the clinical plans. Plan metrics (MU, Paddick conformity index, gradient index, and the volume receiving 12 Gy or more), normal brain dose-volume differences, as well as maximum doses received by organs at risk (OARs) were assessed. The values were compared between standard and virtual isocenter plans with Wilcoxon Sign Ranked tests to determine significance. A subset of the plans were mapped to the MAX-HD anthropomorphic phantom which contained an insert housing EBT3 GafChromic film and a PTW 31010 microion chamber for dose verification on a linac. Delivering plans at a virtual isocenter resulted in an average reduction of 20.9% (p = 3×10-6 ) and 20.6% (p = 3.0×10-6 ) of MUs across all VMAT and all DCA plans, respectively. There was no significant change in OAR max doses received by plans delivered at a virtual isocenter. The low dose wash (1.0-2.0 Gy or 5-11% of the prescription dose) was increased (by approximately 20 cc) for plans with three lesions. This was equivalent to a 2.7%-3.8% volumetric increase in normal tissue receiving the respective dose level when comparing the plan with a virtual isocenter to a plan with a standard isocenter. Gamma pass rates with a 5%/1mm analysis criteria were 96.40% ± 2.90% and 95.07% ± 3.10% for deliveries at standard and virtual isocenter, respectively. Absolute point dose agreements were within -0.36% ± 3.45% and -0.55% ± 3.39% for deliveries at a standard and virtual isocenter, respectively. Potential time savings per arc were found to have linear relationship with the monitor units delivered per arc (savings of 0.009 s/MU with an r2 = 0.866 when fit to plans with a single lesion). Converting clinical plans at standard isocenter to a virtual isocenter design did not show any losses to plan quality while simultaneously improving treatment efficiency through MU reductions.

Analytical dosimetric study of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer

PurposeThe study aimed to compare the dosimetric results and treatment delivery efficiency among four techniques to explore the preferred technique in prostate treatment.Materials and methods7 IMRT, 9 IMRT, 1 ARC, and 2 ARC plans were created for 30 prostate cancer patients using the Eclipse™ treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems). All the plans were designed to deliver 80.0 Gy in 40 fractions to the prostate planning target volume (PTV). Target coverage, organs at risk (OARs), number of monitor units, homogeneity, and conformity were compared across the four techniques to assess the quality of the plans.ResultsThe study revealed better Planning Target Volume (PTV) dose coverage in the VMAT-2A than in the other plans. At the same time, VMAT-2A plans were found to be significantly lower in terms of Bladder and rectum doses than other techniques. In addition, VMAT has the advantage of considerably reducing the number of monitor units and treatment time.ConclusionFor prostate cancer, VMAT may offer a favorable dose gradient profile, conformity, and MU and treatment time compared to IMRT.

Spot scanning proton arc therapy reduces toxicity in oropharyngeal cancer patients.

Proton arc technology has recently shown dosimetric gains for various treatment indications. The increased number of beams and energy layers (ELs) in proton arc plans, increases the degrees of freedom in plan optimization and thereby flexibility to spare dose in organs at risk (OARs). A relationship exists between dosimetric plan quality, delivery efficiency, the number of ELs -and beams in a proton arcplan. This work aims to investigate the effect of the number of beams and ELs in a proton arc plan, on toxicity and delivery time for oropharyngeal cancer patients (OPC) selected for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) based on the Dutch model-basedapproach. The EL reduction algorithm iteratively selects ELs from beams equidistantly spaced over a 360° arc. The beams in the final plan may contain multiple ELs, making them suited for static delivery on the studied treatment machine. The produced plans can therefore be called "step and shoot" proton arc plans. The number of beams and ELs were varied to determine the relationship with the planning cost function value, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and delivery time. Proton arc plans with robust target coverage and optimal energy layer reduction (ELR) settings to reduce NTCP, were generated for 10 OPC patients. Proton arc plans were compared to clinical volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and IMPT plans in terms of integral dose, OAR dose, NTCP for xerostomia and dysphagia and delivery time. Furthermore, dose-weighted average linear energy transfer (LETd ) distributions were compared between the IMPT and proton arc plans. A dry run delivery of a plan containing 20 beams and 360 ELs was performed to evaluate delivery time andaccuracy. We found 360 ELs distributed over 30 beams generated proton arc plans with near minimal expected plan toxicity. Relative to corresponding IMPT and VMAT plans, an average reduction of 21 ± 3% and 58 ± 10% in integral dose was observed. D was reduced most in the pharyngeal constrictor muscle (PCM) medius structure, with on average 9.0 ± 4.2 Gy(RBE) (p = 0.0002) compared to the clinical IMPT plans. The average NTCP for grade≥2 and grade≥3 xerostomia at 6 months after treatment significantly decreased with 4.7 ± 1.8% (p = 0.002) and 1.7 ± 0.8% (p = 0.002), respectively, while the average NTCP for grade≥2 and grade≥3 dysphagia decreased with 4.4 ± 2.9% (p = 0.002) and 0.9 ± 0.4% (p = 0.002), respectively, increasing the benefit of protons relative to VMAT. For a "step and shoot" proton arc delivery with auto beam sequencing the estimated delivery time is 11 min, similar to the delivery time of a 6-field IMPT treatment. Gamma analysis between the planned and delivered dose distribution resulted in a 99.99% pass rate using 1mm/1% dose difference/distance to agreement criteria. "Step and shoot" proton arc demonstrates potential to further reduce toxicity compared to IMPT and VMAT in OPC treatment. By employing 360 ELs and 30 beams in the proposed ELR method, delivery time can reach clinically acceptable levels without compromising plan toxicity when automatic beam sequencing isavailable.