Evaluation of dose distribution differences from five algorithms implemented in three commercial treatment planning systems for lung SBRT.
ABSTRACT: Early stage lung cancer is increasingly being treated using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Several advanced treatment planning algorithms are now available in various commercial treatment planning systems. This work compares the dose distributions calculated for the same treatment plan using, five algorithms, in three different treatment planning systems. All plans were normalized to ensure the prescription dose covers 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). Dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was compared using near-minimum dose (D98%), near-maximum dose (D2%) and dose homogeneity, while dose fall-off was compared using D2cm and R50. Dose to the lung was compared using V5Gy, V20Gy and mean lung dose. Statistical analysis shows that dose distributions calculated using Eclipse's Acuros XB and RayStation's Monte Carlo were significantly different from the other dose distributions for the PTV dose parameters investigated. For lung dosimetric parameters, this difference persisted for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans but not for conformal arc plans. While normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) differences were significant for some of the algorithms for VMAT delivery approaches, they were not significantly different for any algorithm for conformal arc plans. All parameters investigated here were within 5% between all algorithms. The results show that, while some small dosimetric differences can be expected around the PTV, the dose distribution to the rest of the treatment area, especially the lungs, should not be clinically-relevant when switching between one of the five algorithms investigated.
Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aimed to contrast four different irradiation methods for pediatric medulloblastoma tumors in a dosimetric comparison regarding planning target volume (PTV) coverage and sparing of organs at risk (OARs). METHODS:In sum 24 treatment plans for 6 pediatric patients were realized. Besides the clinical standard of a 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) treatment plan taken as a reference, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans ("VMAT_AVD" vs. "noAVD" vs. "FullArc") were optimized and calculated for each patient. For the thoracic and abdominal region, the short partial-arc VMAT_AVD technique uses an arc setup with reduced arc-length by 100°, using posterior and lateral beam entries. The noAVD uses a half 180° (posterior to lateral directions) and the FullArc uses a full 360° arc setup arrangement. The prescription dose was set to 35.2 Gy. RESULTS:We identified a more conformal dose coverage for PTVs and a better sparing of OARs with used VMAT methods. For VMAT_AVD mean dose reductions in organs at risk can be realized, from 16 to 6.6 Gy, from 27.1 to 8.7 Gy and from 8.0 to 1.9 Gy for the heart, the thyroid and the gonads respectively, compared to the 3D-CRT treatment method. In addition we have found out a superiority of VMAT_AVD compared to the noAVD and FullArc trials with lower exposure to low-dose radiation to the lungs and breasts. CONCLUSIONS:With the short partial-arc VMAT_AVD technique, dose exposures to radiosensitive OARS like the heart, the thyroid or the gonads can be reduced and therefore, maybe the occurrence of late sequelae is less likely. Furthermore the PTV conformity is increased. The advantages of the VMAT_AVD have to be weighed against the potentially risks induced by an increased low dose exposure compared to the 3D-CRT method.
Project description:PURPOSE:Nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient radiation therapy (RT) is planned without consideration of spatial heterogeneity in lung function or tumor response. We assessed the dosimetric and clinical feasibility of functional lung avoidance and response-adaptive escalation (FLARE) RT to reduce dose to [99m Tc]MAA-SPECT/CT perfused lung while redistributing an escalated boost dose within [18 F]FDG-PET/CT-defined biological target volumes (BTV). METHODS:Eight stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC patients underwent FDG-PET/CT and MAA-SPECT/CT treatment planning scans. Perfused lung objectives were derived from scatter/collimator/attenuation-corrected MAA-SPECT uptake relative to ITV-subtracted lung to maintain < 20 Gy mean lung dose (MLD). Prescriptions included 60 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) and concomitant boost of 74 Gy mean to biological target volumes (BTV = GTV + PET gradient segmentation) scaled to each BTV voxel by relative FDG-PET SUV. Dose-painting-by-numbers prescriptions were integrated into commercial treatment planning systems via uptake threshold discretization. Dose constraints for lung, heart, cord, and esophagus were defined. FLARE RT plans were optimized with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) with 3%-3 mm robust optimization, and combination of PBS (avoidance) plus VMAT (escalation). The high boost dose region was evaluated within a standardized SUVpeak structure. FLARE RT plans were compared to reference VMAT plans. Linear regression between radiation dose to BTV and normalized FDG PET SUV at every voxel was conducted, from which Pearson linear correlation coefficients and regression slopes were extracted. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were estimated between radiation dose to lung and normalized SPECT uptake. Dosimetric differences between treatment modalities were evaluated by Friedman nonparametric paired test with multiple sampling correction. RESULTS:No unacceptable violations of PTV and normal tissue objectives were observed in 24 FLARE RT plans. Compared to reference VMAT plans, FLARE VMAT plans achieved a higher mean dose to BTV (73.7 Gy 98195. 61.3 Gy), higher mean dose to SUVpeak (89.7 Gy vs. 60.8 Gy), and lower mean dose to highly perfused lung (7.3 Gy vs. 14.9 Gy). These dosimetric gains came at the expense of higher mean heart dose (9.4 Gy vs. 5.8 Gy) and higher maximum cord dose (50.1 Gy vs. 44.6 Gy) relative to the reference VMAT plans. Between FLARE plans, FLARE VMAT achieved higher dose to the SUVpeak ROI than FLARE PBS (89.7 Gy vs. 79.2 Gy, P = 0.01), while FLARE PBS delivered lower dose to lung than FLARE VMAT (11.9 Gy vs. 15.6 Gy, P < 0.001). Voxelwise linear dose redistribution slope between BTV dose and FDG PET uptake was higher in magnitude for FLARE PBS + VMAT (0.36 Gy per %SUVmax ) compared to FLARE VMAT (0.27 Gy per %SUVmax ) or FLARE PBS alone (0.17 Gy per %SUVmax ). CONCLUSIONS:FLARE RT is clinically feasible with VMAT and PBS. A combination of PBS for functional lung avoidance and VMAT for FDG PET dose escalation balanced target and normal tissue objective tradeoffs. These results provide a technical platform for testing of FLARE RT safety and efficacy within a precision radiation oncology trial.
Project description:Purpose:Brachytherapy is essential for local treatment in cervical carcinoma, but some patients are not suitable for it. Presently, for these patients, the authors prefer a boost by using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The authors evaluated the dosimetric comparison of proton-modulated radiation therapy versus IMRT and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a boost to know whether protons can replace photons. Patients and Methods:Five patients who received external beam radiation therapy to the pelvis by IMRT were reviewed. Three different plans were made, including pencil beam scanning (PBS), IMRT, and VMAT. The prescribed planning target volume (PTV) was 20 Gy in 4 fractions. The dose to 95% PTV (D95%), the conformity index, and the homogeneity index were evaluated for PTV. The Dmax, D2cc, and Dmean were evaluated for organs at risk along with the integral dose of normal tissue and organs at risk. Results:The PTV coverage was optimal and homogeneous with modulated protons and photons. For PBS, coverage D95% was 20.01 ± 0.02 Gy (IMRT, 20.08 ± 0.06 Gy; VMAT, 20.1 ± 0.04 Gy). For the organs at risk, Dmax of the bladder for PBS was 21.05 ± 0.05 Gy (IMRT, 20.8 ± 0.21 Gy; VMAT, 21.65 ± 0.41 Gy) while the Dmax for the rectum for PBS was 21.04 ± 0.03 Gy (IMRT, 20.81 ± 0.12 Gy; VMAT, 21.66 ± 0.38 Gy). Integral dose to normal tissues in PBS was 14.17 ± 2.65 Gy (IMRT, 25.29 ± 6.35 Gy; VMAT, 25.24 ± 6.24 Gy). Conclusions:Compared with photons, modulated protons provide comparable conformal plans. However, PBS reduces the integral dose to critical structures significantly compared with IMRT and VMAT. Although PBS may be a better alternative for such cases, further research is required to substantiate such findings.
Project description:The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential benefits of conformal radiotherapy (CRT) combined with a sequential volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) boost in the treatment of upper thoracic esophageal cancer. Ten patients with upper thoracic esophageal cancer previously treated with CRT plus a sequential VMAT boost plan were replanned with CRT plus an off-cord CRT boost plan and a full course of VMAT plan. Dosimetric parameters were compared. Results indicated that CRT plus off-cord CRT boost was inferior in planning target volume (PTV) coverage, as indicated by the volume covered by 93% (p = 0.05) and 95% (p = 0.02) of the prescription dose. The full course VMAT plan was superior in conformal index (CI) and conformation number (CN), and produced the highest protection for the spinal cord. CRT plus a VMAT boost demonstrated significant advantages in decreasing the volume of the lung irradiated by a dose of 10 Gy (V10, p = 0.007), 13 Gy (V13, p = 0.003), and 20 Gy (V20, p = 0.001). The full course VMAT plan demonstrated the lowest volume of lung receiving a dose of 30 Gy. CRT plus a VMAT boost for upper thoracic esophageal cancer can improve the target coverage and reduce the volume of lung irradiated by an intermediate dose. This combination may be a promising treatment technique for patients with upper thoracic esophageal cancer.
Project description:This study aimed to compare the post-modified radical mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRMRT) for left-sided breast cancer utilizing 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy with field-in-field technique (3DCRT-FinF), 5-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (5F-IMRT) and 2- partial arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (2P-VMAT). We created the 3 different PMRMRT plans for each of the ten consecutive patients. We performed Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the Dunn's-type multiple comparisons to establish a hierarchy in terms of plan quality and dosimetric benefits. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Both 5F-IMRT and 2P-VMAT plans exhibited similar PTV coverage (V95%), hotspot areas (V110%) and conformity (all p > 0.05), and significantly higher PTV coverage compared with 3DCRT-FinF (both p < 0.001). In addition, 5F-IMRT plans provided significantly less heart and left lung radiation exposure than 2P-VMAT (all p < 0.05). The 3DCRT-FinF plans with accurately estimated CTV displacement exhibited enhanced target coverage but worse organs at risk (OARs) sparing compared with those plans with underestimated displacements. Our results indicate that 5F-IMRT has dosimetrical advantages compared with the other two techniques in PMRMRT for left-sided breast cancer given its optimal balance between PTV coverage and OAR sparing (especially heart sparing). Individually quantifying and minimizing CTV displacement can significantly improve dosage distribution.
Project description:Concurrent radiotherapy to the pelvis plus a prostate boost with long-term androgen deprivation is a standard of care for locally advanced prostate cancer. IMRT has the ability to deliver highly conformal dose to the target while lowering irradiation of critical organs around the prostate. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy is able to reduce treatment time, but its impact on organ sparing is still controversial when compared to static gantry IMRT. We compared the two techniques in simultaneous integrated boost plans. Ten patients with locally advanced prostate cancer were included. The planning target volume (PTV) 1 was defined as the pelvic lymph nodes, the prostate, and the seminal vesicles plus setup margins. The PTV2 consisted of the prostate with setup margins. The prescribed doses to PTV1 and PTV2 were 54 Gy in 37 fractions and 74 Gy in 37 fractions, respectively. We compared simultaneous integrated boost plans by means of either a seven coplanar static split fields IMRT, or a one-arc (RA1) and a two-arc (RA2) RapidArc planning. All three techniques allowed acceptable homogeneity and PTV coverage. Static IMRT enabled a better homogeneity for PTV2 than RapidArc techniques. Sliding window IMRT and VMAT permitted to maintain doses to OAR within acceptable levels with a low risk of side effects for each organ. VMAT plans resulted in a clinically and statistically significant reduction in doses to bladder (mean dose IMRT: 50.1 ± 4.6Gy vs. mean dose RA2: 47.1 ± 3.9 Gy, p = 0.037), rectum (mean dose IMRT: 44± 4.5 vs. mean dose RA2: 41.6 ± 5.5 Gy, p = 0.006), and small bowel (V30 IMRT: 76.47 ± 14.91% vs. V30 RA2: 47.49 ± 16.91%, p = 0.002). Doses to femoral heads were higher with VMAT but within accepted constraints. Our findings suggest that simultaneous integrated boost plans using VMAT and sliding window IMRT allow good OAR sparing while maintaining PTV coverage within acceptable levels.
Project description:The purpose of this work is to evaluate the volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) multicriteria optimization (MCO) algorithm clinically available in the RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) and its ability to reduce treatment planning time while providing high dosimetric plan quality. Nine patients with localized prostate cancer who were previously treated with 78 Gy in 39 fractions using VMAT plans and rayArc system based on the direct machine parameter optimization (DMPO) algorithm were selected and replanned using the VMAT-MCO system. First, the dosimetric quality of the plans was evaluated using multiple conformity metrics that account for target coverage and sparing of healthy tissue, used in our departmental clinical protocols. The conformity and homogeneity index, number of monitor units, and treatment planning time for both modalities were assessed. Next, the effects of the technical plan parameters, such as constraint leaf motion CLM (cm/°) and maximum arc delivery time T (s), on the accuracy of delivered dose were evaluated using quality assurance passing rates (QAs) measured using the Delta4 phantom from ScandiDos. For the dosimetric plan's quality analysis, the results show that the VMAT-MCO system provides plans comparable to the rayArc system with no statistical difference for V95% (p < 0.01), D1% (p < 0.01), CI (p < 0.01), and HI (p < 0.01) of the PTV, bladder (p < 0.01), and rectum (p < 0.01) constraints, except for the femoral heads and healthy tissues, for which a dose reduction was observed using MCO compared with rayArc (p < 0.01). The technical parameter study showed that a combination of CLM equal to 0.5 cm/degree and a maximum delivery time of 72 s allowed the accurate delivery of the VMAT-MCO plan on the Elekta Versa HD linear accelerator. Planning evaluation and dosimetric measurements showed that VMAT-MCO can be used clinically with the advantage of enhanced planning process efficiency by reducing the treatment planning time without impairing dosimetric quality.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSES:This study compared VMAT and IMRT plans for intact breast radiotherapy for left sided breast cancer and evaluated the irradiated dose of planning target volume and OARs, especially focusing on heart and coronary artery. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Eleven patients with left sided breast cancer whose breast was relatively smaller (the mean volumes is 296 cc) treated with breast-conserving surgery were prescribed radiotherapy of 50 Gy in 25 fractions using two or four-field step and shoot IMRT (2 or 4-F IMRT), and one or two-arc VMAT (1 or 2-arc VMAT). The 10 Gy electron boost to the tumor bed after delivery of 50 Gy was not included in the analysis. Multiple planning parameters for the PTV and the PRV-OARs were measured and analyzed. RESULTS:Treatment plans generated using VMAT had better PTV homogeneity than the IMRT plans. For the PRV-OARs, the 1-arc VMAT had significantly higher Dmean and V5 for left lung and heart, and showed worse Dmean for liver, esophagus, spinal cord, contralateral lung and breast. In contrast, the 2-arc VMAT and the 2-F or 4-F IMRT plans showed better results for the PRV-OARs than the 1-arc VMAT. However, for the heart and coronary artery, the 1-arc VMAT showed better V20 and V40 compared with the other plans. Moreover, the 2 F-IMRT had specially advantage on V5 and V20 for heart and V5 for coronary arteries, the 2-F IMRT also showed a greater MU and treatment times. Using the table of quality score to evaluate the plans, we found that 2-F IMRT had the highest scores of 13, followed by the 2-arc VMAT plan (10 points) and 1-arc VMAT plan (8 points), and finally the 4-F IMRT plan (6 points). Moreover, when a dose comparison for heart minus coronary artery was calculated, the V20 and V40 for the rest of heart in all plans were very small and closed, indicating the dose to the coronary artery contributed dramatically to the high dose volumes for the entire heart. CONCLUSIONS:Compared to other plans, the 2-F IMRT plan with fewer monitor units and shorter delivery time is an appropriate technique for left sided breast cancer, which achieved good PTV coverage and sparing of organs at risk besides for the heart and coronary artery.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Although there have been many attempts to increase the therapeutic ratio of radiotherapy for gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma (MALToma), only a few planning studies have reported the efficacy of the modern radiotherapy technique till date. Therefore, we performed the dosimetric comparison among 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans, using deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) or free-breathing (FB) techniques, to determine the most optimal plan for gastric MALToma.<h4>Methods</h4>We evaluated 9 patients with gastric MALToma for whom 3D-CRT, step-and-shoot IMRT (<sub>S</sub>IMRT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and tomotherapy plans with identical prescribed doses were generated using DIBH or FB computed tomography (CT). Planning target volume (PTV) coverage and non-target doses were calculated for each plan and compared with plan quality metric (PQM) scores.<h4>Results</h4>All 72 plans of 9 patients satisfied our dosimetric goals, and the IMRT plans and 3D-CRT plans had similarly good conformity index values with no differences related to respiratory movement. IMRT plans yielded significantly better doses to the organs-at-risk, and DIBH plans yielded significantly lower liver, heart, and lung D<sub>mean</sub> and spinal cord D<sub>max</sub> with smaller irradiated volumes compared to FB plans. For the mean PQM scores, VMAT-DIBH and <sub>S</sub>IMRT-DIBH yielded the best scores, whereas 3D plans provided reduced beam monitor unit values.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Our findings demonstrate that modern RT technologies (DIBH with VMAT or <sub>S</sub>IMRT) could potentially provide excellent target coverage for gastric MALToma while reducing doses to organs-at-risk. However, the relevance of the most optimal plan considering clinical outcomes should be confirmed further in a larger patient cohort.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The treatment of lung lesions with stereotactic body radiation therapy calls for highly conformal dose, which is evaluated by a number of metrics. Lung stereotactic body radiation therapy clinical trials constrain a plans gradient index. The purpose of this work is to describe the dependence of clinically achievable dose gradient on planning target volume. METHODS:Three hundred seventy-four lung stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans were retrospectively reviewed and selected for this study. The relationship between R50% and planning target volume size was observed and compared against the RTOG 0915 and 0813 constraints noting minor and major deviations. Then a least squares regression was used to determine the coefficients for a power functional form of the dependence of gradient measure (GM) on planning target volume size. RESULTS:Of the 317 peripheral lung SBRT plans, 142 exhibited no deviation, 135 exhibited a minor deviation, and 40 exhibited a major deviation according to the RTOG 0915 dosimetric. conformality and dose fall-off constraints. A plot of gradient measure versus planning target volume size for peripheral lesions, excluding RTOG 0915 major deviations, is fit with an power function of GM = 0.564 V0.215. CONCLUSIONS:Using the PTV size and GM relationship we have characterized, treatment plans with PTV < 85 cm3 can be evaluated subjectively to our previously plans, and given a percentile GM. This relationship and evaluation is useful for volumetric modulated arc therapy lung stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning and quality control.