Planning Target Volume Homogeneity Research Articles

Minimizing normal tissue low dose bath for left breast Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) using jaw offset.

With proper beam setup and optimization constraints in the treatment planning system, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) can improve target dose coverage and conformity while reducing doses to adjacent structures for whole breast radiation therapy. However, the low-dose bath effect on critical structures, especially the heart and the ipsilateral lung, remains a concern. In this study, we present a VMAT technique with the jaw offset VMAT (JO-VMAT) to reduce the leakage and scatter doses to critical structures for whole breast radiation therapy. The data of 10 left breast cancer patients were retrospectively used for this study. CT images were acquired on a CT scanner (GE, Discovery) with the deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) technique. The planning target volumes (PTVs) and the normal structures (the lungs, the heart, and the contralateral breast) were contoured on the DIBH scan. A 3D field-in-field plan (3D-FiF), a tangential VMAT (tVMAT) plan, and a JO-VMAT plan were created with the Eclipse treatment planning system. An arc treatment field with the x-jaw closed across the central axis creates a donut-shaped high-dose distribution and a cylinder-shaped low-dose volume along the central axis of gantry rotation. Applying this setup with proper multi-leaf collimator (MLC) modulation, the optimized plan potentially can provide sufficient target coverage and reduce unnecessary irradiation to critical structures. The JO-VMAT plans involve 5-6 tangential arcs (3 clockwise arcs and 2-3 counterclockwise arcs) with jaw offsets. The plans were optimized with objective functions specified to achieve PTV dose coverage and homogeneity; For organs at risk (OARs), objective functions were specified individually for each patient to accomplish the best achievable treatment plan. For tVMAT plans, optimization constraints were kept the same except that the jaw offset was removed from the initial beam setup. The dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters were generated for dosimetric evaluation of PTV and OARs. The D95% to the PTV was greater than the prescription dose of 42.56Gy for all the plans. With both VMAT techniques, the PTV conformity index (CI) was statistically improved from 0.62 (3D-FiF) to 0.83 for tVMAT and 0.84 for JO-VMAT plans. The difference in the homogeneity index (HI) was not significant. The Dmax to the heart was reduced from 12.15Gy for 3D-FiF to 8.26Gy for tVMAT and 7.20Gy for JO-VMAT plans. However, a low-dose bath effect was observed with tVMAT plans to all the critical structures including the lungs, the heart, and the contralateral breast. With JO-VMAT, the V5Gy and V2Gy of the heart were reduced by 32.7% and 15.4% compared to 3D-FiF plans. Significantly, the ipsilateral lung showed a reduction in mean dose (4.65-3.44Gy) and low dose parameters (23.4% reduction for V5Gy and 10.7% reduction for V2Gy) for JO-VMAT plans compared to the 3D-FiF plans. The V2Gy dose to the contralateral lung and breast was minimal with JO-VMAT techniques. A JO-VMAT technique was evaluated in this study and compared with 3D-FiF and tVMAT techniques. Our results showed that the JO-VMAT technique can achieve clinically comparable coverage and homogeneity and significantly improve dose conformity within PTV. Additionally, JO-VMAT eliminated the low-dose bath effect at all OARs evaluation metrics including the ipsilateral/contralateral lung, the heart, and the contralateral breast compared to 3D-FiF and tVMAT. This technique is feasible for the whole breast radiation therapy of left breast cancers.

Automatic dose prediction using deep learning and plan optimization with finite-element control for intensity modulated radiation therapy.

Automatic solutions for generating radiotherapy treatment plans using deep learning (DL) have been investigated by mimicking the voxel's dose. However, plan optimization using voxel-dose features has not been extensively studied. This study aims to investigate the efficiency of a direct optimization strategy with finite elements (FEs) after DL dose prediction for automatic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. A double-UNet DL model was adapted for 220 cervical cancer patients (200 for training and 20 for testing), who underwent IMRT between 2016 and 2020 at our clinic. The model inputs were computed tomography (CT) slices, organs at risk (OARs), and planning target volumes (PTVs), and the outputs were dose distributions of uniformly generated high-dose region-controlled plans. The FEs were discretized into equal intervals of the dose prediction value within the [OARs avoid PTV(O-P)] and [body avoids OARs & PTV(B-OP)] regions in the test cohort and used to define the objectives for IMRT plan optimization. The plans were optimized using a two-step process. In the beginning, the plans of two extra cases with and without low-dose region control were compared to pursue robust and optimal dose adjustment degree pattern of FEs. In the first step, the mean dose of O-P FEs were constrained to differing degrees according to the pattern. The further the FEs from the PTV, the tighter the constraints. In the second step, the mean dose of O-P FEs from first step were constrained again but weakly and the dose of the B-OP FEs from dose prediction and PTV were tightly regulated. The dosimetric parameters of the OARs and PTV were evaluated and compared using an interstep approach. In another 10 cases, the plans optimized via the aforementioned steps (method 1) were compared with those directly generated by the double-UNet dose prediction model trained by low and high region-controlled plans (method 2). The mean differences in dose metrics between the UNet-predicted dose and the clinical plans were: 0.47Gy for bladder D50% ; 0.62Gy for rectum D50% ; 0% for small intestine V30Gy ; 1% for small intestine V40Gy ; 4% for left femoral head V30Gy ; and 6% for right femoral head V30Gy . The reductions in mean dose (p<0.001) after FE-based optimization were: 4.0, 1.9, 2.8, 5.9, and 5.7Gy for the bladder, rectum, small intestine, left femoral head, and right femoral head, respectively, with flat PTV homogeneity and conformity. Method 1 plans produced lower mean doses than those of method 2 for the bladder (0.7Gy), rectum (1.0Gy), and small intestine (0.6Gy), while maintaining PTV homogeneity and conformity. FE-based direct optimization produced lower OAR doses and adequate PTV doses after DL prediction. This solution offers rapid and automatic plan optimization without manual adjustment, particularly in low-dose regions.

Comparative dosimetric and radiobiological assessment of left-sided whole breast and regional nodes with advanced radiotherapy techniques.

The aim of this study was to analyze the dosimetric and radiobiologic differences of the left-sided whole breast and regional nodes in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and helical tomotherapy (HT). The IMRT, VMAT, and HT plans in this study were generated for thirty-five left-sided breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). The planning target volume (PTV) included the whole breast and supraclavicular nodes. PTV coverage, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), dose to organs at risk (OARs), secondary cancer complication probability (SCCP), and excess absolute risk (EAR) were used to evaluate the plans. Compared to IMRT, the VMAT and HT plans resulted in higher PTV coverage and homogeneity. The VMAT and HT plans also delivered a lower mean dose to the ipsilateral lung (9.19±1.36 Gy, 9.48±1.17 Gy vs. 11.31±1.42 Gy) and heart (3.99±0.86 Gy, 4.48±0.62 Gy vs. 5.53±1.02 Gy) and reduced the V5Gy, V10Gy, V20Gy, V30Gy, and V40Gy of the ipsilateral lung and heart. The SCCP and EAR for the ipsilateral lung were reduced by 3.67%, 3.09% in VMAT, and 22.18%, 19.21% in HT, respectively. While were increased for the contralateral lung and breast. This study showed that VMAT plans provide a more homogeneous dose distribution to the PTV, minimizing exposure to ipsilateral structures and significantly reducing SCCP and EAR, and slightly increasing dose to contralateral structures. Overall, the VMAT plan can be considered a beneficial technique for BCS patients whose PTV includes the whole breast and regional nodes.

A Dosimetric Comparison of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Patients Treated with Post-Mastectomy Radiotherapy.

Radiotherapy continues to play an important role in the management of breast cancer. This study compared the dosimetric differences between the techniques of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in breast cancer patients who had radiotherapy after mastectomy. Forty post-mastectomy patients (19 right-sided breast and 21 left-sided breast) treated with the IMRT technique using 7-9 fields who were re-planned with VMAT using 2 coplanar arc on the Varian Vital beam linear accelerator between January, 2020 and August, 2021 were included in this study. The patients received 42 Gy in 15 fractions to the chest wall, lymph nodes and supraclavicular nodes. The dosimetric parameter for planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk (OAR) and the integral dose to the body were analysed. Student's t-test for two independent means was used to analyse the dosimetric differences between the plans. Clinical goals were achieved for both techniques. In terms of PTV coverage at 95% (IMRT: 712.17±233) vs (VMAT: 694.9±214) and the homogeneity index (IMRT: 0.075±0.04) vs (VMAT: 0.104±0.03), IMRT resulted in better dose coverage and homogeneity than VMAT. However, with the conformity index, no significant difference was seen. As regards the OARs, the mean doses, V5, V10, V20, V30, and V40 for the Ipsilateral-lung were lower in IMRT plans than in VMAT plans with a non-significant variation (p-values = 0.141, 0.416, 0.954, 0.443, and 1 respectively). Regarding the mean dose to the heart, low-dose volumes V5, V10, and high-dose volume V30 were significantly reduced in IMRT compared to VMAT. When comparing the dose to the contralateral breast, IMRT achieved a significantly lower mean dose than VMAT (2.9 vs 3.62, p = 0.0148). For MU, VMAT showed lower MU compared to IMRT with a non-significant difference. With IMRT, better PTV coverage, homogeneity and OAR sparing were observed. Additionally, VMAT resulted in a lower delivery time than IMRT. Overall, both techniques offered dosimetric qualities that were clinically acceptable.

Evaluation of a hybrid automatic planning solution for rectal cancer

BackgroundScript-based planning and knowledge-based planning are two kinds of automatic planning solutions. Hybrid automatic planning may integrate the advantages of both solutions and provide a more robust automatic planning solution in the clinic. In this study, we evaluated and compared a commercially available hybrid planning solution with manual planning and script-based planning.MethodsIn total, 51 rectal cancer patients in our institution were enrolled in this study. Each patient generated 7 plans: one clinically accepted manual plan ({plan}_{manual}), three script-based plans and three hybrid plans generated with the volumetric-modulated arc therapy technique and 3 different clinical goal settings: easy, moderate and hard ({plan}_{hybrid}^{easy}, {plan}_{hybrid}^{moderate}, {plan}_{hybrid}^{hard}, {plan}_{script}^{easy}, {plan}_{script}^{moderate} and {plan}_{script}^{hard}). Planning goals included planning target volume (PTV) Dmax, bladder Dmean and femur head Dmean. The PTV prescription was the same (50.00 Gy) for the 3 goal settings. The hard setting required a lower PTV Dmax and stricter organ at risk (OAR) dose, while the easy setting was the opposite. Plans were compared using dose metrics and plan quality metric (PQM) scores, including bladder D15 and D50, left and right femur head D25 and D40, PTV D2, D98, CI (conformity index) and HI (homogeneity index).ResultsCompared to manual planning, hybrid planning with all settings significantly reduced the OAR dose (p < 0.05, paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test) for all dose-volume indices, except D25 of the left femur head. For script-based planning, {plan}_{script}^{easy} significantly increased the OAR dose for the femur head and D2 and the PTV homogeneity index (p < 0.05, paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test). Meanwhile, the maximum dose of the PTV was largely increased with hard script-based planning (D2 = 56.06 ± 7.57 Gy). For all three settings, the comparison of PQM between hybrid planning and script-based planning showed significant differences, except for D25 of the left femur head and PTV D2. The total PQM showed that hybrid planning could provide a better and more robust plan quality than script-based planning.ConclusionsThe hybrid planning solution was manual-planning comparable for rectal cancer. Hybrid planning can provide a better and more robust plan quality than script-based planning.

Different functional lung-sparing strategies and radiotherapy techniques for patients with esophageal cancer.

BackgroundIntegration of 4D-CT ventilation function images into esophageal cancer radiation treatment planning aimed to assess dosimetric differences between different functional lung (FL) protection strategies and radiotherapy techniques.MethodsA total of 15 patients with esophageal cancer who had 4D-CT scans were included. Lung ventilation function images based on Jacobian values were obtained by deformation image registration and ventilation imaging algorithm. Several different plans were designed for each patient: clinical treatment planning (non-sparing planning), the same beam distribution to FL-sparing planning, three fixed-beams FL-sparing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning (5F-IMRT, 7F-IMRT, 9F-IMRT), and two FL-sparing volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning [1F-VMAT (1-Arc), 2F-VMAT (2-Arc)]. The dosimetric parameters of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were compared and focused on dosimetric differences in FL.ResultsThe FL-sparing planning compared with the non-sparing planning significantly decreased the FL-Dmean, V5-30 and Lungs-Dmean, V10-30 (Vx: volume of receiving ≥X Gy), although it slightly compromised PTV conformability and increased Heart-V40 (P< 0.05). The 5F-IMRT had the lowest PTV-conformability index (CI) but had a lower Lungs and Heart irradiation dose compared with those of the 7F-IMRT and 9F-IMRT (P< 0.05). The 2F-VMAT had higher PTV-homogeneity index (HI) and reduced irradiation dose to FL, Lungs, and Heart compared to those of the 1F-VMAT planning (P< 0.05). The 2F-VMAT had higher PTV conformability and homogeneity and decreased FL-Dmean, V5-20 and Lungs-Dmean, V5-10 but correspondingly increased spinal cord-Dmean compared with those of the 5F-IMRT planning (P< 0.05).ConclusionIn this study, 4D-CT ventilation function image-based FL-sparing planning for esophageal cancer can effectively reduce the dose of the FL. The 2F-VMAT planning is better than the 5F-IMRT planning in reducing the dose of FL.

Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique in left-sided breast cancer patients-comparative analysis of dose distribution and estimation of projected secondary cancer risk.

The purpose of this study was to compare two techniques of irradiation of left-sided breast cancer patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique (3D-CRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), in terms of dose distribution in the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs). The second aim of the study was estimation of the projected risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer for both radiotherapy techniques. For 25patients who underwent CT simulation in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH), three treatment plans were generated: one using athree-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique and two using volumetric modulated arc therapy. First VMAT-DIBH geometry consisted of three partial arcs (ARC-DIBH 3A) and second consisted of four partial arcs (ARC-DIBH 4A). Cumulative dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were used to compare dose distributions within the PTV and OARs (heart, left anterior descending coronary artery [LAD], ipsilateral and contralateral lung [IL, CL], and contralateral breast [CB]). Normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs) and organ equivalent doses (OEDs) were calculated using the differential DVHs. Excess absolute risks (EARs) for second cancers were estimated using Schneider's full mechanistic dose-response model. All plans fulfilled the criterium for PTV V95% ≥ 95%. The PTV coverage, homogeneity, and conformity indices were significantly better for VMAT-DIBH. VMAT showed asignificantly increased mean dose and V5Gy for all OARs, but reduced LAD Dmax by 15 Gy. For IL, CL, and CB, the 3D-CRT DIBH method achieved the lowest values of EAR: 28.38 per 10,000PYs, 2.55 per 10,000PYs, and 4.48 per 10,000PYs (p < 0.001), compared to 40.29 per 10,000PYs, 15.62 per 10,000PYs, and 23.44 per 10,000PYs for ARC-DIBH 3A plans and 41.12 per 10,000PYs, 15.59 per 10,000PYs, and 22.73 per 10,000PYs for ARC-DIBH 4A plans. Both techniques provided negligibly low NTCPs for all OARs. The study shows that VMAT-DIBH provides better OAR sparing against high doses. However, the large low-dose-bath (≤ 5 Gy) is still aconcern due to the fact that alarger volume of normal tissues exposed to lower doses may increase aradiation-induced risk of secondary cancer.

Dosimetric comparison of different intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques for whole-breast irradiation of right-breast cancer

PurposeThis study compared the dosimetric parameters of field-in-field forward intensity-modulated radiotherapy (FIF-IMRT) and fixed-field inversely optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy (FFIO-IMRT) for the whole-breast irradiation of patients undergoing right-breast lumpectomy. Material and methodsA total of 30 patients with pT1-2N0M0 right-breast invasive ductal carcinoma were enrolled in this study. Two different treatment plans, i.e., FIF-IMRT and FFIO-IMRT, were designed for each patient. The dosimetric parameters of the two treatment plans were compared including ipsilateral lung and heart, conformity index (CI), and the homogeneity index (HI) of the planning target volume (PTV). ResultsFixed-field inversely optimized intensity-modulated radiotherapy was found to significantly improve CI (83.302% vs. 60.146%) and HI (11.837% vs. 19.280%), and significantly reduced V25 (18.038% vs. 19.653%) and V30 (15.790% vs. 18.492%) of the ipsilateral lung. It also significantly increased V5 (69.791% vs. 32.615%) of the ipsilateral lung and V5 (61.579% vs. 3.829%), V10 (14.130% vs. 0.381%), V20 (1.843% vs. 0.051%), and Dmean (5.211Gy vs. 1.870Gy) of the heart. ConclusionRegardless of improving the conformity and homogeneity of PTV and reducing the ipsilateral lung irradiation volume at high doses, FFIO-IMRT significantly raised the ipsilateral lung irradiated volume at low doses, as well as the irradiation volume and mean radiation doses to the heart. This limits its use in patients with early-stage right breast cancer.

A New Proton Therapy Solution Provides Superior Cardiac Sparing Compared With Photon Therapy in Whole Lung Irradiation for Pediatric Tumor Patients.

ObjectiveWhole lung irradiation (WLI) plays a crucial role in local control in pediatric patients with lung metastases and improves patient survival. The intention of this research was to explore the advantage of cardiac sparing between photons and protons during WLI. We also propose a new solution for cardiac sparing with proton techniques.MethodsEleven patients with pediatric tumors and pulmonary metastasis treated with 12 Gy WLI (all received volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT)) in our institute between 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively selected. Each patient was replanned with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), helical tomotherapy (HT), and two intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy (IMPT) plans (IMPT-1 and IMPT-2). IMPT-1 considered the whole lung as the planning target volume (PTV), utilizing the anteroposterior technique (0/180°). IMPT-2 was a new proton solution that we proposed in this research. This approach considered the unilateral lung as the PTV, and 3 ipsilateral fields were designed for each lung. Then, IMPT-2 was generated by summing two unilateral lung plans. The primary objective was to obtain adequate coverage (95% of the prescription dose to the PTV) while maximally sparing the dose to the heart. The PTV coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and dose–volume statistics of the heart and substructures were assessed by means of the averages of each comparison parameter.ResultsAll treatment techniques achieved the target volume coverage required by clinical practice. HT yielded the best coverage and homogeneity for the target structure compared with other techniques. The CI from IMRT was excellent. For photon radiation therapy, the HT plan afforded superior dose sparing for the V5, V6, V7, V8, and Dmean of the heart and Dmean of the right ventricle (RV). IMRT displayed the most notable dose reductions in the V9, V10, V11, and V12 of the heart and Dmean of the right atrium (RA). The VMAT plan was the least effective on the heart and substructures. However, compared with photon radiation therapy, IMPT-1 did not show an advantage for heart protection. Interestingly, IMPT-2 provided significant superiority in cardiac sparing, including maximum dose sparing for the V5, V6, V7, V8, V9 and Dmean of the heart and Dmean of the RA, RV, left atrium (LA) and left ventricle (LV) compared to all other techniques.ConclusionsConsidering the complex anatomical relation between target volumes and organs at risk (OARs), IMPT can provide a dose advantage for organs located outside of the target area rather than within or surrounding the area. It is hoped that advances in proton therapy (PT) plan design will lead to further improvements in radiotherapy approaches and provide the best treatment choice for individual patients.

Dosimetric comparative study of 3DCRT, IMRT, VMAT, Ecomp, and Hybrid techniques for breast radiation therapy

PurposeTo assess and compare the dosimetric parameters obtained between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), three-dimensional field-in-field (3DFIF), 5-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT MF5), tangential IMRT (tIMRT), tangential volumetric modulated arc therapy (tVMAT), electronic tissue compensation (Ecomp), and Hybrid treatment plans.Material and MethodsThirty planning computed tomography datasets obtained from patients previously treated with whole breast radiation therapy (WBRT) were utilized in this study. Treatment plans were created for 3DCRT, 3DFIF, IMRT MF5, tIMRT, tVMAT, Ecomp, and Hybrid techniques using Eclipse Treatment Planning System (version 13.6) with a prescribed dose of 42.5 Gy in 16 fractions.ResultsTechniques with tangential beams produced statistically significantly better organs-at-risk (OARs) dosimetry (p < 0.001). Planning target volume Homogeneity Index (HI) was found to be significantly different among all techniques (p < 0.001), with Ecomp resulting in better HI (1.061 ± 0.029). Ecomp was also observed to require relatively shorter planning time (p < 0.001).ConclusionsTechniques using tangential fields arrangements produced improved OARs dosimetry. Of all the treatment planning techniques employed in this study, Ecomp was found to be relatively easy to plan and produce acceptable dosimetry for WBRT in a short time.

The use of aperture shape controller and convergence mode in radiotherapy treatment planning

AbstractAim:Studying the use of Aperture Shape Controller (ASC) and Convergence Mode (CM) in Eclipse (Varian Medical System) in terms of plan quality and complexity of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).Materials and methods:Forty VMAT plans were re-optimised for the prostate, prostate + lymph nodes, breast and head &amp; neck patients retrospectively, changing the ASC settings (off, moderate, very high) and CM settings (off, on and extended).Results:Using ‘on’ or ‘extended’ CM increased plan quality in terms of planning target volume homogeneity and low-dose spread to the organs at risk (OAR). ‘Extended’ CM increased the optimisation time 4·3-fold compared to ‘on’, and deteriorated the plan quality in several simple planning cases. ‘Moderate’ ASC decreased plan complexity with minor effect on plan quality compared to ‘off’, but ‘very high’ ASC had larger adverse dosimetric effects. However, the ASC decreased the plan complexity only if the CM was turned ‘on’.Findings:Using ‘on’ CM increases the plan quality but using ‘extended’ CM is not recommended. The ‘moderate’ ASC decreased complexity without significant adverse effects on plan quality, and even ‘very high’ ASC may be used when plan simplicity is prioritised. However, if CM is not used, the ASC should also be turned off.

Non-Coplanar Many-Isocenter Optimization for Radiotherapy on Robotic Arm Platform

4π non-coplanar radiotherapy significantly improves dosimetry, but its clinical implementation on the widely available C-arm gantry system is limited by the restricted non-colliding beam angles and the complex coordination of gantry and couch motion. Alternatively, a robotic arm platform is more favorable for the non-coplanar and non-isocentric treatment, but the conflict between field size and modulation resolution needs to be managed. This study investigates the dosimetry and delivery efficiency by creating many isocenters to achieve simultaneously large field-of-view (FOV) and high modulation resolution for robotic radiotherapy. The many-isocenter optimization framework includes a least-square dose fidelity objective, a total variation term for regularizing the fluence smoothness, and a group sparsity term for simultaneous beam orientation optimization (BOO) and isocenter selection. A minimal number of candidates isocenters were identified before the optimization for efficient target coverage. The proposed algorithm was evaluated on the intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment plans of 10 Head and Neck (H&N) cancer patients. Colliding beams excluded, high-resolution small-field non-isocentric 4π IMRT plans with 50cm source-to-isocenter distance (SID-50) were compared with low-resolution large-field isocentric plans with 100cm SID (SID-100). The table reports the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) statistics, and the corresponding Wilcoxon signed-rank test, showing significant difference (p<0.05) in PTV homogeneity, PTV Dmax, R50, Integral dose, and OAR Dmean and Dmax. With better target coverage, SID-50 substantially improved dose conformality and reduced OAR dose. R50 and integral dose were reduced by 5.3% and 9.6% respectively. The average reduction of [Dmean, Dmax] of SID-50 from SID-100 were [2.09 Gy, 1.19 Gy] for OAR overall, [3.05 Gy, 0.04 Gy] for parotid gland, [3.62 Gy, 5.19 Gy] for larynx, and [3.27 Gy, 1.10 Gy] for mandible. The estimated delivery time of 20-beam [SID-50, SID-100] plans were [19, 18] minutes and [14, 9] minutes, assuming 5 fractions and 30 fractions, respectively. With clinically acceptable delivery efficiency, the proposed non-coplanar many-isocenter optimization is dosimetrically favorable for treating large targets with high modulation resolution.Tabled 1Abstract 2832; Table 2832Wilcoxon signed rank test of PTV and OAR statistics of SID-100 (isocentric) and SID-50 (non-isocentric) for all 10 patients.Statisticsp-valueSigned rankNumber of samplesSID-100SID-50MeanSTDMeanSTDPTV Homogeneity0.00385290.9010.0450.9060.045PTV Dmin0.749202290.9740.0190.9750.016PTV Dmax<.001380291.1270.0621.1180.061R500.00653102.3810.2362.2540.256Integral Dose0.0025510139.37738.481126.0236.139OAR Dmean0.002551017.8223.72715.7293.273OAR Dmax0.002551034.5156.31733.3256.173 Open table in a new tab

Hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy for hypofractionated radiotherapy of breast cancer: a\xa0treatment planning study

PurposeThis study aims to evaluate the best possible practice using hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT) for hypofractionated radiation therapy of breast cancer. Different combinations of H‑VMAT—a combination of three-dimensional radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and VMAT—were analyzed regarding planning target volume (PTV), dose coverage, and exposure to organs at risk (OAR).MethodsPlanning computed tomography scans were acquired in deep-inspiration breath-hold. A total of 520 treatment plans were calculated and evaluated for 40 patients, comprising six different H‑VMAT plans and a 3D-CRT plan as reference. H‑VMAT plans consisted of two treatment plans including 3D-CRT and VMAT. During H‑VMAT planning, the use of hard wedge filters (HWF) and beam energies were varied. The reference plans were planned with mixed beam energies and the inclusion/omission of HWF.ResultsCompared to the reference treatment plans, all H‑VMAT plans showed consistently better PTV dose coverage, conformity, and homogeneity. Additionally, OAR protection was significantly improved with several H‑VMAT combinations (p < 0.05). The comparison of different H‑VMAT combinations showed that inclusion of HWF in the base plan had a negative impact on PTV dose coverage, conformity, and OAR exposure. It also increased the planned monitor units and beam-on time. Advantages of using lower beam energies (6-MV photons) in both the base plan and in the VMAT supplementary dose were observed.ConclusionThe H‑VMAT technique is an effective possibility for generating homogenous and conformal dose distributions. With the right choice of H‑VMAT combination, superior OAR protection is achieved compared to 3D-CRT.

A retrospective evaluation of mixed energy volumetric modulated arc therapy for anal cancers with lymph node involvement

Applying dual, or mixed photon energies during radiation therapy is a common practice in 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). Mixed photon energies are used to provide uniform dose coverage to a planning target volume (PTV) that ranges in depth from the skin surface. Though the application of mixed photon energies in 3D-CRT was once the convention for treating anal cancers with lymph node involvement (AC-LNI), the advantages offered by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) prove to be the optimal form of therapy for AC-LNI. Recently, multiple researchers have uncovered benefits in employing multiple photon energies in VMAT planning for prostate cancer. A retrospective study was completed to assess the impact of implementing mixed energy VMAT planning in comparison to conventional single energy VMAT planning for AC-LNI. Data from 20 patients with AC-LNI was collected to analyze the dosimetric effects of mixed energy VMAT treatments in terms of PTV conformity index, PTV homogeneity index, monitor unit usage, and organs at risk sparing. For each patient 3 treatment plans were created: a single energy 6 MV plan, a single energy 10 MV plan, and a mixed 6 MV and 10 MV energy plan. Analysis of the resulting dosimetric outcomes showed statistical significance. The current study concluded that mixed energy VMAT plans have some effect on treating AC-LNI when compared to single energy VMAT plans.

Framework for Evaluation of Automated Knowledge-Based Planning Systems Using Multiple Publicly Available Prostate Routines

PurposeTo establish a framework for the evaluation of knowledge-based planning routines that empowers new adopters to select systems that best match their clinical priorities. We demonstrate the power of this framework using 4 publicly available prostate routines. Methods and MaterialsFour publicly available prostate routines (CCMB, Miami, UCSD, WUSTL) were automatically applied across a 25-patient cohort using Eclipse scripting and a PTV prescription of V81 Gy = 95%. The institutions’ routines differed in contouring guidelines for planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk, beam arrangements, and optimization parameters. Model-estimated dose-volume histograms (DVHs) and deliverable postoptimization DVHs were extracted from plans to calculate average DVHs for each routine. Each routine’s average calculated DVH was subtracted from the average DVH for all plans and from the model’s average predicted DVH for comparison. DVH metrics for PTV (DMAX, D1%, D99%, DMIN), Rectum (DMAX, V70, V60, V40), Bladder (V75, V40), Femur (DMAX), and PenileBulb (DMEAN) were compared with the average using 2-sided paired t tests (Bonferroni-corrected P < .05). To control for contouring effects, the full analysis was conducted for 2 PTV margin schemas: 5 mm uniform and 3 mm or 7 mm posterior/else. ResultsCalculated plans generally aligned with their routine’s DVH estimations, except CCMB organ-at-risk Dmaxes. Dosimetric parameter differences were not significant, with the exception of PTV DMAX (Miami = 111.1% [P < .001]), PTV D99% (Miami = 97.4% [P = .05]; UCSD = 97.4% [P = .03]; CCMB = 98.5% [P = .001]), Rectum V40 (Miami = 19.1% [P < .001]; UCSD = 22.7% [P = .003]; CCMB = 53.5% [P < .001]), and Femur DMAX (WUSTL = 48.6% [P = .001.]; CCMB = 37.9% [P < .001]). Overall, UCSD and Miami had lower rectum doses, and CCMB and WUSTL had higher PTV homogeneity. Conclusions were unchanged with different PTV margin schemas. ConclusionsUsing publicly available knowledge-based planning routines spares clinicians substantial effort in developing new models. Our results allow clinicians to select the prostate routine that matches their clinical priorities, and our methodology sets the precedent for comparing routines for different treatment sites.

Clinical implementation of low-dose total body irradiation using topotherapy technique.

Background and PurposeThe topotherapy technique was recently suggested as a robust alternative to helical radiation delivery for total body irradiation (TBI). It allows to deliver a discrete number of beams with fixed gantry. A Topotherapy-based low-dose TBI technique was optimized and clinically implemented.Materials and methodsTBI delivery was split in two parts: the first treating from the head to half thigh and the second the remaining legs. An in-silico investigation aimed to optimize plan parameters was first carried out on four patients. For the upper plan, field width and pitch were fixed to 5 cm and 0.5: the combined impact of five modulation factor (MF) values and different field configurations (6/8/12 fields) was investigated. For the lower plan, two anterior/posterior beams (field width: 5 cm; pitch: 0.5; MF:1.5) were used. After assessing the optimal technique, set-up/quality assurance/image-guidance procedures were defined and the technique clinically implemented: 23 patients were treated up to now.ResultsThe best compromise between treatment time and planning target volume (PTV) coverage/homogeneity was found for MF = 1.5 and 8 fields. All clinical plans were automatically optimized using an “ad-hoc” plan template: excellent PTV coverage (PTV95%>98.5%) and homogeneity (median SD:4%) were found with a median beam-on time of 17/9 min for the upper/lower plan. All patients were successfully treated and transplanted.ConclusionsTBI delivered with the topotherapy approach robustly guarantees adequate coverage and dose homogeneity. Semi-automatic clinical plans can be quickly generated and efficiently delivered.

Dosimetric study for spine stereotactic body radiation therapy: magnetic resonance guided linear accelerator versus volumetric modulated arc therapy.

BackgroundStereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) given in 1-5 fractions is an effective treatment for vertebral metastases. Real-time magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) improves soft tissue contrast, which translates into accurate delivery of spine SBRT. Here we report on clinical implementation of MRgRT for spine SBRT, the quality of MRgRT plans compared to TrueBeam based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in the treatment of spine metastases and benefits of MRgRT MR scan.Patients and methodsTen metastatic lesions were included in this study for plan comparison. Lesions were spread across thoracic spine and lumbosacral spine. Three fraction spine SBRT plans: 27Gy to planning target volume (PTV) and 30Gy to gross tumor volume (GTV) were generated on the ViewRay MRIdian Linac system and compared to TrueBeamTM STx based VMAT plans. Plans were compared using metrics such as minimum dose, maximum dose, mean dose, ratio of the dose to 50% of the volume (R50), conformity index, homogeneity index and dose to the spinal cord.ResultsMRIdian plans achieved equivalent target coverage and spinal cord dose compared to VMAT plans. The maximum and minimum PTV doses and homogeneity index were equivalent for both planning systems. R50 was lower for MRIdian plans compared to VMAT plans, indicating a lower spread of intermediate doses with MRIdian system (5.16 vs. 6.11, p = 0.03).ConclusionsMRgRT can deliver high-quality spine SBRT plans comparable to TrueBeam volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans.

Dosimetric comparison of volumetric‐arc therapy versus sliding window intensity‐modulated radiotherapy in postoperative treatment for primary soft tissue sarcoma of the thigh

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has demonstrated improved local control in extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS) after limb-sparing surgery compared with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. Our purpose was to evaluate sliding-window IMRT (SW-IMRT) and volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) in planning target volume (PTV) coverage and dose to organs-at-risk (OAR). Sixteen patients undergoing postoperative RT for lower extremity STS were included. For each patient, one VMAT plan and one SW-IMRT plan were proposed. Both were evaluated using cumulative dose-volume histogram data for OAR and PTVs. Prescribed dose was 66Gy (2Gy/fraction) to PTV1 and 56Gy (1.69Gy/fraction) to PTV2. OARs contoured were femur, neurovascular bundle, minimum tissue corridor, normal tissue outside PTV2, joint and genitalia. T-Student test was performed. Eleven male (69%) and five female patients (31%) were analyzed. Mean age was 60 years. Both techniques showed optimal target coverage, conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI). VMAT PTV2 CI was 1.13 (mean)±0.08 (standard deviation) versus 1.19±0.10 SW-IMRT PTV2 CI (P<0.05). VMAT PTV1 HI was 0.09±0.01 versus 0.08±0.01 SW-IMRT PTV1 HI (P<0.05). Regarding OARs, VMAT delivered lower dose to femur, genitalia, normal tissue outside PTV2 and joints. SW-IMRT spared tissue corridor mean dose (10.4Gy±6.8Gy) versus (14.7±6.5Gy) VMAT (P<0.05). Both techniques achieved great conformity, homogeneity and coverage of PTV. VMAT produced lower dose to OARS and SW-IMRT was superior in sparing dose to normal-tissue-corridor, which could reduce risk of lymphedema.

Dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy for anal cancer

AbstractAim:Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), an extension of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), employs modifications in gantry rotation speed, machine dose rate and multi-leaf collimator motion to deliver a three-dimensional dose distribution. This study compared VMAT to IMRT for patients with anal carcinoma.Materials and Methods:Sixteen patients previously treated with IMRT were retrospectively selected. Each patient received a total dose of 57·6–63·0 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. A single- or double-isocenter multi-arc VMAT treatment plan was generated using Eclipse RapidArc system with the same computed tomography image sets and optimisation constraints used for IMRT. Dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs), and monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOTs) were used for comparison. Results:IMRT and VMAT plans showed insignificant differences in PTV homogeneity and conformity and sparing hips and bowel. VMAT required fewer mean MU and shorter BOT per plan (1,597 MU, 2·66 min) compared to IMRT (2,571 MU, 4·29 min) with p &lt; 0·0001. Conclusions:Fewer MU and shorter BOT for VMAT may decrease the damage from secondary radiation and treatment delivery uncertainty due to intra-fraction tumour motion, leading to higher machine throughput and improving patient comfort, with less treatment time.

Dose optimization and endorectal balloon for internal pudendal arteries sparing in prostate SBRT

PurposeVessel-sparing radiotherapy has shown promising results in preserving erectile function (EF). Using an endorectal balloon (ERB) may help to reduce the dose to the internal pudendal arteries (IPA) by pushing the prostate forward. We tested this hypothesis and evaluated the limits of IPA dose optimization in prostate cancer patients simulated with and without ERB. Materials and methodsTwelve patients with localized disease were simulated both with and without ERB. IPA were delineated on every CT after MRI registration. Planning target volumes (PTV) were planned to receive 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions with a VMAT technique. Twenty-four initial plans were generated using a knowledge-based planning software without any specific constraints for IPA. Additional stepwise optimization was performed until stabilization of the IPA dose or trespassing of PTV homogeneity limits. ResultsWithout optimization, the median mean IPA dose (Dmean) was lower with ERB than without (10.5 vs. 12.8 Gy, p = 0.023). After optimization, the IPA Dmean dropped significantly (from 11.1 to 4.8 Gy) without impairing the PTV dose homogeneity and the organs at risk dose constraints. The comparison of the best-optimized plans with and without ERB showed an optimal sparing of IPA using ERB (28% mean dose reduction, p = 0.006; median Dmean of 4.1 Gy vs. 5.7 Gy with and without ERB, respectively). ConclusionIPA dose sparing is feasible without compromising dose prescription and constraints. ERB significantly reduced the dose on IPA compared to plans generated without ERB. As no specific constraints are available for vessel-sparing SBRT, optimal IPA dose reduction should be recommended to maximize EF preservation.