Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy Research Articles

A comparative dosimetric evaluation of dynamic conformal arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy

PurposeThis study assesses the viability of utilizing dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) as an alternative to volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer, with a focus on four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) in free-breathing conditions. Materials and methodsWe selected four non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who had previously undergone VMAT SBRT and re-planned their treatment using DCAT. We compared the DCAT and VMAT plans based on dose distribution, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), and total monitor units (MUs). Quality assurance (QA) assessments for both plans were conducted using the Octavius 4D system (PTW, Freiburg, Germany). ResultsThe results showed that CIPaddick was 0.80 ± 0.06 and 0.79 ± 0.04 (p-value >0.05), HI was 1.16 ± 0.03 (p-value <0.05) and 1.07 ± 0.02, GI was 3.91 ± 0.05 and 3.40 ± 0.05 (p-value <0.05), and MU was 1880.42 ± 135.19 and 5020.82 ± 188.03 for DCAT and VMAT, respectively (p-value <0.05). The average gamma passing rate exceeded 95 % with a 2 %/2 mm criteria. The dose distribution displayed remarkable similarity between DCAT and VMAT. ConclusionThe DCAT technique exhibits the capacity to deliver PTV dose distributions comparable to those achieved with VMAT, while significantly reducing treatment duration.

Dosimetric Comparison between Simultaneous Integrated Boost Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy and Whole Brain Radiation Therapy Techniques in Treatment of Patients with Multiple Brain Metastases

Dosimetric Comparison between Simultaneous Integrated Boost Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy and Whole Brain Radiation Therapy Techniques in Treatment of Patients with Multiple Brain Metastases

Integrating cine EPID, dynamic delivery, and the off-axis Winston-Lutz test to enhance quality control in multiple brain metastasis stereotactic radiotherapy

PurposeStereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) has transformed cancer treatment, especially for brain metastases. Ensuring accurate SRT delivery is crucial, with the Winston-Lutz test being an important quality control tool. Off-axis Winston-Lutz (OAWL) tests are designed for accuracy assessment, but most are limited to fixed angles and hampered by local-field shifts caused by suboptimal Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) positioning. This study introduces a new OAWL approach for quality control in multi-brain-metastasis SRT. Utilizing cine Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) images, it can be used with dynamic conformal arc (DCA) therapy. However, dynamic OAWL (DOAWL) is prone to more local-field shifts due to dynamic MLC movements. A two-step DOAWL is proposed: step 1 calculates local-field shifts using dynamic MLC movements in the beam-eye view data from the Treatment Planning System (TPS), while step 2 processes cine EPID images with an OAWL algorithm to isolate true deviations. MethodsValidation involved an anthropomorphic head phantom with metallic ball-bearings, Varian TrueBeam STx accelerator delivering six coplanar/non-coplanar DCA beams, cine EPID, and ImageJ's OAWL analysis algorithm. ResultsInherent local-field shifts ranged from 0.11 to 0.49 mm; corrected mean/max EPID-measured displacement was 0.34/1.03 mm. Few points exceeded 0.75/1.0-mm thresholds. ConclusionsThis two-step DOAWL test merges cine-EPID acquisitions, DCA, OAWL, and advanced analysis and offers effective quality control for multi-brain-metastasis SRT. Its routine implementation may also improve physicist knowledge of the treatment precision of their machines.

Evaluation of the deliverability of dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) by gantry wobble and its influence on dose

We aimed to investigate the deliverability of dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) by gantry wobble owing to the intrinsic inter-segment break of the Elekta linear accelerator (LINAC) and its adverse influence on the dose to the patient. The deliverability of DCAT was evaluated according to the plan parameters, which affect the gantry rotation speed and resultant positional inaccuracies; the deliverability according to the number of control points and dose rates was investigated by using treatment machine log files and dosimetry devices, respectively. A non-negligible degradation in DCAT deliverability due to gantry wobble was observed in both the treatment machine log files and dosimetry devices. The resulting dose-delivery error occurred below a certain number of control points or above a certain dose rate. Dose simulations in the patient domain showed a similar impact on deteriorated deliverability. For targets located primarily in the isocenter, the dose differences were negligible, whereas for organs at risk located mainly off-isocenter, the dose differences were significant up to − 8.77%. To ensure safe and accurate radiotherapy, optimal plan parameters should be selected, and gantry angle-specific validations should be conducted before treatment.

Dosimetric Comparison of Three-Dimensional Conformal, Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, and Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy Techniques in Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation

Dosimetric Comparison of Three-Dimensional Conformal, Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, and Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy Techniques in Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation

A target definition based on electroanatomic maps for stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation

PurposeIdentifying the target region is critical for successfully treating ventricular tachycardia (VT) with single fraction stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR). We report the feasibility of target definition based on direct co-registration of electroanatomic maps (EAM) and radioablation planning images. Materials and methodsThe EAM consists of 3D cardiac anatomy representation with electrical activity at endocardium and is acquired by a cardiac electrophysiologist (CEP) during electrophysiology study. The CEP generates an EAM using a 3D cardiac mapping system anticipating radioablation planning. Our in-house software read these non-DICOM EAMs, registered them to a planning image set, and converted them to DICOM structure files. The EAM based target volume was finalized based on a consensus of CEPs, radiation oncologists and medical physicists, then expanded to ITV and PTV. The simulation, planning, and treatment is performed with a standard STAR technique: a single fraction of 25 Gy using volumetric-modulated arc therapy or dynamic conformal arc therapy depending on the target shape. ResultsSeven patients with refractory VT were treated by defining the target based on registering EAMs on the planning images. Dice similarity indices between reference map and reference contours after registration were 0.814 ± 0.053 and 0.575 ± 0.199 for LV and LA/RV, respectively. ConclusionsThe quality of the transferred EAMs on the MR/CT images was sufficient to localize the treatment region. Five of 7 patients demonstrated a dramatic reduction in VT events after 6 weeks. Longer follow-up is required to determine the true safety and efficacy of this therapy using EAM-based direct registration method.

PO-04-095 ACCURATE EAM-BASED TARGET DELINEATION IN STEREOTACTIC ARRHYTHMIA RADIOABLATION OF VT

Stereotactic Arrhythmia Radiotherapy (STAR) aided by precise image-guided delivery and respiratory motion management has been used successfully for experimental treatment of refractory VT. However, accurate target selection remains challenging. Current methods often rely on manual delineation and/or visual estimation of predefined cardiac segments. Develop a systematic process for registering VT targets from electroanatomic maps (EAM) to reference imaging coordinates of the planning CT (pCT) used for radiation treatment. The goal is to minimize potential variations in target site selection as well as treated volumes. In patients on antiarrhythmic treatment and undergoing a 2nd unsuccessful VT ablation, EA maps of the LV (and LA/RV when possible) and more focal maps of VT target sites were acquired (CARTO®3, Biosense-Webster, CA, USA) and exported. In-house software was used to register these to a planning image set and convert them to DICOM structure files (Fig 1). Dice similarity coefficients were calculated between ventricular mesh data and corresponding reference contours. Initial targets (GTV) were expanded to include internal target volumes (ITV) and planning target volumes (PTV) to account for respiratory and cardiac motion and residual uncertainties, with minor manual adjustments guided by consensus among electrophysiologists, radiation oncologists and medical physicists. STAR was delivered as a single fraction of 25 Gy using volumetric-modulated arc therapy or dynamic conformal arc therapy depending on the target shape. 7 patients with refractory VT were treated by defining targets based on registering individualized EAM maps on the planning images. Dice similarity indices between transferred reference map and reference contours were 0.83 ± 0.04 and 0.72 ± 0.04 for LV and LA/RV, respectively (table 1). The median clinical target was 22cc, with PTVs ranging from 62.4 to 199.6 cc. All patients demonstrated a significant reduction in VT events by 6 weeks post STAR. We have developed an effective methodology for direct registration of VT targets selected for STAR, based on direct anatomic registration of individualized EA maps acquired during ablation procedures. This process offers a way to efficiently delineate variable target boundaries in a semi-automated way, which is advantageous when unusual contours make standard segmentation inaccurate and visual estimation difficult. However, rigorous comparison with other approaches remains to be done.Tabled 1Patient-specific metrics1234567Dice, LV0.8680.8450.7910.8060.7210.8720.794Dice, LA/RV0.7520.6670.734N/A0.382N/A0.338GTV (cc)22.313.526.520.759.863.927.2ITV (cc)45.529.142.230.959.8127.829.6PTV (cc)98.662.488.275.5166.8199.672.8 Open table in a new tab

Clinical outcomes and lung toxicities after lung SABR using dynamic conformal arc therapy: a single-institution cohort study

BackgroundStereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a validated treatment for early stage lung cancer and pulmonary metastases. It provides a high local control rate with low symptomatic toxicities. Recently, Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy (DCAT), a delivery option that differs from conventional DCA, has been implemented in the Monaco Treatment Planning System for SABR. The aim of the study was to report clinical outcomes and toxicities for patients treated for lung SABR with this new technique.MethodsWe retrospectively identified adult patients treated for primary or secondary lung tumors with DCAT-SABR and reported their clinical, radiological, histological characteristics and dosimetric parameters. Total dose was delivered in 3 or 5 fractions for 95% of patients and prescribed on the 80% isodose line to the PTV periphery.Results145 patients met inclusion criteria for a total of 152 lesions with a median follow up of 12 months. Local control for the irradiated site was 96.7% at 1 year. Overall survival was 93.1% at 1 year. Mean prescription dose in BED10 was 110 Gy. 92% of patients had a prescribed dose superior to 100 Gy BED10. Mean PTV coverage was 95.1%. There were 66 cases of grade 1 radiation pneumonitis (RP) (43%) and only 7 cases of symptomatic grade 2 RP (4.6%).ConclusionLung SABR for primary or metastatic lung tumors using dynamic conformal arc therapy provides efficient results of local control and low lung toxicities, similar to other SABR techniques. Advances in knowledge: SABR using DCAT is a safe technique to treat lung lesions, allowing intra-fraction motion limitation, potentially higher OARs protection and a shortened beam delivery.

Cochlear sparing in LINAC-based radiosurgery for vestibular schwannoma: a dosimetric comparison of dynamic conformal arc, IMRT and VMAT treatment plans

BackgroundStereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is the preferred treatment for vestibular schwannoma (VS) in patients with preserved hearing and tumour diameter < 3 cm. Emerging evidence suggests restricting cochlear dose could preserve hearing. This retrospective replanning study aims to compare dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT), intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for superiority of cochlear dose sparing without compromising tumour coverage.MethodsEligibility criteria included sporadic VS, serviceable hearing and availability of CT and MRI for planning. The original gross tumour volume and brainstem OAR volume were retained; the cochlea was newly contoured on the planning CT scan (bone window). Each case was replanned using the three above techniques, prescribing 12 Gy to the 80% isodose line. No dose constraint was applied to the cochlea.ResultsEighteen patients were replanned. Mean tumour volume was 2.25 cc. Tumour coverage and tumour mean dose (DCAT: 14.2, IMRT: 14.6, VMAT: 14.5 Gy) were comparable. Paddick and RTOG conformity indices were better for DCAT (0.66 and 1.6) and VMAT (0.69 and 1.5) compared to IMRT (0.56 and 1.9). DCAT had superior gradient index (3.0) compared to VMAT (3.4) and IMRT (3.4). VMAT delivered the lowest mean brainstem maximum dose (8.3 Gy) and decreased the mean cochlear dose (3.4 Gy) by 2.3 and 2.1 Gy, and the mean cochlear maximum dose (3.6 Gy) by 2.4 and 2.5 Gy relative to DCAT and IMRT, respectively.ConclusionLINAC-based SRS treatment using VMAT can achieve better cochlear dose sparing than DCAT or IMRT while maintaining tumour coverage.

Planning issues on linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy.

This work aims to summarize and evaluate the current planning progress based on the linear accelerator in stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). The specific techniques include 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, dynamic conformal arc therapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). They are all designed to deliver higher doses to the target volume while reducing damage to normal tissues; among them, VMAT shows better prospects for application. This paper reviews and summarizes several issues on the planning of SRT to provide a reference for clinical application.

A novel and clinically useful weight-optimized dynamic conformal arc in stereotactic radiation therapy of non-small cell lung cancer: Dosimetric comparison of treatment plans with volumetric‐modulated arc therapy

PurposeThis study constitutes a feasibility assessment of dynamic conformal arc (DCA) therapy as an alternative to volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of lung cancer with the free-breathing technique using four-dimensional computed tomography. MethodsA total of 25 patients who received 50 Gy in four fractions treated using VMAT technique having two partial coplanar arcs with 6 MV beams for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were included. Plans were re‐planned using a novel and clinically technique of weight optimized based on dynamic conformal Arcs with two coplanar partial dynamic conformal arcs (WO-DCA). For the two partial arcs, MLC aperture around the PTV was automatically generated at different margins for both arcs and maintained dynamically around the target during arc rotation. Weight of the two arcs using optimization method was adjusted between the arcs to maximize tumor coverage and protect organs at risk (OAR). The clinical VMAT and WO-DCA plans were compared via the RTOG-0915 protocol for conformity and dose to the organs at risk (OAR). Additionally, delivery efficiency, quality assurance pass rate, monitor unit and beam treatment time were recorded. ResultsThe mean value of quality assurance (QA) pass rate 98.16 ± 1.27 in WO-DCA and 92.87 ± 1.56 in VMAT. The rate was higher in WO-DCA (p < 0.001 and t = 8.75). The values of beam‐on time (BOT) and monitor units (MU) in the VMAT technique were 4.20 (3.45–4.95) and 3155 (2279–4867) and they were 3.10 (2.85–3.35) and 2167 (1702–2948) in WO-DCA. These values were significantly improved with WO-DCA (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001) ConclusionsAs there is, no beam modulation through the target, WO‐DCA plans could potentially minimize small‐field dosimetry error without MLC interplay effects via respiratory motion and provide similar doses to OAR and the tumor while providing faster treatment delivery by significantly reducing MU and BOT in lung cancer for tumors of appropriate localization. Additionally, providing WO‐DCA eliminate patient‐specific VMAT quality assurance; potentially offering cost‐effective, same day SBRT treatments.

Dosimetric comparison of mDCAT and VMAT techniques according to 6MV-FFF and 10MV-FFF energies in patients with single adrenal metastasis.

To compare dosimetric and radiobiological terms of modified dynamic conformal arc therapy (mDCAT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques using different flattening-filter free (FFF) energies in patients with single adrenal metastasis. In this study, plans were prepared for 10 patients drawing on the mDCAT and VMAT techniques with 6MV-FFF and 10MV-FFF energies. Target volume doses, biological effective doses (BED), quality indices, Monitor Unit (MU), number of segments, beam-on time and critical organ doses were compared in the plans. Plans with the significantly lower gradient index (GI) and conformity index (CI) values were obtained with 6MV-FFF energy VMAT planning (p < 0.05). The higher values were obtained for dose to 95% of internal target volume (ITVD95), ITVD95-BED10 with 10MV-FFF energy VMAT planning, whereas lower results were obtained for high dose spillage (HDS%) values (p < 0,05). With 10MV-FFF energy, HDS% values were 21.1% lower in VMAT plans and 5.6% lower in mDCAT plans compared to 6MV-FFF energy. Plans with approximately 50% fewer segments were obtained in mDCAT plans than VMAT plans (p < 0,05). Beam-on time values with mDCAT was 1.84 times lower when 6MV-FFF energies were analyzed, and 2.11 times lower when 10MV-FFF was analyzed (p < 0,05). Additionally, when 6MV-FFF and 10MV-FFF energies were examined, MU values with mDCAT were 2.1 and 2.5 times lower (p < 0,05). In general, the smaller the target volume size, the greater the differences between MU and beam-on time values mDCAT and VMAT. The study results implied that VMAT enabled to offer significantly more conformal SBRT plans with steeper dose fall-off beyond the target volume for single adrenal metastasis than the mDCAT, which attained at the cost of significantly higher MU and beam-on times. Especially with 10MV-FFF energy mDCAT plans, low-dose-bath zones can be reduced, and shorter-term treatments can be implemented with large segments. In adrenal gland SBRT, higher effective doses can be achieved with the right energy and technique, critical organ doses can be reduced, thus increasing the possibility of local control of the tumor with low toxicity.

Comparative study of SRS end-to-end QA processes of a diode array device and an anthropomorphic phantom loaded with GafChromic XD film.

PurposeEnd‐to‐end testing (E2E) is a necessary process for assessing the readiness of the stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) program and annual QA of an SRS system according to the AAPM MPPG 9a. This study investigates the differences between using a new SRS MapCHECK (SRSMC) system and an anthropomorphic phantom film‐based system in a large network with different SRS delivery techniques.Methods and materialsThree SRS capable Linacs (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) at three different regional sites were chosen to represent a hospital network, a Trilogy with an M120 multi‐leaf collimator (MLC), a TrueBeam with an M120 MLC, and a TrueBeam Stx with an HD120 MLC. An anthropomorphic STEEV phantom (CIRS, Norfolk, VA) and a phantom/diode array: StereoPHAN/SRSMC (Sun Nuclear, Melbourne, FL) were CT scanned at each site. The new STV‐PHANTOM EBT‐XD films (Ashland, Bridgewater, NJ) were used. Six plans with various complexities were measured with both films and SRSMC in the StereoPHAN to establish their dosimetric correlations. Three SRS cranial plans with a total of sixteen fields using dynamic conformal arc and volumetric‐modulated arc therapy, with 1–4 targets, were planned with Eclipse v15.5 treatment planning system (TPS) using a custom SRS beam model for each machine. The dosimetric and localization accuracy were compared. The time of analysis for the two systems by three teams of physicists was also compared to assess the throughput efficiency.ResultsThe correlations between films and SRSMC were found to be 0.84 (p = 0.03) and 0.16 (p = 0.76) for γ (3%, 1 mm) and γ (3%, 2 mm), respectively. With film, the local dose differences (ΔD) relative to the average dose within the 50% isodose line from the three sites were found to be −3.2%–3.7%. The maximum localization errors (Elocal) were found to be within 0.5 ± 0.2 mm. With SRSMC, the ΔD was found to be within 5% of the TPS calculation. Elocal were found to be within 0.7 to 1.1 ± 0.4 mm for TrueBeam and Trilogy, respectively. Comparing with film, an additional uncertainty of 0.7 mm was found with SRSMC. The delivery and analysis times were found to be 6 and 2 h for film and SRSMC, respectively.ConclusionsThe SRS MapCHECK agrees dosimetrically with the films within measurement uncertainties. However, film dosimetry shows superior sub‐millimeter localization resolving power for the MPPG 9a implementation.

A novel weight optimized dynamic conformal arcs with TrueBeam™ Linac for very small tumors (≤1 cc) with single isocenter of multiple brain metastases (2≤, ≥4) in stereotactic radiosurgery: A comparison with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

We evaluated whether improved increase delivery efficiency of weight optimized dynamic conformal arc (WO-DCA) therapy in comparison to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with single isocenter for SRS treatment of very small volume and multiple brain metastases (BMs). 20 patients having a less than 1 cc volume and 2≤, ≥4 of multiple BMs, redesigned for 20 Gy in 1 fraction using WO-DCA and VMAT techniques with double full coplanar and three partial noncoplanar arcs. Plan qualities were compared using tumor coverage, conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), V4Gy, V10Gy, and V12Gy volumes of brain, monitor units (MUs), and percent of quality assurance pass rate (QA%). Both techniques satisfied clinical requirements in coverage and CI. VMAT had a significantly higher MU and mean GI than WO-DCA (for MUs; 2330 vs. 1991; P < 0.001, and for GI; 4.72 vs. 3.39; P < 0.001). WO-DCA was found significantly lower V4Gy (171.11 vs. 232.80 cm3, P < 0.001), V10Gy (25.82 vs. 29.71 cm3, P < 0.05), and V12Gy (14.35 vs. 17.28 cm3, P < 0.05) volumes than VMAT. WO-DCA was associated with markedly increase QA pass rates for all plans (97.65% vs. 92.64%, P < 0.001). WO-DCA may be the first choice compared to the VMAT in reducing the dose in the brain and minimizing small-field dosimetric errors for very small SRS treatment of brain metastases in the range of ≤ 1 cc and 2≤, ≥4.

Single-isocenter multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: dosimetric evaluation of two automated treatment planning systems

PurposeAutomated treatment planning systems are available for linear accelerator (linac)-based single-isocenter multi-target (SIMT) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of brain metastases. In this study, we compared plan quality between Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Metastases (Elements MBM) software which utilizes dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) and Varian HyperArc (HA) software using a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique.Patients and methodsBetween July 2018 and April 2021, 36 consecutive patients ≥ 18 years old with 367 metastases who received SIMT SRS at UPMC Hillman Cancer San Pietro Hospital, Rome, were retrospectively evaluated. SRS plans were created using the commercial software Elements MBM SRS (Version 1.5 and 2.0). Median cumulative gross tumor volume (GTV) and planning tumor volume (PTV) were 1.33 cm3 and 3.42 cm3, respectively. All patients were replanned using HA automated software. Extracted dosimetric parameters included mean dose (Dmean) to the healthy brain, volumes of the healthy brain receiving more than 5, 8,10, and 12 Gy (V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy and V12Gy), and doses to hippocampi.ResultsBoth techniques resulted in high-quality treatment plans, although Element MBM DCAT plans performed significantly better than HA VMAT plans, especially in cases of more than 10 lesions). Median V12Gy was 13.6 (range, 1.87–45.9) cm3 for DCAT plans and 18.5 (2.2–62,3) cm3 for VMAT plans (p < 0.0001), respectively. Similarly, V10Gy, V8Gy, V5Gy (p < 0.0001) and median dose to the normal brain (p = 0.0001) were favorable for DCAT plans.ConclusionsBoth Elements MBM and HA systems were able to generate high-quality plans in patients with up to 25 brain metastases. DCAT plans performed better in terms of normal brain sparing, especially in patients with more than ten lesions and limited total tumor volume.

Dosimetric benefits of dynamic conformal arc therapy-combined with active breath-hold in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy.

To test the hypothesis that dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) in Monaco, compared with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), maintains plan quality with higher delivery efficiency for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and to investigate dosimetric benefits of DCAT with active breath-hold (DCAT+ABH), compared with free-breathing (DCAT+FB) for varying tumor sizes and motions. Fifty DCAT plans were used for lung SBRT. Randomly selected 17 DCAT plans were evaluated with respect to the retrospectively generated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. The maximum dose at 2 cm from planning target volume (PTV) in any direction (D2cm/Rx), the ratio of 50% prescription isodose volume to the PTV (R50%), conformity index (CI), the lung volume receiving ≥20 Gy (V20), and monitor unit (MU) were evaluated. A t-test was used to evaluate the difference of plan quality between DCAT and VMAT. Internal target volume (ITV)/integrated-gross target volume (GTV) attributed by intra-fraction motion and lung V20 were stratified for DCAT+ABH and DCAT+FB across varying GTVs. DCAT maintained plan quality (p = 0.154 for D2cm/Rx, p = 0.089 for R50%, p = 0.064 for CI, and p = 0.780 for lung V20) while reducing MUs up to 30% (p <0.001) from 2748 MU (VMAT) to 1868 MU (DCAT). DCAT+ABH, compared to DCAT+FB, reduced tumor motion, resulting in 19% volume reduction of PTV and 60% reduction in lung V20, on average. The difference in lung V20 between DCAT+ABH and DCAT+FB increased as the target size increased. The DCAT is a favorable approach compared with VMAT. These results support the utility of DCAT as a routine planning platform for lung SBRT, especially when utilized with respiratory motion management using the ABH.

A dosimetric comparison of 3D DCAT vs VMAT for palliative and early-stage liver lesions using eclipse TPS.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and 3D dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) are 2 methods proven useful for the clinical implementation of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung lesions however, similar comparisons of SBRT liver lesions are lacking. The purpose of this study was to determine if the conformity of dose, irradiated volume, and dose to organs at risk (OAR) are equivalent or improved with the use of DCAT as an alternative treatment method when compared to standard VMAT for SBRT delivery of palliative and early-stage liver lesions. Twenty patients with liver lesions sized 2.0 to 5.0 cm were selected for this study. Plans were created with both DCAT and VMAT techniques for each patient. Metrics evaluated included the mean heart, kidney, large bowel, small bowel, esophagus, and stomach doses, the lung volume receiving 20 Gy (V20), the volume of the normal liver receiving 15 Gy (V15), conformity index (CI), heterogeneity index (HI), and the irradiated volume or volume receiving 25 Gy (V25). The p-values for the mean dose to kidneys, small bowel, esophagus, and the lung V20 were greater than 0.05, and no statistical difference could be determined between DCAT and VMAT. The p-values for the mean heart, large bowel, stomach, and liver V15 were less than 0.05, indicating statistical significance and superiority of VMAT for minimizing dose to these organs, especially V15 of the liver. The DCAT technique produced CI greater than 1.0 for all patients proving superior coverage, while standard VMAT produced significantly improved V25 with p-values less than 0.0001, and consequently higher HI.

Comparison of the dosimetric planning efficiency of dynamic conformal arc (DCA) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung cancer using internal target volume (ITV)

Comparison of the dosimetric planning efficiency of dynamic conformal arc (DCA) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung cancer using internal target volume (ITV)

A Comparison of Robustness of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy for Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

A Comparison of Robustness of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy for Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

Survival Outcomes following LINAC based Stereotactic Radiosurgery/Stereotactic Radiotherapy (SRST) treatment of brain metastases: The Wessex Experience

Abstract Aims Since 2016, the University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (UHSFT) has been commissioned by NHS England to deliver SRST to brain metastases. At UHSFT, all referrals are discussed at the Wessex Neurosciences multidisciplinary team meeting. Referrals that satisfy the criteria set by NHS England (estimated prognosis greater than 6 months, absence or controlled extracranial disease or potentially controllable extracranial disease with a Karnofsky Performance Status &amp;gt;70%) will be offered SRST. This retrospective study was performed to assess overall survival rates of patients with brain metastases treated with SRST with further tumour subtype analysis. We also benchmarked our results with other SRST centres. Method Retrospective data collection was performed for all the patients who have been treated with SRST. Patients who received SRST to a single metastasis, multiple metastases and/or to the resection cavity between 01/01/2017 to 30/09/2019 were included in this study. All treatment was delivered using a LINAC based SRST platform. Prescription doses ranged from 13.5 Gy to 21 Gy in a single fraction, 21 to 24 Gy in 3 fractions and 25 Gy in 5 fractions. Patients are treated using a stereotactic thermoplastic immobilisation shell and dynamic conformal arc therapy with ExacTrac TM and Cone Beam CT imaging. Dates of death were obtained from the NHS Digital Spine and survival analysis using median overall survival was performed using the Kaplan Meier Method. Results 277 patients were treated between 01/01/17 and 30/9/2019. The median overall survival from the Kaplan Meier Method was shown to be 14.7 months and the 6-month overall survival was 71% for all patients. Sub-group analysis of individual tumour sites showed: lung (n=110) median OS 12.1 months, melanoma (n=58) median OS 26.4 months, breast (n=46) median OS not reached (67% still alive) but 18 months survival was 70%, renal (n=22) median OS 15.4 months and colorectal (n=19) median OS 6 months. “Other” tumour sites (n=22) included patients with ovarian, neuroendocrine, sarcoma, testis, oesophagus, unknown primary and gallbladder which were grouped together due to small patient numbers. 41% of patients treated were alive at the time of analysis. Conclusion Patients with brain metastases treated with SRST at UHFST have similar outcomes compared to other SRST centres. These patients have a median overall survival of 14.7 months. However, 29% of patients analysed did not survive more than 6 months. Further collection and analysis of the data might improve patient selection and their outcomes.