Impact of proton PBS machine operating parameters on the effectiveness of layer rescanning for interplay effect mitigation in lung SBRT treatment.

BACKGROUND: Rescanning is a common technique used in proton pencil beam scanning to mitigate the interplay effect. Advances in machine operating parameters across different generations of particle therapy systems have led to improvements in beam delivery time (BDT). However, the potential impact of these improvements on the effectiveness of rescanning remains an underexplored area in the existing research. METHODS: We systematically investigated the impact of proton machine operating parameters on the effectiveness of layer rescanning in mitigating interplay effect during lung SBRT treatment, using the CIRS phantom. Focused on the Hitachi synchrotron particle therapy system, we explored machine operating parameters from our institution's current (2015) and upcoming systems (2025A and 2025B). Accumulated dynamic 4D dose were reconstructed to assess the interplay effect and layer rescanning effectiveness. RESULTS: Achieving target coverage and dose homogeneity within 2% deviation required 6, 6, and 20 times layer rescanning for the 2015, 2025A, and 2025B machine parameters, respectively. Beyond this point, further increasing the number of layer rescanning did not further improve the dose distribution. BDTs without rescanning were 50.4, 24.4, and 11.4 s for 2015, 2025A, and 2025B, respectively. However, after incorporating proper number of layer rescanning (six for 2015 and 2025A, 20 for 2025B), BDTs increased to 67.0, 39.6, and 42.3 s for 2015, 2025A, and 2025B machine parameters. Our data also demonstrated the potential problem of false negative and false positive if the randomness of the respiratory phase at which the beam is initiated is not considered in the evaluation of interplay effect. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of layer rescanning for mitigating interplay effect is affected by machine operating parameters. Therefore, past clinical experiences may not be applicable to modern machines.

Effects of reconstruction methods on dose distribution for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment plans.

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of tumour motion on various imaging strategies as well as on treatment plan accuracy for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment (SBRT) cases. The ExacTrac gating phantom and paraffin were used to investigate respiratory motion and represent a lung tumour, respectively. Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) imaging was performed, while the phantom was moving sinusoidally with 4 s cycling time with three different amplitudes of 8, 16, and 24 mm. Reconstructions were done with maximum (MIP) and average intensity projection (AIP) methods. Comparisons of target density and volume were performed using two reconstruction techniques and references values. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were planned based on reconstructed computed tomography (CT) sets, and it was examined how density variations affect the dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters. 4D cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed with the Elekta Versa HD linac imaging system before irradiation and compared with 3D CBCT. Thus, various combinations of 4DCT reconstruction methods and treatment alignment methods have been investigated. Point measurements as well as 2 and 3D dose measurements were done by optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), gafchromic films, and electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs), respectively. The mean volume reduction was 7.8% for the AIP and 2.6% for the MIP method. The obtained Hounsfield Unit (HU) values were lower for AIP and higher for MIP when compared with the reference volume density. In DVH analysis, there were no statistical differences for D95%, D98%, and Dmean (p > 0.05). However, D2% was significantly affected by HU changes (p < 0.01). A positional variation was obtained up to 2 mm in moving direction when 4D CBCT was applied after 3D CBCT. Dosimetric measurements showed that the main part of the observed dose deviation was due to movement. In lung SBRT treatment plans, D2% doses differ significantly according to the reconstruction method. Additionally, it has been observed that setups based on 3D imaging can cause a positional error of up to 2 mm compared to setups based on 4D imaging. It is concluded that MIP has advantages over AIP in defining internal target volume (ITV) in lung SBRT applications. In addition, 4D CBCT and 3D EPID dosimetry are recommended for lung SBRT treatments.

How much rotational error is clinically acceptable for single-isocenter/two-lesion lung SBRT treatment on halcyon ring delivery system (RDS)?

PURPOSE: SBRT treatment of two separate lung lesions via single-isocenter/multi-target (SIMT) plan on Halcyon RDS could improve patient comfort, compliance, patient throughput, and clinic efficiency. However, aligning two separate lung lesions synchronously via a single pre-treatment CBCT scan on Halcyon can be difficult due to rotational patient setup errors. Thus, to quantify the dosimetric impact, we simulated loss of target(s) coverage due to small, yet clinically observable rotational patient setup errors on Halcyon for SIMT treatments. METHODS: Seventeen previously treated 4D-CT based SIMT lung SBRT patients with two separate lesions (total 34 lesions, 50 Gy in five fractions to each lesion) on TrueBeam (6MV-FFF) were re-planned on Halcyon (6MV-FFF) using a similar arc geometry (except couch rotation), dose engine (AcurosXB algorithm), and treatment planning objectives. Rotational patient setup errors of [± 0.5° to ± 3.0°] on Halcyon were simulated via Velocity registration software in all three rotation axes and recalculated dose distributions in Eclipse treatment planning system. Dosimetric impact of rotational errors was evaluated for target coverage and organs at risk (OAR). RESULTS: Average PTV volume and distance to isocenter were 23.7 cc and 6.1 cm. Average change in Paddick's conformity indexes were less than -5%, -10%, and -15% for 1°, 2°, and 3°, respectively for yaw, roll, and pitch rotation directions. Maximum drop off of PTV(D100%) coverage for 2° rotation was -2.0% (yaw), -2.2% (roll), and -2.5% (pitch). With ±1° rotational error, no PTV(D100%) loss was found. Due to anatomical complexity: irregular and highly variable tumor sizes and locations, highly heterogenous dose distribution, and steep dose gradient, no trend for loss of target(s) coverage as a function of distance to isocenter and PTV size was found. Change in maximum dose to OAR were acceptable per NRG-BR001 within ±1.0° rotation, but were up to 5 Gy higher to heart with 2° in the pitch rotation axis. CONCLUSION: Our clinically realistic simulation results show that rotational patient setup errors up to 1.0° in any rotation axis could be acceptable for selected two separate lung lesions SBRT patients on Halcyon. Multivariable data analysis in large cohort is ongoing to fully characterize Halcyon RDS for synchronous SIMT lung SBRT.

Organ-at-risk dose prediction using a machine learning algorithm: Clinical validation and treatment planning benefit for lung SBRT.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the clinical performance of a machine learning (ML) algorithm for organ-at-risk (OAR) dose prediction for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and estimate the treatment planning benefit from having upfront access to these dose predictions. METHODS: ML models were trained using multi-center data consisting of 209 patients previously treated with lung SBRT. Two prescription levels were investigated, 50 Gy in five fractions and 54 Gy in three fractions. Models were generated using a gradient-boosted regression tree algorithm using grid searching with fivefold cross-validation. Twenty patients not included in the training set were used to test OAR dose prediction performance, ten for each prescription. We also performed blinded re-planning based on OAR dose predictions but without access to clinically delivered plans. Differences between predicted and delivered doses were assessed by root-mean square deviation (RMSD), and statistical differences between predicted, delivered, and re-planned doses were evaluated with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests. RESULTS: ANOVA tests showed no significant differences between predicted, delivered, and replanned OAR doses (all p ≥ 0.36). The RMSD was 2.9, 3.9, 4.3, and 1.7Gy for max dose to the spinal cord, great vessels, heart, and trachea, respectively, for 50 Gy in five fractions. Average improvements of 1.0, 1.4, and 2.0 Gy were seen for spinal cord, esophagus, and trachea max doses in blinded replans compared to clinically delivered plans with 54 Gy in three fractions, and 1.8, 0.7, and 1.5 Gy, respectively, for the esophagus, heart and bronchus max doses with 50 Gy in five fractions. Target coverage was similar with an average PTV V100% of 94.7% for delivered plans compared to 97.3% for blinded re-plans for 50 Gy in five fractions, and respectively 98.4% versus 99.2% for 54 Gy in three fractions. CONCLUSION: This study validated ML-based OAR dose prediction for lung SBRT, showing potential for improved OAR dose sparing and more consistent plan quality using dose predictions for patient-specific planning guidance.

Using previously registered cone beam computerized tomography images to facilitate online computerized tomography to cone beam computerized tomography image registration in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: In our conventional image registration workflow, the four-dimensional (4D) CBCT was directly registered to the reference helical CT (HCT) using a dual registration approach within the Elekta XVI software. In this study, we proposed a new HCT-CBCT auto-registration strategy using a previously registered CBCT (CBCTpre) as the reference image and tested its clinical feasibility. METHODS: From a previous CBCT session, the registered average 4D CBCT was selected as CBCTpre and the HCT-CBCTpre registration vector from the clinician's manual registration result was recorded. In the new CBCT session, auto-registration was performed between the new average 4D CBCT (CBCTtx) and CBCTpre (CBCTpre-CBCTtx). The overall HCT-CBCTtx registration result was then derived by combing the results from two registrations (i.e., HCT-CBCTpre + CBCTpre-CBCTtx). The results from the proposed method were compared with clinician's manually adjusted HCT-CBCTtx registration results ("ground truth") to evaluate its accuracy using a test dataset consisting of 32 challenging registration cases. RESULTS: The uncertainty of the proposed auto-registration method was -0.1 ± 0.5, 0.1 ± 1.0, and -0.1 ± 0.7 mm in three translational directions (lateral, longitudinal, and vertical) and 0.0° ± 0.9°, 0.3° ± 0.9°, and 0.4° ± 0.7° in three rotation directions, respectively. Two patients (6.3%) had translational uncertainty > 2 mm (max = 3.1 mm) and both occurred in the longitudinal direction. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of the conventional direct HCT-CBCTtx auto-registration was -0.4 ± 2.6, -0.2 ± 7.4, -1.4 ± 3.6 mm for translations and -0.3° ± 1.2°, 0.0° ± 1.6°, and 0.1 ± 1.1° for rotations. Eleven patients (34.4%) had translation uncertainty > 2 mm (max = 26.2 mm) in at least one direction. Accuracy in translation was improved with the new method, while rotation accuracy stayed in the same order. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the feasibility of incorporating prior clinical registration knowledge into the online HCT-CBCT registration process. The proposed auto-registration method provides a quick and reliable starting solution for online HCT-CBCT registration.

Feasibility of using ring-mounted Halcyon Linac for single-isocenter/two-lesion lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the plan quality and delivery efficiency of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with the Halcyon Linac ring delivery system (RDS) in the treatment of single-isocenter/two-lesion lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). MATERIALS/METHODS: Sixteen previously treated non-coplanar VMAT single-isocenter/two-lesion lung SBRT plans delivered with SBRT-dedicated C-arm TrueBeam Linac were selected. Prescribed dose was 50 Gy to each lesion over five fractions with treatment delivery every other day and AcurosXB algorithm as the final dose calculation algorithm. TrueBeam single-isocenter plans were reoptimized for Halcyon Linac with coplanar geometry. Both TrueBeam and Halcyon plans were normalized for identical combined target coverage and evaluated. Conformity indices (CIs), heterogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), gradient distance (GD), and D2cm were compared. The normal lung V5Gy, V10Gy, V20Gy, mean lung dose (MLD), and dose to organs at risk (OAR) were evaluated. Treatment delivery parameters, including beam-on time, were recorded. RESULTS: Halcyon plans were statistically similar to clinically delivered TrueBeam plans. No statistical differences in target conformity, dose heterogeneity, or intermediate-dose spillage were observed (all, p > 0.05). Halcyon plans, on average, demonstrated statistically insignificant reduced maximum dose to most adjacent OAR and normal lung. However, Halcyon yielded statistically significant lower maximal dose to the ribs (p = 0.041) and heart (p = 0.026), dose to 1 cc of ribs (p = 0.035) and dose to 5 cc of esophagus (p = 0.043). Plan complexity slightly increased as seen in the average increase of total monitor units, modulation factor, and beam-on time by 480, 0.48, and 2.78 min, respectively. However, the estimated overall treatment time was reduced by 2.22 min, on average. Mean dose delivery accuracy of clinical TrueBeam plans and the corresponding Halcyon plans was 98.9 ± 0.85% (range: 98.1%-100%) and 98.45 ± 0.99% (range: 97.9%-100%), respectively, demonstrating similar treatment delivery accuracy. CONCLUSION: SBRT treatment of synchronous lung lesions via single-isocenter VMAT on Halcyon RDS is feasible and dosimetrically equivalent to clinically delivered TrueBeam plans. Halcyon provides excellent plan quality and shorter overall treatment time that may improve patient compliance, reduce intrafraction movement, improve clinic efficiency, and potentially offering lung SBRT treatments for underserved patients on a Halcyon only clinic.

Setup accuracy and dose attenuation of a wooden immobilization system for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Background: We evaluated the setup error and dose absorption of an immobilization system with a shell and wooden baseplate (SW) for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Materials and methods: Setup errors in 109 patients immobilized with an SW or BodyFix system (BF) were compared. Dose attenuation rates of materials for baseplates were measured with an ion-chamber. Ionization measurements were performed from 90° to 180° gantry angle in 10° increments, with the ball water equivalent phantom placed at the center of the wood and carbon baseplates whose effects on dose distribution were compared using an electron portal imaging device. Results: The ratio for the anterior-posterior, cranial-caudal, and right-left of the cases within 3-mm registered shifts in interfractional setup error were 90.9%, 89.2%, and 97.4% for the SW, and 93.2%, 91.6%, and 98.0% for the BF, respectively. For intrafractional setup error, 98.3%, 97.4%, and 99.1% for the SW and 96.6%, 95.8%, and 98.7% for the BF were within 3-mm registered shifts, respectively. In the center position, the average (minimum/maximum) dose attenuation rates from 90° to 180° for the wooden and carbon baseplates were 0.5 (0.1/2.8)% and 1.0 (-0.1/10.1)% with 6 MV, respectively. The gamma passing rates of 2%/2 mm for the wooden and carbon baseplates were 99.7% and 98.3% (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The immobilization system with an SW is effective for lung SBRT since it is comparable to the BF in setup accuracy. Moreover, the wooden baseplate had lower radiation attenuation rates and affected the dose distribution less than the carbon baseplate.

Fast generation of lung SBRT plans with a knowledge-based planning model on ring-mounted Halcyon Linac.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate fast treatment planning feasibility of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for centrally located lung tumors on Halcyon Linac via a previously validated knowledge-based planning (KBP) model to support offline adaptive radiotherapy. MATERIALS/METHODS: Twenty previously treated non-coplanar volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) lung SBRT plans (c-Truebeam) on SBRT-dedicated C-arm Truebeam Linac were selected. Patients received 50 Gy in five fractions. c-Truebeam plans were re-optimized for Halcyon manually (m-Halcyon) and with KBP model (k-Halcyon). Both m-Halcyon and k-Halcyon plans were normalized for identical or better target coverage than clinical c-Truebeam plans and compared for target conformity, dose heterogeneity, dose fall-off, and dose tolerances to the organs-at-risk (OAR). Treatment delivery parameters and planning times were evaluated. RESULTS: k-Halcyon plans were dosimetrically similar or better than m-Halcyon and c-Truebeam plans. k-Halcyon and m-Halcyon plan comparisons are presented with respect to c-Truebeam. Differences in conformity index were statistically insignificant in k-Halcyon and on average 0.02 higher (p = 0.04) in m-Halcyon plans. Gradient index was on average 0.43 (p = 0.006) lower and 0.27 (p = 0.02) higher for k-Halcyon and m-Halcyon, respectively. Maximal dose 2 cm away in any direction from target was statistically insignificant. k-Halcyon increased maximal target dose on average by 2.9 Gy (p < 0.001). Mean lung dose was on average reduced by 0.10 Gy (p = 0.004) in k-Halcyon and increased by 0.14 Gy (p < 0.001) in m-Halcyon plans. k-Halcyon plans lowered bronchial tree dose on average by 1.2 Gy. Beam-on-time (BOT) was increased by 2.85 and 1.67 min, on average for k-Halcyon and m-Halcyon, respectively. k-Halcyon plans were generated in under 30 min compared to estimated dedicated 180 ± 30 min for m-Halcyon or c-Truebeam plan. CONCLUSION: k-Halcyon plans were generated in under 30 min with excellent plan quality. This adaptable KBP model supports high-volume clinics in the expansion or transfer of lung SBRT patients to Halcyon.

Automation and integration of a novel restricted single-isocenter stereotactic body radiotherapy (a-RESIST) method for synchronous two lung lesions.

Synchronous treatment of two lung lesions using a single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plan can decrease treatment time and reduce the impact of intrafraction motion. However, alignment of both lesions on a single cone beam CT (CBCT) can prove difficult and may lead to setup errors and unacceptable target coverage loss. A Restricted Single-Isocenter Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (RESIST) method was created to minimize setup uncertainties and provide treatment delivery flexibility. RESIST utilizes a single-isocenter placed at patient's midline and allows both lesions to be planned separately but treated in the same session. Herein is described a process of automation of this novel RESIST method. Automation of RESIST significantly reduced treatment planning time while maintaining the benefits of RESIST. To demonstrate feasibility, ten patients with two lung lesions previously treated with a single-isocenter clinical VMAT plan were replanned manually with RESIST (m-RESIST) and with automated RESIST (a-RESIST). a-RESIST method automatically sets isocenter, creates beam geometry, chooses appropriate dose calculation algorithms, and performs VMAT optimization using an in-house trained knowledge-based planning model for lung SBRT. Both m-RESIST and a-RESIST showed lower dose to normal tissues compared to manually planned clinical VMAT although a-RESIST provided slightly inferior, but still clinically acceptable, dose conformity and gradient indices. However, a-RESIST significantly reduced the treatment planning time to less than 20 min and provided a higher dose to the lung tumors. The a-RESIST method provides guidance for inexperienced planners by standardizing beam geometry and plan optimization using DVH estimates. It produces clinically acceptable two lesions VMAT lung SBRT plans efficiently. We have further validated a-RESIST on phantom measurement and independent pretreatment dose verification of another four selected 2-lesions lung SBRT patients and implemented clinically. Further development of a-RESIST for more than two lung lesions and refining this approach for extracranial oligometastastic abdominal/pelvic SBRT, including development of automated simulated collision detection algorithm, merits future investigation.

Intrinsic detector sensitivity analysis as a tool to characterize ArcCHECK and EPID sensitivity to variations in delivery for lung SBRT VMAT plans.

PURPOSE: To investigate intrinsic sensitivity of an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and the ArcCHECK detector and to use this in assessing their performance in detecting delivery variations for lung SBRT VMAT. The effect of detector spatial resolution and dose matrix interpolation on the gamma pass rate was also considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients' lung SBRT VMAT plans were used. Delivery variations (errors) were introduced by modifying collimator angles, multi-leaf collimator (MLC) field sizes and MLC field shifts by ±5, ±2, and ±1 degrees or mm (investigating 103 plans in total). EPID and ArcCHECK measured signals with introduced variations were compared to measured signals without variations (baseline), using OmniPro-I'mRT software and gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 2%/1 mm, and 1%/1 mm, to test each system's basic performance. The measurement sampling resolution for each was also changed to 1 mm and results compared to those with the default detector system resolution. RESULTS: Intrinsic detector sensitivity analysis, that is, comparing measurement to baseline measurement, rather than measurement to plan, demonstrated the intrinsic constraints of each detector and indicated the limiting performance that users might expect. Changes in the gamma pass rates for ArcCHECK, for a given introduced error, were affected only by dose difference (DD %) criteria. However, the EPID showed only slight changes when changing DD%, but greater effects when changing distance-to-agreement criteria. This is pertinent for lung SBRT where the minimum dose to the target will drop dramatically with geometric errors. Detector resolution and dose matrix interpolation have an impact on the gamma results for these SBRT plans and can lead to false positives or negatives in error detection if not understood. CONCLUSION: The intrinsic sensitivity approach may help in the selection of more meaningful gamma criteria and the choice of optimal QA device for site-specific dose verification.

A novel CRT-IMRT-combined (Co-CRIM) planning technique for peripheral lung stereotactic body radiotherapy in pinnacle treatment planning system.

OBJECTIVES: This study attempts to explore a novel peripheral lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) planning technique that can balance the pros and cons of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) / volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). METHODS: Treatment plans were retrospectively designed based on CRT, IMRT, VMAT, and the proposed CRT-IMRT-combined (Co-CRIM) techniques using Pinnacle treatment planning system (TPS) for 20 peripheral lung cancer patients. Co-CRIM used an inverse optimization algorithm available in Pinnacle TPS. To develop a Co-CRIM plan, the number of segments in each field was limited to one, the minimum segment area was set to the internal target volume (ITV), and the minimum monitor units (MU) of the segment was the quotient of fractional dose divided by twice the number of total fields. The performance of Co-CRIM was then compared with other techniques. RESULTS: For conformity index (CI), Co-CRIM performed comparably to IMRT/VMAT but better than CRT. For gradient index (GI), Co-CRIM was similar to IMRT/VMAT or CRT. For heterogeneity index (HI), Co-CRIM was comparable to IMRT/VMAT, higher than CRT. The dosimetric results of spinal cord and lung with Co-CRIM were better than CRT, comparable to IMRT, but inferior to VMAT. The MU resulted from Co-CRIM was lower than IMRT/VMAT but higher than CRT. For plan verification γ passing rate, Co-CRIM was higher than IMRT/VMAT, comparable to CRT. For planning time, Co-CRIM was shorter than CRT or VMAT but similar to IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed Co-CRIM technique on Pinnacle TPS is an effective planning technique for peripheral lung SBRT.

Risk of target coverage loss for stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment of synchronous lung lesions via single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Treating multiple lung lesions synchronously via single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) improves treatment efficiency and patient compliance. However, aligning multiple lung tumors accurately on single pretreatment cone beam CTs (CBCTs) can be problematic. Tumors misaligned could lead to target coverage loss. To quantify this potential target coverage loss due to small, clinically realistic setup errors, a novel simulation method was developed. This method was used on 26 previously treated patients with two metastatic lung lesions. Patients were treated with 4D CT-based, highly conformal noncoplanar VMAT plans (clinical VMAT) with 6MV-flattening filter free (FFF) beam using AcurosXB dose calculation algorithm with heterogeneity corrections. A single isocenter was placed approximately between the lesions to improve patient convenience and clinic workflow. Average isocenter to tumor distance was 5.9 cm. Prescription dose was 54 Gy/50 Gy in 3/5 fractions. For comparison, a plan summation (simulated VMAT) was executed utilizing randomly simulated, clinically relevant setup errors, obtained from pretreatment setup, per treatment fraction, in Eclipse treatment planning system for each of the six degrees of freedom within ± 5.0 mm and ± 2°. Simulations yielded average deviations of 27.4% (up to 72% loss) (P < 0.001) from planned target coverage when treating multiple lung lesions using a single-isocenter plan. The largest deviations from planned coverage and desired biological effective dose (BED10, with α/ß = 10 Gy) were seen for the smallest targets (<10 cc), some of which received < 100 Gy BED10. Patient misalignment resulted in substantial decrease in conformity and increase in the gradient index, violating major characteristics of SBRT. Statistically insignificant differences were seen for normal tissue dose. Although, clinical follow-up of these patients is ongoing, the authors recommend an alternative treatment planning strategy to minimize the probability of a geometric miss when treating small lung lesions synchronously with single-isocenter VMAT SBRT plans.

An Automated knowledge-based planning routine for stereotactic body radiotherapy of peripheral lung tumors via DCA-based volumetric modulated arc therapy.

PURPOSE: To develop a knowledge-based planning (KBP) routine for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of peripherally located early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors via dynamic conformal arc (DCA)-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using the commercially available RapidPlanTM software. This proposed technique potentially improves plan quality, reduces complexity, and minimizes interplay effect and small-field dosimetry errors associated with treatment delivery. METHODS: KBP model was developed and validated using 70 clinically treated high quality non-coplanar VMAT lung SBRT plans for training and 20 independent plans for validation. All patients were treated with 54 Gy in three treatments. Additionally, a novel k-DCA planning routine was deployed to create plans incorporating historical three-dimensional-conformal SBRT planning practices via DCA-based approach prior to VMAT optimization in an automated planning engine. Conventional KBPs and k-DCA plans were compared with clinically treated plans per RTOG-0618 requirements for target conformity, tumor dose heterogeneity, intermediate dose fall-off and organs-at-risk (OAR) sparing. Treatment planning time, treatment delivery efficiency, and accuracy were recorded. RESULTS: KBPs and k-DCA plans were similar or better than clinical plans. Average planning target volume for validation was 22.4 ± 14.1 cc (7.1-62.3 cc). KBPs and k-DCA plans provided similar conformity to clinical plans with average absolute differences of 0.01 and 0.01, respectively. Maximal doses to OAR were lowered in both KBPs and k-DCA plans. KBPs increased monitor units (MU) on average 1316 (P < 0.001) while k-DCA reduced total MU on average by 1114 (P < 0.001). This routine can create k-DCA plan in less than 30 min. Independent Monte Carlo calculation demonstrated that k-DCA plans showed better agreement with planned dose distribution. CONCLUSION: A k-DCA planning routine was developed in concurrence with a knowledge-based approach for the treatment of peripherally located lung tumors. This method minimizes plan complexity associated with model-based KBP techniques and improve plan quality and treatment planning efficiency.

Development and clinical validation of a robust knowledge-based planning model for stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment of centrally located lung tumors.

PURPOSE: To develop a robust and adaptable knowledge-based planning (KBP) model with commercially available RapidPlanTM for early stage, centrally located non-small-cell lung tumors (NSCLC) treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and improve a patient's"simulation to treatment" time. METHODS: The KBP model was trained using 86 clinically treated high-quality non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (n-VMAT) lung SBRT plans with delivered prescriptions of 50 or 55 Gy in 5 fractions. Another 20 independent clinical n-VMAT plans were used for validation of the model. KBP and n-VMAT plans were compared via Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)-0813 protocol compliance criteria for conformity (CI), gradient index (GI), maximal dose 2 cm away from the target in any direction (D2cm), dose to organs-at-risk (OAR), treatment delivery efficiency, and accuracy. KBP plans were re-optimized with larger calculation grid size (CGS) of 2.5 mm to assess feasibility of rapid adaptive re-planning. RESULTS: Knowledge-based plans were similar or better than n-VMAT plans based on a range of target coverage and OAR metrics. Planning target volume (PTV) for validation cases was 30.5 ± 19.1 cc (range 7.0-71.7 cc). KBPs provided an average CI of 1.04 ± 0.04 (0.97-1.11) vs. n-VMAT plan'saverage CI of 1.01 ± 0.04 (0.97-1.17) (P < 0.05) with slightly improved GI with KBPs (P < 0.05). D2cm was similar between the KBPs and n-VMAT plans. KBPs provided lower lung V10Gy (P = 0.003), V20Gy (P = 0.007), and mean lung dose (P < 0.001). KBPs had overall better sparing of OAR at the minimal increased of average total monitor units and beam-on time by 460 (P < 0.05) and 19.2 s, respectively. Quality assurance phantom measurement showed similar treatment delivery accuracy. Utilizing a CGS of 2.5 mm in the final optimization improved planning time (mean, 5 min) with minimal or no cost to the plan quality. CONCLUSION: The RTOG-compliant adaptable RapidPlan model for early stage SBRT treatment of centrally located lung tumors was developed. All plans met RTOG dosimetric requirements in less than 30 min of planning time, potentially offering shorter "simulation to treatment" times. OAR sparing via KBPs may permit tumorcidal dose escalation with minimal penalties. Same day adaptive re-planning is plausible with a 2.5-mm CGS optimizer setting.

Cleaning the dose falloff in lung SBRT plan.

PURPOSE: To investigate a planning technique that can possibly reduce low-to-intermediate dose spillage (measured by R50%, D2cm values) in lung SBRT plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dose falloff outside the target was studied retrospectively in 102 SBRT VMAT plans of lung tumor. Plans having R50% and/or D2cm higher than recommended tolerances in RTOG protocols 0813 and 0915 were replanned with new optimization constraints using novel shell structures and novel constraints. Violations in the RTOG R50% value can be rectified with a dose constraint to a novel shell structure ("OptiForR50"). The construction of structure OptiForR50% and the novel optimization criteria translate the RTOG goals for R50% into direct inputs for the optimizer. Violations in the D2cm can be rectified using constraints on a 0.5 cm thick shell structure with inner surface 2cm from the PTV surface. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare differences in dose conformity, volume of hot spots, R50%, D2cm of the target in addition to the OAR doses. A two-sided P-value of 0.05 was used to assess statistical significance. RESULTS: Among 102 lung SBRT plans with PTV sizes ranging from 5 to 179 cc, 32 plans with violations in R50% or D2cm were reoptimized. The mean reduction in R50% (4.68 vs 3.89) and D2cm (56.49 vs 52.51) was statistically significant both having P < 0.01. Target conformity index, volume of 105% isodose contour outside PTV, normal lung V20, and mean dose to heart and aorta were significantly lowered with P < 0.05. CONCLUSION: The novel planning methodology using multiple shells including the novel OptiForR50 shell with precisely calculated dimensions and optimizer constraints lead to significantly lower values of R50% and D2cm and lower dose spillage in lung SBRT plans. All plans were successfully brought into the zone of no RTOG violations.

Clinical validation of ring-mounted halcyon linac for lung SBRT: comparison to SBRT-dedicated C-arm linac treatments.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung tumors via the ring-mounted Halcyon Linac, a fast kilovoltage cone beam CT-guided treatment with coplanar geometry, a single energy 6MV flattening filter free (FFF) beam and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a fast, safe, and feasible treatment modality for selected lung cancer patients. Four-dimensional (4D) CT-based treatment plans were generated using advanced AcurosXB algorithm with heterogeneity corrections using an SBRT board and Halcyon couch insert. Halcyon VMAT-SBRT plans with stacked and staggered multileaf collimators produced highly conformal radiosurgical dose distribution to the target, lower intermediate dose spillage, and similar dose to adjacent organs at risks (OARs) compared to SBRT-dedicated highly conformal clinical noncoplanar Truebeam VMAT plans following the RTOG-0813 requirements. Due to low monitor units per fraction and less multileaf collimator (MLC) modulation, the Halcyon VMAT plan can deliver lung SBRT fractions with an overall treatment time of less than 15 min (for 50 Gy in five fractions), significantly improving patient comfort and clinic workflow. Higher pass rates of quality assurance results demonstrate a more accurate treatment delivery on Halcyon. We have implemented Halcyon for lung SBRT treatment in our clinic. We suggest others use Halcyon for lung SBRT treatments using abdominal compression or 4D CT-based treatment planning, thus expanding the access of curative ultra-hypofractionated treatments to other centers with only a Halcyon Linac. Clinical follow-up results for patients treated on Halcyon Linac with lung SBRT is ongoing.

A simple, yet novel hybrid-dynamic conformal arc therapy planning via flattening filter-free beam for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: Due to multiple beamlets in the delivery of highly modulated volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) plans, dose delivery uncertainties associated with small-field dosimetry and interplay effects can be concerns in the treatment of mobile lung lesions using a single-dose of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Herein, we describe and compare a simple, yet clinically useful, hybrid 3D-dynamic conformal arc (h-DCA) planning technique using flattening filter-free (FFF) beams to minimize these effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive solitary early-stage I-II non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who underwent a single-dose of 30 Gy using 3-6 non-coplanar VMAT arcs with 6X-FFF beams in our clinic. These patients' plans were re-planned using a non-coplanar hybrid technique with 2-3 differentially-weighted partial dynamic conformal arcs (DCA) plus 4-6 static beams. About 60-70% of the total beam weight was given to the DCA and the rest was distributed among the static beams to maximize the tumor coverage and spare the organs-at-risk (OAR). The clinical VMAT and h-DCA plans were compared via RTOG-0915 protocol for conformity and dose to OAR. Additionally, delivery efficiency, accuracy, and overall h-DCA planning time were recorded. RESULTS: All plans met RTOG-0915 requirements. Comparison with clinical VMAT plans h-DAC gave better target coverage with a higher dose to the tumor and exhibited statistically insignificance differences in gradient index, D2cm , gradient distance and OAR doses with the exception of maximal dose to skin (P = 0.015). For h-DCA plans, higher values of tumor heterogeneity and tumor maximum, minimum and mean doses were observed and were 10%, 2.8, 1.0, and 2.0 Gy, on average, respectively, compared to the clinical VMAT plans. Average beam on time was reduced by a factor of 1.51. Overall treatment planning time for h-DCA was about an hour. CONCLUSION: Due to no beam modulation through the target, h-DCA plans avoid small-field dosimetry and MLC interplay effects and resulting in enhanced target coverage by improving tumor dose (characteristic of FFF-beam). The h-DCA simplifies treatment planning and beam on time significantly compared to clinical VMAT plans. Additionally, h-DCA allows for the real time target verification and eliminates patient-specific VMAT quality assurance; potentially offering cost-effective, same or next day SBRT treatments. Moreover, this technique can be easily adopted to other disease sites and small clinics with less extensive physics or machine support.

Dynamic conformal arcs for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy: A comparison with volumetric-modulated arc therapy.

This study constitutes a feasibility assessment of dynamic conformal arc (DCA) therapy as an alternative to volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of lung cancer. The rationale for DCA is lower geometric complexity and hence reduced risk for interplay errors induced by respiratory motion. Forward planned DCA and inverse planned DCA based on segment-weight optimization were compared to VMAT for single arc treatments of five lung patients. Analysis of dose-volume histograms and clinical goal fulfillment revealed that DCA can generate satisfactory and near equivalent dosimetric quality to VMAT, except for complex tumor geometries. Segment-weight optimized DCA provided spatial dose distributions qualitatively similar to those for VMAT. Our results show that DCA, and particularly segment-weight optimized DCA, may be an attractive alternative to VMAT for lung SBRT treatments if the patient anatomy is favorable.

Automated planning through robust templates and multicriterial optimization for lung VMAT SBRT of lung lesions.

PURPOSE: To develop and validate a robust template for VMAT SBRT of lung lesions, using the multicriterial optimization (MCO) of a commercial treatment planning system. METHODS: The template was established and refined on 10 lung SBRT patients planned for 55 Gy/5 fr. To improve gradient and conformity a ring structure around the planning target volume (PTV) was set in the list of objectives. Ideal fluence optimization was conducted giving priority to organs at risk (OARs) and using the MCO, which further pushes OARs doses. Segmentation was conducted giving priority to PTV coverage. Two different templates were produced with different degrees of modulation, by setting the Fluence Smoothing parameter to Medium (MFS) and High (HFS). Each template was applied on 20 further patients. Automatic and manual plans were compared in terms of dosimetric parameters, delivery time, and complexity. Statistical significance of differences was evaluated using paired two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in PTV coverage and maximum dose were observed, while an improvement was observed in gradient and conformity. A general improvement in dose to OARs was seen, which resulted to be significant for chest wall V30 Gy , total lung V20 Gy , and spinal cord D0.1 cc . MFS plans are characterized by a higher modulation and longer delivery time than manual plans. HFS plans have a modulation and a delivery time comparable to manual plans, but still present an advantage in terms of gradient. CONCLUSION: The automation of the planning process for lung SBRT using robust templates and MCO was demonstrated to be feasible and more efficient.

Technical Note: Comparison of the internal target volume (ITV) contours and dose calculations on 4DCT, average CBCT, and 4DCBCT imaging for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

PURPOSE: To investigate the differences between internal target volumes (ITVs) contoured on the simulation 4DCT and daily 4DCBCT images for lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and determine the dose delivered on 4D planning technique. METHODS: For nine patients, 4DCBCTs were acquired before each fraction to assess tumor motion. An ITV was contoured on each phase of the 4DCBCT and a union of the 10 ITVs was used to create a composite ITV. Another ITV was drawn on the average 3DCBCT (avgCBCT) to compare with current clinical practice. The Dice coefficient, Hausdorff distance, and center of mass (COM) were averaged over four fractions to compare the ITVs contoured on the 4DCT, avgCBCT, and 4DCBCT for each patient. Planning was done on the average CT, and using the online registration, plans were calculated on each phase of the 4DCBCT and on the avgCBCT. Plan dose calculations were tested by measuring ion chamber dose in the CIRS lung phantom. RESULTS: The Dice coefficients were similar for all three comparisons: avgCBCT-to-4DCBCT (0.7 ± 0.1), 4DCT-to-avgCBCT (0.7 ± 0.1), and 4DCT-to-4DCBCT (0.7 ± 0.1); while the mean COM differences were also comparable (2.6 ± 2.2mm, 2.3 ± 1.4mm, and 3.1 ± 1.1mm, respectively). The Hausdorff distances for the comparisons with 4DCBCT (8.2 ± 2.9mm and 8.1 ± 3.2mm) were larger than the comparison without (6.5 ± 2.5mm). The differences in ITV D95% between the treatment plan and avgCBCT calculations were 4.3 ± 3.0% and -0.5 ± 4.6%, between treatment plan and 4DCBCT plans, respectively, while the ITV V100% coverages were 99.0 ± 1.9% and 93.1 ± 8.0% for avgCBCT and 4DCBCT, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is great potential for 4DCBCT to evaluate the extent of tumor motion before treatment, but image quality challenges the clinician to consistently delineate lung target volumes.