Optimal combination of collimator angles for dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy planning in stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastases.

In planning the treatment of spinal metastases using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), the optimal blocking of the spinal cord to match the leaf travel can be achieved with a first-arc collimator angle of approximately 90°. We aim to clarify the optimal second-arc collimator angles when the first-arc collimator angle is fixed to 90° in dual-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). For this retrospective study, we considered 37 spinal segments with spinal metastases and created dual-arc VMAT plans. In the plans, 24 Gy in 2 fractions were prescribed, and the first-arc collimator angle was fixed to 90° while varying the second-arc collimator angle in increments of 15° from 0° to 90°. All the plans were normalized such that the planning organ-at-risk volume for the spinal cord D0.035 cc = 17 Gy and satisfied other dose constraints. D95% for the planning target volume (PTV), V100% for the overlap between the PTV and 10 mm expansion of the spinal cord, modified gradient index, monitor unit, and 3%/1 mm gamma passing rates were compared between different second-arc collimator angles using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bonferroni correction. PTV D95% and overlap V100% were the highest for a second-arc collimator angle of 45° and decreased as the angle approached either 0° or 90°. The maximum mean differences of PTV D95% and overlap V100% were -2.66% (90° vs 45°, p < 0.0024) and -5.49% (90° vs 45°, p < 0.0024), respectively. Moreover, the second-arc collimator angle of 45° was the least suitable in terms of the modified gradient index. The required monitor unit increased from the second-arc collimator angle of 15° to 45°, and the 3%/1 mm gamma passing rates reached over 95% for the evaluated second-arc collimator angles of 15°, 30°, and 45°. We found that in the dual-arc VMAT plan for spine SBRT, second-arc collimator angles other than 90° were suitable, and 45° was the optimal angle in terms of target coverage including the area around the spinal cord.

Automated planning of stereotactic spine re-irradiation using cumulative dose limits.

Background and Purpose: The lack of dedicated tools in commercial planning systems currently restricts efficient review and planning for re-irradiation. The aim of this study was to develop an automated re-irradiation planning framework based on cumulative doses. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 14 patients who received spine SBRT re-irradiation near a previously irradiated treatment site. A fully-automated workflow, DART (Dose Accumulation-based Re-irradiation Tool), was implemented within Eclipse by leveraging a combination of a dose accumulation script and a proprietary automated optimization algorithm. First, we converted the prior treatment dose into equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) and mapped it to the current anatomy, utilizing deformable image registration. Subsequently, the intersection of EQD2 isodose lines with relevant organs at risk defines a series of optimization structures. During plan optimization, the residual allowable dose at a specified tissue tolerance was treated as a hard constraint. Results: All DART plans met institutional physical and cumulative constraints and passed plan checks by qualified medical physicists. DART demonstrated significant improvements in target coverage over clinical plans, with an average increase in PTV D99% and V100% of 2.3 Gy [range -0.3-7.7 Gy] and 3.4 % [range -0.4 %-7.6 %] (p < 0.01, paired t-test), respectively. Moreover, high-dose spillage (>105 %) outside the PTV was reduced by up to 7 cm3. The homogeneity index for DART plans was improved by 19 % (p < 0.001). Conclusions: DART provides a powerful framework to achieve more tailored re-irradiation plans by accounting for dose distributions from the previous treatments. The superior plan quality could improve the therapeutic ratio for re-irradiation patients.

Toward quantitative intrafractional monitoring in paraspinal SBRT using a proprietary software application: clinical implementation and patient results.

Objective.We report on paraspinal motion and the clinical implementation of our proprietary software that leverages Varian's intrafraction motion review (IMR) capability for quantitative tracking of the spine during paraspinal SBRT. The work is based on our prior development and analysis on phantoms.Approach.To address complexities in patient anatomy, digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR's) that highlight only the spine or hardware were constructed as tracking reference. Moreover, a high-pass filter and first-pass coarse search were implemented to enhance registration accuracy and stability. For evaluation, 84 paraspinal SBRT patients with sites spanning across the entire vertebral column were enrolled with prescriptions ranging from 24 to 40 Gy in one to five fractions. Treatments were planned and delivered with 9 IMRT beams roughly equally distributed posteriorly. IMR was triggered every 200 or 500 MU for each beam. During treatment, the software grabbed the IMR image, registered it with the corresponding DRR, and displayed the motion result in near real-time on auto-pilot mode. Four independent experts completed offline manual registrations as ground truth for tracking accuracy evaluation.Main results.Our software detected ≥1.5 mm and ≥2 mm motions among 17.1% and 6.6% of 1371 patient images, respectively, in either lateral or longitudinal direction. In the validation set of 637 patient images, 91.9% of the tracking errors compared to manual registration fell within ±0.5 mm in either direction. Given a motion threshold of 2 mm, the software accomplished a 98.7% specificity and a 93.9% sensitivity in deciding whether to interrupt treatment for patient re-setup.Significance.Significant intrafractional motion exists in certain paraspinal SBRT patients, supporting the need for quantitative motion monitoring during treatment. Our improved software achieves high motion tracking accuracy clinically and provides reliable guidance for treatment intervention. It offers a practical solution to ensure accurate delivery of paraspinal SBRT on a conventional Linac platform.

Dosimetric verification of four dose calculation algorithms for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy.

The applications of Type B [anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and collapsed cone (CC)] and Type C [Acuros XB (AXB) and photon Monte Carlo (PMC)] dose calculation algorithms in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) were evaluated. Water- and bone-equivalent phantoms were combined to evaluate the percentage depth dose and dose profile. Subsequently, 48 consecutive patients with clinical spine SBRT plans were evaluated. All treatment plans were created using AXB in Eclipse. The prescription dose was 24 Gy in two fractions at a 10 MV FFF on TrueBeam. The doses were then recalculated with AAA, CC and PMC while maintaining the AXB-calculated monitor units and beam arrangement. The dose index values obtained using the four dose calculation algorithms were then compared. The AXB and PMC dose distributions agreed with the bone-equivalent phantom measurements (within ±2.0%); the AAA and CC values were higher than those in the bone-equivalent phantom region. For the spine SBRT plans, PMC, AAA and CC were overestimated compared with AXB in terms of the near minimum and maximum doses of the target and organ at risk, respectively; the mean dose difference was within 4.2%, which is equivalent with within 1 Gy. The phantom study showed that the results from AXB and PMC agreed with the measurements within ±2.0%. However, the mean dose difference ranged from 0.5 to 1 Gy in the spine SBRT planning study when the dose calculation algorithms changed. Users should incorporate a clinical introduction that includes an awareness of these differences.

The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms.

To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently imported into Eclipse (AAA and AcurosXB) and Raystation (CC) for dose evaluation with and without DO to the titanium implant. We renormalized all plans such that 90% of the tumor volume received the prescription dose and subsequently evaluated the following dose metrics: (1) the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (Dmax), dose to 99% (D99%) and 90% (D90%) of the tumor volume; (2) Dmax and volumetric metrics of the spinal cord. For the same algorithm, plans with and without DO had similar dose distributions. Differences in Dmax, D99% and D90% of the tumor were on average <2% with slightly larger variations up to 5.58% in Dmax using AcurosXB. Dmax of the spinal cord for plans calculated with DO increased but the differences were clinically insignificant for all algorithms (mean: 0.36% ± 0.7%). Comparing to the clinical plans, the relative differences for all algorithms had an average of 1.73% (-10.36%-13.21%) for the tumor metrics and -0.93% (-9.87%-10.95%) for Dmax of the spinal cord. A few cases with small tumor and spinal cord volumes, dose differences of >10% in both D99% and Dmax of the tumor, and Dmax of the spinal cord were observed. For all algorithms, the presence of titanium implants in the spine for most patients had minimal impact on dose distributions with and without DO. For the same plan calculated with different algorithms, larger differences in volumetric metrics of >10% could be observed, impacted by dose gradient at the plan normalization volume, tumor volumes, plan complexity, and partial voxel volume interpolation.

Incidence and Prognostic Factors of Painful Vertebral Compression Fracture Caused by Spine Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy.

Most studies of vertebral compression fractures (VCF) caused by stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) do not discuss the symptoms of this complication. In this paper, we aimed to determine the rate and prognostic factors of painful VCF caused by SBRT for spinal metastases. Spinal segments with VCF in patients treated with spine SBRT between 2013 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary endpoint was the rate of painful VCF (grades 2-3). Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated as prognosticators. In total, 779 spinal segments in 391 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up after SBRT was 18 (range: 1-107) months. Sixty iatrogenic VCFs (7.7%) were identified. The rate of painful VCF was 2.4% (19/779). Eight (1.0%) VCFs required surgery for internal fixation or spinal canal decompression. The painful VCF rate was significantly higher in patients with no posterolateral tumor involvement than in those with bilateral or unilateral involvement (50% vs. 23%; p = 0.042); it was also higher in patients with spine without fixation than in those with fixation (44% vs. 0%; p < 0.001). Painful VCFs were confirmed in only 2.4% of all the irradiated spinal segments. The absence of posterolateral tumor involvement and no fixation was significantly associated with painful VCF.

Quantification of six-degree-of-freedom motion during beam delivery in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy using intra-irradiation cone-beam computed tomography imaging technique.

PURPOSE: Quantifying intra-fractional six-degree-of-freedom (6DoF) residual errors or motion from approved patient setups is necessary for accurate beam delivery in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy. However, previously reported errors were not acquired during beam delivery. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the 6DoF residual errors and motions during arc beam delivery using a concurrent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging technique, intra-irradiation CBCT. METHODS: Consecutive 15 patients, 19 plans for various treatment sites, and 199 CBCT images were analyzed. Pre-irradiation CBCT was performed to verify shifts from the initial patient setup using the ExacTrac system. During beam delivery by two or three co-planar full-arc rotations, CBCT imaging was performed concurrently. Subsequently, an intra-irradiation CBCT image was reconstructed. Pre- and intra-irradiation CBCT images were rigidly registered to a planning CT image based on the bone to quantify 6DoF residual errors. RESULTS: 6DoF residual errors quantified using pre- and intra-irradiation CBCTs were within 2.0 mm/2.0°, except for one measurement. The mean elapsed time (mean ± standard deviation [min:sec]) after pre-irradiation CBCT to the end of the last arc beam delivery was 6:08 ± 1:25 and 7:54 ± 2:14 for the 2- and 3-arc plans, respectively. Root mean squares of residual errors for several directions showed significant differences; however, they were within 1.0 mm/1.0°. Time-dependent analysis revealed that the residual errors tended to increase with elapsed time. CONCLUSION: The errors represent the optimal intra-fractional error compared with those acquired using the pre-, inter-beam, and post-6DoF image guidance and can be acquired within a standard treatment timeslot.

Dosimetric analysis on computed tomography myelography based treatment planning in stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastases.

This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the influence of enhanced contrast on the CT myelography image of the spinal cord and/or cauda equina in addition to the target volume in spine SBRT treatment planning. In total, 19 patients who had previously undergone spine SBRT were randomly selected. The rigid image registration accuracy of CT myelography that aligned with the treatment planning CT was evaluated by calculating the normalized mutual information (NMI) and Pearson's correlation coefficient for the vertebral landmarks. At postregistration, the contrast-enhanced region of the CT myelography image was replaced with water-mass density, and the original treatment plan was recalculated on this image. For comparison, the dose was also recalculated on the contrast-enhanced CT myelography images. The NMI and Pearson's correlation coefficients for landmarks were 0.39 ± 0.12 and 0.97 ± 0.04, respectively. The mean D0.035cc of the spinal cord and/or cauda equina on the CT myelography image with the contrast-enhanced region replaced by water-mass density showed -0.37% ± 0.64% changes compared with that of the treatment planning CT. Conversely, the mean D0.035cc in contrast-enhanced CT myelography changed by -1.39% ± 0.51%. The percentage change in D98% for the planning target volume was confirmed to be small by replacing the contrast-enhanced region with water-mass density (p < 0.01). The dose calculation of the target volume, spinal cord, and/or cauda equina using the CT myelography image that replaced the contrast-enhanced region with water-mass density could be a more appropriate procedure with less dose calculation uncertainty.

Markerless motion tracking with simultaneous MV and kV imaging in spine SBRT treatment-a feasibility study.

Objective. Motion tracking with simultaneous MV-kV imaging has distinct advantages over single kV systems. This research is a feasibility study of utilizing this technique for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) through phantom and patient studies.Approach. A clinical spine SBRT plan was developed using 6xFFF beams and nine sliding-window IMRT fields. The plan was delivered to a chest phantom on a linear accelerator. Simultaneous MV-kV image pairs were acquired during beam delivery. KV images were triggered at predefined intervals, and synthetic MV images showing enlarged MLC apertures were created by combining multiple raw MV frames with corrections for scattering and intensity variation. Digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) templates were generated using high-resolution CBCT reconstructions (isotropic voxel size (0.243 mm)3) as the reference for 2D-2D matching. 3D shifts were calculated from triangulation of kV-to-DRR and MV-to-DRR registrations. To evaluate tracking accuracy, detected shifts were compared to known phantom shifts as introduced before treatment. The patient study included a T-spine patient and an L-spine patient. Patient datasets were retrospectively analyzed to demonstrate the performance in clinical settings.Main results. The treatment plan was delivered to the phantom in five scenarios: no shift, 2 mm shift in one of the longitudinal, lateral and vertical directions, and 2 mm shift in all the three directions. The calculated 3D shifts agreed well with the actual couch shifts, and overall, the uncertainty of 3D detection is estimated to be 0.3 mm. The patient study revealed that with clinical patient image quality, the calculated 3D motion agreed with the post-treatment cone beam CT. It is feasible to automate both kV-to-DRR and MV-to-DRR registrations using a mutual information-based method, and the difference from manual registration is generally less than 0.3 mm.Significance. The MV-kV imaging-based markerless motion tracking technique was validated through a feasibility study. It is a step forward toward effective motion tracking and accurate delivery for spinal SBRT.

Comparison of setup accuracy and efficiency between the Klarity system and BodyFIX system for spine stereotactic body radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) uses highly conformal dose distributions and sharp dose gradients to cover targets in proximity to the spinal cord or cauda equina, which requires precise patient positioning and immobilization to deliver safe treatments. AIMS: Given some limitations with the BodyFIX system in our practice, we sought to evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of the Klarity SBRT patient immobilization system in comparison to the BodyFIX system. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with 26 metastatic spinal lesions (78 fractions) were enrolled in this prospective observational study with one of two systems - BodyFIX (n = 11) or Klarity (n = 12). All patients were initially set up to external marks and positioned to match bony anatomy on ExacTrac images. Table corrections given by ExacTrac during setup and intrafractional monitoring and deviations from pre- and posttreatment CBCT images were analyzed. RESULTS: For initial setup accuracy, the Klarity system showed larger differences between initial skin mark alignment and the first bony alignment on ExacTrac than BodyFIX, especially in the vertical (mean [SD] of 5.7 mm [4.1 mm] for Klarity vs. 1.9 mm [1.7 mm] for BodyFIX, p-value < 0.01) and lateral (5.4 mm [5.1 mm] for Klarity vs. 3.2 mm [3.2 mm] for BodyFIX, p-value 0.02) directions. For set-up stability, no significant differences (all p-values > 0.05) were observed in the maximum magnitude of positional deviations between the two systems. For setup efficiency, Klarity system achieved desired bony alignment with similar number of setup images and similar setup time (14.4 min vs. 15.8 min, p-value = 0.41). For geometric uncertainty, systematic and random errors were found to be slightly less with Klarity than with BodyFIX based on an analytical calculation. CONCLUSION: With image-guided correction of initial alignment by external marks, the Klarity system can provide accurate and efficient patient immobilization. It can be a promising alternative to the BodyFIX system for spine SBRT while providing potential workflow benefits depending on one's practice environment.

Dosimetric comparison of robotic- and LINAC-based treatment of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy.

To determine which treatment technique and modality would offer better dosimetric results and be preferable for spinal stereotactic body therapy (SBRT) depending on the three different regions of the vertebrae. Linear accelerator (LINAC)- and CyberKnife (CK)-based treatment techniques were compared in terms of their dosimetric quality, treatment efficiency, and delivery accuracy. Thirty previously treated patients were included in this study. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques were used for LINAC-based treatment, whereas CK-based treatment plans were generated for two different collimator systems: fixed and multileaf collimator (MLC). The plans were compared based on spinal cord sparing, dose homogeneity, conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), monitor unit (MU), and beam-on time. The percentage volumes of V2Gy, V5Gy (representing volume low of the dose spillage region), V10Gy, and V20Gy (representing the volume of the high-dose spillage region) of the healthy tissue were analyzed. The CI and GI of the VMAT plans were better than those of the IMRT plans. For spinal cord sparing, the VMAT and MLC-based CK (CK-MLC) techniques were superior. The percentage of low-dose spillage regions was the lowest for IMRT and fixed cone-based CK (CK-FIX) plans. The percentage of the high-dose spillage region was the lowest for the VMAT and CK-MLC plans. In terms of treatment efficiency, the VMAT and CK-MLC plans were superior to the IMRT and CK-FIX plans. The VMAT technique lowered the MU and beam-on time values. The plan delivery accuracy of the VMAT and CK-FIX plans was better than that of the IMRT plans. VMAT is the best option for LINAC-based spinal SBRT. For CK-based spinal SBRT, MLC-based plans are preferred. If the clinic has both treatment modalities and the patient can tolerate long treatment times, CK-MLC-based treatment should be chosen because of its superiority in sparing the spinal cord and sharp dose fall-off.

Dosimetric analysis of MR-LINAC treatment plans for salvage spine SBRT re-irradiation.

PURPOSE: We investigated the feasibility of thoracic spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the Elekta Unity magnetic resonance-guided linear accelerator (MRL) in patients who received prior radiotherapy. We hypothesized that Monaco treatment plans can improve the gross tumor volume minimum dose (GTVmin) with spinal cord preservation and maintain consistent plan quality during daily adaptation. METHODS: Pinnacle clinical plans for 10 patients who underwent thoracic spine SBRT (after prior radiotherapy) were regenerated in the Monaco treatment planning system for the Elekta Unity MRL using 9 and 13 intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) beams. Monaco adapt-to-position (ATP) and adapt-to-shape (ATS) workflow plans were generated using magnetic resonance imaging with a simulated daily positional setup deviation, and these adaptive plans were compared with Monaco reference plans. Plan quality measures included target coverage, Paddick conformity index, gradient index, homogeneity index, spinal cord D0.01cc , esophagus D0.01cc , lung V10, and skin D0.01cc . RESULTS: GTVmin values from the Monaco 9-beam and 13-beam plans were significantly higher than those from Pinnacle plans (p < 0.01) with similar spinal cord dose. Spinal cord D0.01cc , esophagus D0.01cc , and lung V10 did not statistically differ among the three plans. The electron-return effect did not induce remarkable dose effects around the lungs or skin. While in the ATP workflow, a large increase in GTVmin was observed at the cost of a 10%-50% increase in spinal cord D0.01cc , in the ATS workflow, the spinal cord dose increase was maintained within 3% of the reference plan. CONCLUSION: These findings show that MRL plans for thoracic spine SBRT are safe and feasible, allowing tumor dose escalation with spinal cord preservation and consistent daily plan adaptation using the ATS workflow. Careful plan review of hot spots and lung dose is necessary for safe MRL-based treatment.

Deviation from consensus contouring guidelines predicts inferior local control after spine stereotactic body radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To analyze the impact of target delineation on local control (LC) after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for spine metastasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with de novo metastasis of the spine treated with SBRT, excluding those with prostate or hematologic malignancies, were retrospectively reviewed. Deviations from consensus contouring guidelines included incomplete coverage of involved vertebral compartments, omission of adjacent compartments, or unnecessary circumferential coverage. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed using death as a competing risk. RESULTS: 283 patients with 360 discrete lesions were included with a median follow up of 14.6 months (range 1.2-131.3). The prescription dose was 24-27 Gy in 2-3 fractions for the majority of lesions. Median survival after SBRT was 18.3 months (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 14.8-22.8). The 1 and 2-year local control (LC) rates were 81.1 % (95 % CI: 75.5-85.6 %) and 70.6 % (95 % CI: 63.2-76.8 %), respectively. In total, 60 deviations (16.7 %) from consensus contouring guidelines were identified. Deviation from guidelines was associated with inferior LC (1-year LC 63.0 % vs 85.5 %, p < 0.001). Gastrointestinal primary, epidural extension, and paraspinal extension were all associated with inferior LC on univariable analyses. After adjusting for confounding factors, deviation from guidelines was the strongest predictor of inferior LC (HR 3.52, 95 % CI: 2.11-5.86, p < 0.001). Among guideline-compliant treatments, progressions were mainly in field (61 %) and/or epidural (49 %), while marginal (42 %) and/or epidural progressions (58 %) were most common for those with deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to consensus contouring guidelines for spine SBRT is associated with superior LC and fewer marginal misses.

Clinical Evaluation of an Auto-Segmentation Tool for Spine SBRT Treatment.

Purpose: Spine SBRT target delineation is time-consuming due to the complex bone structure. Recently, Elements SmartBrush Spine (ESS) was developed by Brainlab to automatically generate a clinical target volume (CTV) based on gross tumor volume (GTV). The aim of this project is to evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of ESS auto-segmentation. Methods: Twenty spine SBRT patients with 21 target sites treated at our institution were used for this retrospective comparison study. Planning CT/MRI images and physician-drawn GTVs were inputs for ESS. ESS can automatically segment the vertebra, split the vertebra into 6 sectors, and generate a CTV based on the GTV location, according to the International Spine Radiosurgery Consortium (ISRC) Consensus guidelines. The auto-segmented CTV can be edited by including/excluding sectors of the vertebra, if necessary. The ESS-generated CTV contour was then compared to the clinically used CTV using qualitative and quantitative methods. The CTV contours were compared using visual assessment by the clinicians, relative volume differences (RVD), distance of center of mass (DCM), and three other common contour similarity measurements such as dice similarity coefficient (DICE), Hausdorff distance (HD), and 95% Hausdorff distance (HD95). Results: Qualitatively, the study showed that ESS can segment vertebra more accurately and consistently than humans at normal curvature conditions. The accuracy of CTV delineation can be improved significantly if the auto-segmentation is used as the first step. Conversely, ESS may mistakenly split or join different vertebrae when large curvatures in anatomy exist. In this study, human interactions were needed in 7 of 21 cases to generate the final CTVs by including/excluding sectors of the vertebra. In 90% of cases, the RVD were within ±15%. The RVD, DCM, DICE, HD, and HD95 for the 21 cases were 3% ± 12%, 1.9 ± 1.5 mm, 0.86 ± 0.06, 13.34 ± 7.47 mm, and 4.67 ± 2.21 mm, respectively. Conclusion: ESS can auto-segment a CTV quickly and accurately and has a good agreement with clinically used CTV. Inter-person variation and contouring time can be reduced with ESS. Physician editing is needed for some occasions. Our study supports the idea of using ESS as the first step for spine SBRT target delineation to improve the contouring consistency as well as to reduce the contouring time.

A dosimetric comparative analysis of Brainlab elements and Eclipse RapidArc for spine SBRT treatment planning.

Purpose. This is a dosimetric study comparing stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans of spine tumors using Brainlab Elements Spine planning module against Eclipse RapidArc plans. Dose conformity, dose gradient, dose fall-off, and patient-specific quality assurance (QA) metrics were evaluated. Methods:Twenty patients were immobilized in supine position using half Vac-Lok. A prescription dose of 16 Gy in a single fraction was planned for Varian TrueBeam. Conformal arc plans were generated with Pencil beam (PB), MonteCarlo (MC) in Elements, and RapidArc with Acuros XB algorithm in Eclipse using identical treatment geometry.Results. Eclipse, Elements PB, and Elements MC generated dosimetrically conformal plans having Inverse Paddick Conformity Index (IPCI) <1.3. All plans satisfied the dose constraints to target and OARs. Elements PB had a sharper gradient than Elements MC with average GI of 3.67(95% CI: 3.52-3.82) and 4.06 (95% CI: 3.93-4.20) respectively. Eclipse plans were more homogeneous with mean HI = 1.22 (95% CI: 1.20-1.23) that is lower than others. Average maximum clinical target volume (CTV) doses were higher in Elements MC with 22.31 Gy (95% CI: 21.87-22.74), while PB plans have 21.15 Gy (95% CI: 20.36-21.96), respectively. Elements MC and PB plans had lower average dose to 0.35 c.c. of spinal cord (D0.35cc) of 7.60 Gy (95% CI: 7.18-8.02) and 8.42 Gy (95% CI: 7.83-9.01). All plans had >95% points passing the gamma QA criteria at 3%/2 mm.Conclusion. All treatment plans achieved clinically acceptable target coverage >95% and meet spinal cord dose limits. Smart optimization in Brainlab Elements spine module produced dosimetrically superior plans by better spinal cord sparing.

Double-vertebral segment SBRT via novel ring-mounted Halcyon Linac: Plan quality, delivery efficiency and accuracy.

To evaluate the plan quality, treatment delivery efficiency, and accuracy of single-isocenter/multi-target (SIMT) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) of double-vertebral segments stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) on Halcyon ring delivery system (RDS). In-house multi-target end-to-end phantom testing and independent dose verification using the MD Anderson's single-isocenter/multi-target (lung/spine targets) thorax phantom were completed. Six previously treated patients with 2-vertebral segments on thoracic and/or lumber spine were replanned on Halcyon RDS with 6MV-FFF beam using a single-isocenter placed between the vertebral segments. Three full VMAT arcs with 0° and ±10° collimator angles and advanced Acuros-based dose engine for heterogeneity corrections were used. Prescription was 35 Gy in 5 fractions to each vertebral-segment, simultaneously. For comparison, Halcyon VMAT-SBRT plans were retrospectively created on SBRT-dedicated Truebeam with a 6MV-FFF beam using identical planning geometry and optimization objectives. Target coverage, conformity index (CI), heterogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), dose to 2-cm away from each target (D2-cm), and dose to adjacent organs-at-risk (OAR) were evaluated per NRG-BR002 protocol. Treatment delivery parameters were evaluated for both plans. In-house phantom measurements showed acceptable spatial accuracy (< 1mm within 5-cm from the isocenter) of conebeam CT-guided Halcyon SBRT treatments. The MD Anderson phantom irradiation credentialing results met IROC requirements for protocol patients. Mean isocenter-to-tumor center distance was 3.3 ± 0.6-cm (range 2.4 to 4.3-cm). Mean combined PTV was 57.3 ± 31.3 cc (range 20.1 to 99.9 cc). Both Halcyon and Truebeam SIMT-VMAT plans met NRG-BR002 compliance criteria and show similar CI, HI, GI, D2-cm. Maximal and volumetric doses to adjacent OAR including dose to partial spinal cord were lower with Halcyon RDS. Average total monitor units, modulation, and overall treatment time were lower with Halcyon plans by 130 MU, 0.2, 3.8 min, respectively, with similar beam-on time. Average pre-treatment patient-specific portal-dosimetry QA results on Halcyon showed a high pass rate of 99.6%, compared to SBRT-dedicated Truebeam pass rate of 96.8%, for 2%/2 mm clinical gamma passing criteria, suggesting more accurate treatment delivery on Halcyon RDS. SBRT treatment of double-vertebral segments via SIMT-VMAT plans on Halcyon for selected patients is feasible and dosimetrically superior to Truebeam Linac. Faster treatment delivery (<10 min) of double-vertebral segment SBRT on Halcyon could reduce patient intolerance due to severe back pain, potentially reduce intra-fraction motion errors, and improve patient throughput, and clinic workflow.

Evaluation of the dosimetric impact of changes in shoulder position on target coverage for spine SBRT to metastases in the lower cervical spine region.

For patients treated with SBRT for spinal metastases in the cervical area, a thermoplastic mask is the usual immobilization technique. This project investigates the impact of shoulder position variability on target coverage for such cases. Eight HN patients treated in a suite equipped with a CT-on-rails system (CTOR) were randomly chosen. Of these, three were treated with shoulder depressors. For each patient, their planning CT was used to contour spine targets at the C5, C6 and C7 levels for which two VMAT plans were developed to deliver 18 Gy to each target per the RTOG 0631 protocol. One plan used full arcs while the other used avoidance sectors around the lateral positions. For each patient, IGRT CTOR images were used to recalculate doses that would have been delivered from these plans. Target coverage and dose to the spinal cord were compared for four scenarios: full and partial arcs, with or without depressors. A Dunn test showed significant differences between groups with and without shoulder depressors, but not between those with full versus partial arcs. For most of the investigated cases, the coverage ended up being higher than planned due to the shoulder position being inferior at treatment compared to simulation. In some cases, this led to higher spinal cord doses than allowed per protocol. The results of this study confirm that, when treating lower cervical spine lesions with SBRT, special care should be taken to ensure that the shoulders are positioned as they were during planning CT acquisition.

Feasibility of spinal stereotactic body radiotherapy in Elekta Unity® MR-Linac.

The Elekta Unity MR-Linac (MRL) is expected to benefit spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) due to the improved soft tissue contrast available with onboard MR imaging. However, the irradiation geometry and beam configuration of the MRL deviates from the conventional linear accelerator (Linac). The purpose of the study was to investigate the feasibility of spine SBRT on the MRL. Treatment plans were generated for lumbar and thoracic spines. Target and spinal cord doses were measured with two cylindrical ion chambers inserted into an anthropomorphic spine phantom. Our study indicated that the Monaco treatment planning system (TPS) could generate clinical treatment plans for the MRL that were of comparable quality to the RayStation TPS with a conventional Linac. For both Linacs the planned dose within the gross tumor volume agreed with measurements within ±3%. For the spinal cord, while the measured doses from the TrueBeam were 1.8% higher for the lumbar spine plan and 6.9% higher for thoracic spine plan, the measured doses from MRL were 0.6% lower for the lumbar spine plan and 3.9% higher for the thoracic spine plan. In conclusion, the feasibility of spine SBRT in Elekta Unity MRL has been demonstrated, however, more effort is needed for such as optimizing the online plan adaptation method.

Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases.

Purpose: The Elements Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery treatment planning system uses automated volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy that can provide a highly conformal dose distribution to targets, which can provide superior sparing of the spinal cord. This study compares the dosimetric quality of Elements plans with the clinical plans of 20 spine stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SRS/SBRT) patients treated at our institution. Methods: Twenty spine SRS/SBRT patients who were clinically treated at our institution were replanned using the automated Elements planning workflow with prespecified templates. Elements automatically evaluates the size and shape of the target to determine if splitting the PTV into simplistic subvolumes, each treated by their own arc(s), would increase conformity and spinal cord sparing. The conformity index, gradient index, PTV D 5%, and maximum and mean cord dose were evaluated for the Elements and clinical plans. Treatment delivery efficiency was also analyzed by comparing the total number of monitor units and the modulation factor. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed on the statistics. Results: Elements split the PTV for 50% of cases, requiring four or six arcs. Overall, Elements plans were found to be superior to clinical plans in conformity index, gradient index, and maximum cord dose. The PTV D 5% and cord mean dose for the Elements plans trended higher and lower, respectively. The numbers of monitor units and modulation factor were also higher for Elements plans, although the differences were not significant. Conclusion: Automated Elements plans achieved superior conformity and cord dose sparing compared to clinical plans and PTV splitting successfully improved spinal cord sparing.

Technical Note: A custom-designed flexible MR coil array for spine radiotherapy treatment planning.

PURPOSE: To assess the performance and optimize the MR image quality when using a custom-built flexible radiofrequency (RF) spine coil array fitted between the immobilization device and the patient for spine radiotherapy treatment planning. METHODS: A 32 channel flexible custom-designed receive-only coil array has been developed for spine radiotherapy simulation for a 3 T Philips MR scanner. Coil signal-to-noise performance and interactions with standard vendor hardware were assessed. In four volunteers, immobilization molds were created with a dummy version of the array within the mold, and subjects were scanned using the custom array in the mold. Phantoms and normal volunteers were scanned with both the custom spine coil array and the vendor's FDA-approved in-table posterior coil array to compare performance. RESULTS: The superior-inferior field of view for the custom spine array was ~30 cm encompassing at least 10 vertebrae. A noise correlation matrix showed at least 25 dB isolation between all coil elements. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) calculated on a phantom scan at the depth of the spinal cord was a factor of 3 higher with the form-fit spine array as compared to the vendor's posterior coil array. The body coil B1 transmit map was equivalent with and without the spine array in place demonstrating that the elements are decoupled from the body coil. Volunteer imaging showed improved SNR as compared to the vendor's posterior coil array. The custom array permitted a high degree of acceleration making possible the acquisition of isotropic high-resolution 1.1 × 1.1 × 1.1 mm3 three-dimensional data set over a 30-cm section of the spine in less than 5 min. CONCLUSION: The custom-designed form-fitting flexible spine coil array provided enhanced SNR and increased acceleration compared to the vendor's posterior array. Future studies will assess MR-based spinal cord imaging with the custom coil in comparison to CT myelogram.