[Comparison of planning quality and delivery efficiency between volumetric modulated arc therapy and dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma with more than 4 prescribed dose levels].

The aim of this study is to compare the planning quality and delivery efficiency between dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy (d-IMRT) and dual arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) systematically for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients with multi-prescribed dose levels, and to analyze the correlations between target volumes and plan qualities. A total of 20 patients of NPC with 4-5 prescribed dose levels to achieve simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) treated by sliding window d-IMRT in our department from 2014 to 2015 were re-planned with dual arc VMAT. All optimization objectives for each VMAT plan were as the same as the corresponding d-IMRT plan. The dose parameters for targets and organ at risk (OAR), the delivery time and monitor units (MU) in two sets of plans were compared respectively. The treatment accuracy was tested by three dimensional dose validation system. Finally, the correlations between the difference of planning quality and the volume of targets were discussed. The conform indexes (CIs) of planning target volumes (PTVs) in VMAT plans were obviously high than those in d-IMRT plans ( P < 0.05), but no significant correlations between the difference of CIs and the volume of targets were discovered ( P > 0.05). The target coverage and heterogeneity indexes (HIs) of PTV 1 and PGTV nd and PTV 3 in two sets of plans were consistent. The doses of PTV 2 decreased and HIs were worse in VMAT plans. VMAT could provide better spinal cord and brainstem sparing, but increase mean dose of parotids. The average number of MUs and delivery time for d-IMRT were 3.32 and 2.19 times of that for VMAT. The γ-index (3 mm, 3%) analysis for each plans was more than 97% in COMPASS ® measurement for quality assurance (QA). The results show that target dose coverages in d-IMRT and VMAT plans are similar for NPC with multi-prescribed dose levels. VMAT could improve the the CIs of targets, but reduce the dose to the target volume in neck except for PGTV nd. The biggest advantages of VMAT over d-IMRT are delivery efficiency and QA.