Terms Of Organs At Risk Sparing Research Articles

Assessment of Knowledge-Based Planning Model in Combination with Multi-Criteria Optimization in Head-and-Neck Cancers.

Aim:The aim of this study was to build knowledge-based planning model (KBPM) for head-and-neck (HN) cancers using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), optimized with multi-criteria optimization (MCO), and to evaluate KBPM plan quality with clinical plan (CP) using in-house developed Python script.Materials and Methods:Two hundred previously treated simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) HN VMAT plans (RapidArc®) were selected for creating KBPM. These plans were further optimized using MCO to strike right trade-off between target and organs at risk (OARs). The script was written using Python V3.7.1 to automatically extract and analyze treatment plan dosimetric parameters through Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface (ESAPI). Analyzed plans that met deliverable quality were modeled using regression-based KBPM framework. The trained model is validated with 35 cohorts of HN SIB patients.Results:MCO plans were able to improve the OAR sparing without compromising target coverage compared to user-optimized CPs except for increased heterogeneity. With MCO, spinal cord dose D0.03cc is reduced by 3.2 Gy ± 1.8 Gy, parotid mean dose by 2 Gy ± 1.7 Gy compared to CPs, respectively. MCO-based KBPM plans were comparable to CP with improved sparing for left and right parotids by 11.5% and 7.8%, respectively.Conclusion:MCO-based KBPM plans were superior to user plans in terms of OAR sparing and user need to spend more time to meet the model-based plan outcomes. Created KBPM planning is simple and efficient to generate estimate for OAR sparing to guide entry and intermittent planners to improve their clinical planning skills with lesser planning time. Python ESAPI is a powerful tool to extract plan parameters and quickly evaluate either individual or a cohort of plans.

Dosimetric Quality of Online Adapted Pancreatic Cancer Treatment Plans on an MRI-Guided Radiation Therapy System

PurposeStereotactic magnetic resonance image–guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) is an emerging technique that shows promise in the treatment of pancreatic cancer and other abdominopelvic malignancies. However, it is unknown whether the time-limited nature of on-table adaptive planning may result in dosimetrically suboptimal plans. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively address that question through systemic retrospective replanning of treated on-table adaptive pancreatic cancer cases. Methods and MaterialsOf 74 consecutive adapted fractions, 30 were retrospectively replanned based on deficiencies in planning target volume (PTV) and gross tumor volume (GTV) coverage or doses to organs-at-risk (OARs) that exceeded ideal constraints. Retrospective plans were created by adjusting dose-volume objectives in an iterative fashion until deemed optimized. The goal of replanning was to improve PTV/GTV coverage while keeping the dose to gastrointestinal OARs the same or lower or to reduce OAR doses while keeping PTV coverage the same or higher. The global maximum dose was required to be maintained within 2% of that of the treated adaptive plan to eliminate it as a confounding factor. A threshold of 5% improvement in PTV coverage or 5% decrease in OAR dose was used to define a clinically significant improvement. ResultsOf the 30 replans, 7 obtained at least 5% PTV coverage improvement. The average increase in PTV coverage for these plans was 11%. No plans were clinically significantly improved in terms of OAR sparing. Changes in beam-on time did not show any correlation. Statistical analysis via a linear mixed-effects model with a nested random effect suggested that both GTV and PTV coverage were improved over SMART process plans by 0.91 cc (P = .02) and 2.03 cc (P < .001), respectively. ConclusionsDosimetric plan quality of at least 10% of SMART fractions may be improved through more extensive replanning than is currently performed on-table. Further work is needed to develop an automated replanning workflow to streamline the in-depth replanning process to better fit into an on-table adaptive workflow.

A novel inverse optimization based three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique in craniospinal irradiation

Our aim was to develop a novel inverse optimization-based three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (i3DCRT) technique for craniospinal irradiation. The imaging data of 20 patients with medulloblastoma were used retrospectively. The first group included 10 pediatric patients with supine position treated under anesthesia/sedation, and the second group included 10 young adult/adult patients treated with prone position. Three different treatment plans were created for each patient via i3DCRT, forward-planned three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (f3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques. A total dose of 36 Gy was prescribed in 20 fractions for all plans. The comparative evaluation was conducted by using the parameters of conformity-index, homogeneity-index, and doses to the target volumes and organs at risk (OARs). The plans created with i3DCRT technique achieved better conformity and homogeneity compared to f3DCRT. In terms of OARs sparing, we found pronounced dose reductions in esophagus and heart in i3DCRT compared to f3DCRT plans. i3DCRT technique also provided a well-conformed dose distribution not superior, but comparable, to IMRT without increase in the total monitor unit per fraction (MU/fx) with respect to f3DCRT. The average monitor unit per fraction (MU/fx) for i3DCRT, f3DCRT and IMRT plans were found as 379.3, 378.0 and 1051.7 MU for the first group and 577.4, 563.5 and 1368.7 MU for the second group, respectively. Novel i3DCRT technique solves the problems associated with field junctions and beam edge matching encountered in f3DCRT plans. Additionally, i3DCRT technique can create almost similar plans as with IMRT with lower total MU/fx.

Improving organ at risk sparing in oropharyngeal treatment planning by increasing target dose heterogeneity: A feasibility study

Target dose homogeneity has historically been a priority in radiotherapy treatment planning. However, in an era of more advanced modulated techniques, there is now greater flexibility in shaping dose distributions suggesting that allowing controlled target dose heterogeneity may consequently improve organ at risk (OAR) sparing. This study sought to determine the feasibility of allowing an increase in target dose heterogeneity in oropharyngeal VMAT plans, and to examine the dosimetric impact this has on target coverage and OARs such as the parotid glands, spinal cord, brainstem and mandible. Nineteen oropharyngeal patients' plans were created with homogeneous dose distributions specified in the London Cancer Head and Neck Radiotherapy Protocol. The upper dose constraint (UDC) objective of the primary planning target volumes (PTV) for each plan were increased in increments of 10% until a maximum of 150% of the prescribed dose was reached. These plans were dosimetrically compared to plans with a uniform dose distribution in terms of OAR sparing and target coverage. Minimal coverage was not compromised, with the largest median changes being a 0.81% decrease [98.6 to 97.8%] to the PTV_70Gy D98% and a 2.86% decrease [99.81 to 96.96%] to the PTV_54Gy D98% at a UDC of 150% of the prescription dose. An OAR sparing effect was observed for the parotid glands, spinal cord and oral cavity sub PTV. Mandible and brainstem Dmax values increased as the PTV UDC increased. Changes in brainstem dose were not statistically significant. All other differences were statistically significant for UDC's above 130%. Target coverage was not compromised as a result of increased target dose heterogeneity. The OAR sparing effect was promising for most organs, however further research with a larger dataset is necessary surrounding the effect on organs that overlap with the PTV.

Dosimetric comparison of different radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of Retinoblastoma

AbstractAim:This study aims to compare the dosimetric parameters among four different external beam radiotherapy techniques used for the treatment of retinoblastoma.Materials and methods:Computed tomography (CT) sets of five retinoblastoma patients who required radiotherapy to one globe were included. Four different plans were generated for each patient using three dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and VMAT using flattening filter free (VMAT-FFF) beam techniques. Plans were compared for target coverage and organs at risk (OARs) sparing.Results:The target coverage of planning target volume (PTV) for all the four modalities were clinically acceptable with a V95 of 95 ± 0%, 97·6 ± 1·87%, 99·3 ± 0·5% and 99·17 ± 0·45% for 3DCRT, IMRT, VMAT and VMAT-FFF respectively. The VMAT and IMRT plans had better target coverage than the 3DCRT plans (p = 0·001 and p = 0·07 respectively). IMRT and VMAT plans were also found superior to 3DCRT plans in terms of OAR sparing like brainstem, optic chiasm, brain (p &lt; 0·05). VMAT delivered significantly lower dose to the brainstem and contralateral optic nerve in comparison to IMRT. Use of VMAT-FFF beams did not show any benefit over VMAT in target coverage and OAR sparing.Conclusion:VMAT should be preferred over 3DCRT and IMRT for treatment of retinoblastoma owing to better target coverage and less dose to most of the OARs. However, IMRT and VMAT should be used with caution because of the increased low dose volumes to the OARs like contralateral lens and eyeball.

Clinical implementation in proton therapy of multi-field optimization by a hybrid method combining conventional PTV with robust optimization

To implement a robust multi-field optimization (MFO) technique compatible with the application of a Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm and to evaluate its robustness. Nine patients (three brain, five head-and-neck, one spine) underwent proton treatment generated by a novel robust MFO technique. A hybrid (hMFO) approach was implemented, planning dose coverage on isotropic PTV compensating for setup errors, whereas range calibration uncertainties are incorporated into PTV robust optimization process. hMFO was compared with single-field optimization (SFO) and full robust multi-field optimization (fMFO), both on the nominal plan and the worst-case scenarios assessed by robustness analysis. The SFO and the fMFO plans were normalized to hMFO on CTV to obtain iso-D95 coverage, and then the organs at risk (OARs) doses were compared. On the same OARs, in the normalized nominal plans the potential impact of variable relative biological effectiveness (RBE) was investigated. hMFO reduces the number of scenarios computed for robust optimization (from twenty-one in fMFO to three), making it practicable with the application of a MC algorithm. After normalizing on D95 CTV coverage, nominal hMFO plans were superior compared to SFO in terms of OARs sparing (p < 0.01), without significant differences compared to fMFO. The improvement in OAR sparing with hMFO with respect to SFO was preserved in worst-case scenarios (p < 0.01), confirming that hMFO is as robust as SFO to physical uncertainties, with no significant differences when compared to the worst case scenarios obtained by fMFO. The dose increase on OARs due to variable RBE was comparable to the increase due to physical uncertainties (i.e. 4–5 Gy(RBE)), but without significant differences between these techniques. hMFO allows improving plan quality with respect to SFO, with no significant differences with fMFO and without affecting robustness to setup, range and RBE uncertainties, making clinically feasible the application of MC-based robust optimization.

Evaluation of plan quality improvements in PlanIQ-guided Autoplanning.

Philips recently integrated PlanIQ with Autoplan® in Pinnacle3 TPS (V16.2). The objective of the present work is to quantitatively demonstrate how this integration improves the plan quality. Pinnacle3 Autoplan® is the tool that generates the treatment plans with clinically acceptable plan quality with less manual intervention. In the recent past, a new tool called PlanIQ (Sun Nuclear Corp.) was introduced for a priori estimation of the best possible sparing of an organ at risk (OAR) for a given patient anatomy. Philips has recently integrated PlanIQ tool with Autoplan® for a seamless and efficient planning workflow. We have performed this evaluation in Pinnacle3 TPS (V.16.2) for the VMAT treatment technique. All plans were created using Varian True beam machine with the dual arc technique. Basically, we created two sets of VMAT plans using 6MV photons. In the first set of VMAT plans (AP_RTOG), we used OAR goals from either RTOG guidelines to perform optimization using Autoplan®. Subsequently, we exported the same dataset to the PlanIQ system to perform feasibility analysis on the OAR goals. These newly obtained OAR goals from PlanIQ were used to generate the other set of plans (AP_PlanIQ plans). We compared the dosimetric results from these two sets of plans in five cases, such as brain, head & neck, lung, abdomen and prostate. We compared the dosimetric results for AP_RTOG and AP_PlanIQ plans. We used RTOG guidelines to evaluate the plans and observed that while both sets of plans were meeting the RTOG guidelines in terms of OAR sparing, the AP_PlanIQ plans were significantly better in terms of OAR sparing as compared to AP_RTOG plans without any compromise in the target coverage. The results indicate that, although Autoplan helps achieve the user-defined goals without much manual intervention, the plan quality (OAR sparing) can be significantly improved without taking many iterative steps when PlanIQ suggested clinical goals are used in the Autoplan-based optimization. At present, there are no published material available about the efficacy of the integration of PlanIQ with Autoplanning®. In the present work, our objective is to evaluate the improvements in plan quality resulting from this integration.

Direction modulated brachytherapy (DMBT) for treatment of cervical cancer: A planning study with 192 Ir, 60 Co, and 169 Yb HDR sources.

To evaluate plan quality of a novel MRI-compatible direction modulated brachytherapy (DMBT) tandem applicator using 192 Ir, 60 Co, and 169 Yb HDR brachytherapy sources, for various cervical cancer high-risk clinical target volumes (CTVHR ). The novel DMBT tandem applicator has six peripheral grooves of 1.3-mm diameter along a 5.4-mm thick nonmagnetic tungsten alloy rod. Monte Carlo (MC) simulations were used to benchmark the dosimetric parameters of the 192 Ir, 60 Co, and 169 Yb HDR sources in a water phantom against the literature data. 45 clinical cases that were treated using conventional tandem-and-ring applicators with 192 Ir source (192 Ir-T&R) were selected consecutively from intErnational MRI-guided BRAchytherapy in CErvical cancer (EMBRACE) trial. Then, for each clinical case, 3D dose distribution of each source inside the DMBT and conventional applicators were calculated and imported onto an in-house developed inverse planning optimization code to generate optimal plans. All plans generated by the DMBT tandem-and-ring (DMBT T&R) from all three sources were compared to the respective 192 Ir-T&R plans. For consistency, all plans were normalized to the same CTVHR D90 achieved in clinical plans. The D2cm3 for organs at risk (OAR) such as bladder, rectum, and sigmoid, and D90, D98, D10, V100, and V200 for CTVHR were calculated. In general, plan quality significantly improved when a conventional tandem (Con.T) is replaced with the DMBT tandem. The target coverage metrics were similar across 192 Ir-T&R and DMBT T&R plans with all three sources (P>0.093). 60 Co-DMBT T&R generated greater hot spots and less dose homogeneity in the target volumes compared with the 192 Ir- and 169 Yb-DMBT T&R plans. Mean OAR doses in the DMBT T&R plans were significantly smaller (P<0.0084) than the 192 Ir-T&R plans. Mean bladder D2cm3 was reduced by 4.07%, 4.15%, and 5.13%, for the 192 Ir-, 60 Co-, and 169 Yb-DMBT T&R plans respectively. Mean rectum (sigmoid) D2cm3 was reduced by 3.17% (3.63%), 2.57% (3.96%), and 4.65% (4.34%) for the 192 Ir-, 60 Co-, and 169 Yb-DMBT T&R plans respectively. The DMBT T&R plans with the 169 Yb source generally resulted in the greatest OAR sparing when the CTVHR were larger and irregular in shape, while for smaller and regularly shaped CTVHR (<30cm3 ), OAR sparing between the sources were comparable. The DMBT tandem provides a promising alternative to the Con.T design with significant improvement in the plan quality for various target volumes. The DMBT T&R plans generated with the three sources of varying energies generated superior plans compared to the conventional T&R applicators. Plans generated with the 169 Yb-DMBT T&R produced best results for larger and irregularly shaped CTVHR in terms of OAR sparing. Thus, this study suggests that the combination of the DMBT tandem applicator with varying energy sources can work synergistically to generate improved plans for cervical cancer brachytherapy.

Scanning Beam Spot Preservation for Head and Neck Proton Therapy: Machine, Universal, or 3D-Printed Patient-Related Range Shifter?

To investigate whether machine-related range shifter (MRS) should be replaced by universal proton range shifter (UPRS) or personalized 3D-printed patient specific range shifters (PSRS) to preserve the scanning beam spot size and dosimetric advantage of pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy for head and neck and brain (HNB) patients. In PBS proton therapy, it is critical to maintain the smallest possible spot size to achieve the best organs at risk (OARs) sparing and dose conformality to targets for HNB patient. The spot properties are influenced by range shifter material, dimensions and air gap to patient. Currently MRS and UPRS or 3D-printed PSRS may be used in HNB proton therapy. Their ability to minimize the air gap from the range shifter to patient surface varies with MRS, UPRS and PSRS dimensions and location within the treatment geometry to avoid clearance issues. We analyzed the pros and cons of UPRS developed and routinely used in our clinic along with PSRS relative to MRS by means of in proton beam data measurements, analytical calculations (Differential Moliere formula and Eclipse TPS Analytical Algorithm) and Volumetric Imaging. The UPRS (consists of U-shape, thick couch top) can be consistently placed close to the patient (2-8 cm) and maintain the integrity of the proton spot size (within<0.5mm for a 2cm air gap) during HNB treatment, while the MRS often couldn’t be positioned close to the patient (air gap>15 cm), due to clearance issues. As a result, higher quality dose distributions were achieved (heterogeneity index D5/D95 ∼10% lower) by employing the in house developed UPRS which minimizes air gaps and preserves the spot size. A 3D-printed PSRS may create a virtually near zero air gap and fully preserve the integrity of the spot size. Improved dosimetric plan quality relative to MRS was observed in terms of OAR sparing and dose conformality to target when UPRS and 3D printed PSRS were used for HNB patients. However, for a non-removable UPRS (e.g. thick couch top), the quality of in- room volumetric imaging such as cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was found to be degraded due to high Z elements (Si and Al). The developments in precise 3D printing allowed the use of homogeneous materials with low Z elements for PSRS, minimizing the impact on CBCT image quality, while it could be also designed as a personalized patient immobilization system. UPRS was found to enhance dosimetry plan quality, but it could complicate the clinical workflow and hinder the value of IGRT when it includes high Z-material components, while the low Z 3D printed homogeneous PSRS may further enhance the dose distribution, minimally impact CBCT image quality and simplify clinical processes when acts as a personalized patient immobilization system for HNB patients.

Treatment Planning Evaluation of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) for Craniospinal Irradiation (CSI)

The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and accuracy of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) technique for CSI regarding to improving the PTV dose conformity and homogeneity with reducing the dose to organs at risk (OAR) with reporting the integral dose (ID) received by non-target tissue (NTT). A retrospective study of four male patients (n=4) had received crainiospinal irradiation by volumetric modulated arc therapy [VMAT] treatment planning technique [normalized such that 95% of PTV (planning target volume) received at least 95% of the prescribed dose which is 36Gy in 20 fractions]. Plans were assessed using PTV dose coverage as D95% (the dose received by 95% of PTV); D2% was taken as a reference for the maximum dose and D98% as a reference for the minimum dose, the mean doses of OARs, conformity index 95% (CI95%), and homogeneity index (HI), and non-target tissue integral doses (NTTID). VMAT CSI is able to produce satisfied dose distributions with high PTV conformity and homogeneity. The average D95% coverage of the PTV was 34Gy, with an average conformity index 95% (CI95%) of 0.99 and an average homogeneity index (HI) of 1.13. In terms of OAR sparing, VMAT technique allowed average mean doses acceptably low for all organs [lenses, eyes, liver, kidneys, lungs, and heart were 7.73Gy, 14.39Gy, 8.16Gy, 6.97Gy, 8.06Gy, and 8.18Gy respectively]. As regard the average integral dose for the non target tissue NTTID was 307.21Gy. CSI is considered one of the most challenging processes in radiotherapy. This study provides a practically useful planning method for VMAT treatment of CSI that shows its ability to achieve highly conformal and homogeneous treatment plans, while limiting the dose to the surrounding OARs. However, this technical advantage of this VMAT technique was associated with an increase in non target tissue integral dose that may be associated with increase in risk of secondary malignancies. This VMAT technique should therefore be tested with respect to late toxicity with further studies.

A Dosimetric Study of Using Fixed-Jaw Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for the Treatment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma with Cervical Lymph Node Metastasis.

PurposeTo study the dosimetric difference between fixed-jaw volumetric modulated radiotherapy (FJ-VMAT) and large-field volumetric modulated radiotherapy (LF-VMAT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) with cervical lymph node metastasis.MethodsComputed tomography (CT) datasets of 10 NPC patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy were used to generate LF-VMAT and FJ-VMAT plans in the Eclipse version 10.0 treatment planning system. These two kinds of plans were then compared with respect to planning-target-volume (PTV) coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), organ-at-risk sparing, monitor units (MUs) and treatment time (TT).ResultsThe FJ-VMAT plans provided lower D2% of PGTVnd (PTV of lymph nodes), PTV1 (high-risk PTV) and PTV2 (low-risk PTV) than did the LF-VMAT plans, whereas no significant differences were observed in PGTVnx (PTV of primary nasopharyngeal tumor). The FJ-VMAT plans provided lower doses delivered to the planning organ at risk (OAR) volumes (PRVs) of both brainstem and spinal cord, both parotid glands and normal tissue than did the LF-VMAT plans, whereas no significant differences were observed with respect to the oral cavity and larynx. The MUs of the FJ-VMAT plans (683 ± 87) were increased by 22% ± 12% compared with the LF-VMAT plans (559 ± 62). In terms of the TT, no significant difference was found between the two kinds of plans.ConclusionsFJ-VMAT was similar or slightly superior to LF-VMAT in terms of PTV coverage and was significantly superior in terms of OAR sparing, at the expense of increased MUs.

Feasibility of dominant intraprostatic lesion boosting using advanced photon-, proton- or brachytherapy

Background and purposeAdvancements in imaging and dose delivery enable boosting of the dominant intraprostatic lesions (DIL), while maintaining organs-at-risk (OAR) tolerances. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of DIL boosting for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT). Material and methodsDILs were defined on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and fused with planning CT for twelve patients. VMAT, IMPT and HDR-BT plans were created for each patient with an EQD2α/β DIL aimed at 111.6Gy, PTVinitialDpres was 80.9Gy (EBRT) with CTV D90%=81.9Gy (HDR-BT). Hard dose constraints were applied for OARs. ResultsHigher boost doses were achieved with IMPT compared to VMAT, keeping major OAR doses at similar levels. Patient averaged EQD2α/β D50% to DIL were 110.7, 114.2 and 150.1Gy(IsoE) for VMAT, IMPT and HDR-BT, respectively. Respective rectal wall Dmean were 30.5±5.0, 16.7±3.6, 9.5±2.5Gy(IsoE) and bladder wall Dmean were 21.0±5.5, 15.6±4.3 and 6.3±2.2Gy(IsoE). ConclusionsDIL boosting was found to be feasible with all investigated techniques. Although OAR doses were higher than for standard treatment approach, the risk levels were reasonably low. HDR-BT was superior to VMAT and IMPT, both in terms of OAR sparing and DIL boosting.

Comparative dosimetric analysis of IMRT and VMAT (RapidArc) in brain, head and neck, breast and prostate malignancies

Purpose: Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in the recent past has established itself as a gold standard for organs at risk (OAR) sparing, target coverage and dose conformity. With the advent of a rotational treatment technology such as volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), an inter-comparison is warranted to address the advantages and disadvantages of each technique. Methods: Twenty patients were selected retrospectively from our patient database. Sites included were brain, head and neck, chest wall, and prostate, with five patients for each site. For all the selected patients, both the IMRT and VMAT treatment plans were generated. Plan comparison was done in terms of OAR dose, dose homogeneity index (HI), dose conformity index (CI), target coverage, low isodose volumes, monitor units (MUs), and treatment time. Results: The VMAT showed better sparing of “parotids minus planning target volume (PTV)”, spinal cord and head of femur as compared to the IMRT. The lung V 40 for VMAT was lower, whereas the lung V 10 , contralateral lung mean dose, contralateral breast mean dose and mean body dose were lower with IMRT for chest wall cases. Both the VMAT and IMRT achieved comparable HI except for the brain site, where IMRT scored over VMAT. The CI achieved by the IMRT and VMAT were similar except for chest wall cases, whereas the VMAT achieved better dose conformity. The target coverage was comparable with both the plans. The VMAT clearly scored over IMRT in terms of average MUs (486 versus 812 respectively) and average treatment time (2.54 minutes versus 5.54 minutes) per treatment session. Conclusion: The VMAT (RapidArc) has a potential to generate treatment plans for various anatomical sites which are comparable with the corresponding IMRT plans in terms of OAR sparing and plan quality parameters. The VMAT significantly reduces treatment time as compared to the IMRT, thus VMAT can increase the throughput of a busy radiotherapy department.

SU-D-19A-06: The Effect of Beam Parameters On Very High-Energy Electron Radiotherapy: A Planning Study

Purpose: We evaluated the effect of very high-energy electron (VHEE) beam parameters on the planning of a lung cancer case by means of Monte Carlo simulations. Methods: We simulated VHEE radiotherapy plans using the EGSnrc/BEAMnrc-DOSXYZnrc code. We selected a lung cancer case that was treated with 6MV photon VMAT to be planned with VHEE. We studied the effect of beam energy (80 MeV, 100 MeV, and 120 MeV), number of equidistant beams (16 or 32), and beamlets sizes (3 mm, 5 mm or 7 mm) on PTV coverage, sparing of organs at risk (OARs) and dose conformity. Inverse-planning optimization was performed in a research version of RayStation (RaySearch Laboratories AB) using identical objective functions and constraints for all VHEE plans. Results: Similar PTV coverage and dose conformity was achieved by all the VHEE plans. The 100 MeV and 120 MeV VHEE plans were equivalent amongst them and were superior to the 80 MeV plan in terms of OARs sparing. The effect of using 16 or 32 equidistant beams was a mean difference in average dose of 2.4% (0%–7.7%) between the two plans. The use of 3 mm beamlet size systematically reduced the dose to all the OARs. Based on these results we selected the 100MeV-16beams-3mm-beamlet-size plan to compare it against VMAT. The selected VHEE plan was more conformal than VMAT and improved OAR sparing (heart and trachea received 125% and 177% lower dose, respectively) especially in the low-dose region. Conclusion: We determined the VHEE beam parameters that maximized the OAR dose sparing and dose conformity of the actually delivered VMAT plan of a lung cancer case. The selected parameters could be used for the planning of other treatment sites with similar size, shape, and location. For larger targets, a larger beamlet size might be used without significantly increasing the dose. B Palma: None. M Bazalova: None. B Hardemark: Employee, RaySearch Americas. E Hynning: Employee, RaySearch Americas. B Qu: None. B Loo Jr.: Research support, RaySearch, Varian. P Maxim: Research support, RaySearch, Varian.

Left-sided breast cancer irradiation using rotational and fixed-field radiotherapy

The 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) technique is the standard for breast cancer radiotherapy. During treatment planning, not only the coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) but also the minimization of the dose to critical structures, such as the lung, heart, and contralateral breast tissue, need to be considered. Because of the complexity and variations of patient anatomy, more advanced radiotherapy techniques are sometimes desired to better meet the planning goals. In this study, we evaluated external-beam radiation treatment techniques for left breast cancer using various delivery platforms: fixed-field including TomoDirect (TD), static intensity-modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT), and rotational radiotherapy including Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and tomotherapy helical (TH). A total of 10 patients with left-sided breast cancer who did or did not have positive lymph nodes and were previously treated with 3DCRT/sIMRT to the entire breast were selected, their treatment was planned with Monaco VMAT, TD, and TH. Dosimetric parameters including PTV coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, dose-volume histograms, and target minimum/maximum/mean doses were evaluated. It is found that for plans providing comparable PTV coverage, the Elekta VMAT plans were generally more inhomogeneous than the TH and TD plans. For the cases with regional node involvement, the average mean doses administered to the heart were 9.2 (± 5.2) and 8.8 (± 3.0)Gy in the VMAT and TH plans compared with 11.9 (± 6.4) and 11.8 (± 9.2)Gy for the 3DCRT and TD plans, respectively, with slightly higher doses given to the contralateral lung or breast or both. On average, the total monitor units for VMAT plans are 11.6% of those TH plans. Our studies have shown that VMAT and TH plans offer certain dosimetric advantages over fixed-field IMRT plans for advanced breast cancer requiring regional nodal treatment. However, for early-stage breast cancer fixed-field radiotherapy is potentially more beneficial in terms of OAR sparing.

Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Craniospinal Irradiation: Target Volume Considerations, Dose Constraints, and Competing Risks

To report the results of an analysis of dose received to tissues and organs outside the target volume, in the setting of spinal axis irradiation for the treatment of medulloblastoma, using three treatment techniques. Treatment plans (total dose, 23.4 Gy) for a standard two-dimensional (2D) technique, a three-dimensional (3D) technique using a 3D imaging-based target volume, and an intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) technique, were compared for 3 patients in terms of dose-volume statistics for target coverage, as well as organ at risk (OAR) and overall tissue sparing. Planning target volume coverage and dose homogeneity was superior for the IMRT plans for V(95%) (IMRT, 100%; 3D, 96%; 2D, 98%) and V(107%) (IMRT, 3%; 3D, 38%; 2D, 37%). In terms of OAR sparing, the IMRT plan was better for all organs and whole-body contour when comparing V(10Gy), V(15Gy), and V(20Gy). The 3D plan was superior for V(5Gy) and below. For the heart and liver in particular, the IMRT plans provided considerable sparing in terms of V(10Gy) and above. In terms of the integral dose, the IMRT plans were superior for liver (IMRT, 21.9 J; 3D, 28.6 J; 2D, 38.6 J) and heart (IMRT, 9 J; 3D, 14.1J; 2D, 19.4 J), the 3D plan for the body contour (IMRT, 349 J; 3D, 337 J; 2D, 555 J). Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is a valid treatment option for spinal axis irradiation. We have shown that IMRT results in sparing of organs at risk without a significant increase in integral dose.