Multi-isocentric 4π volumetric-modulated arc therapy approach for head and neck cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the feasibility of multi-isocentric 4π volumetric-modulated arc therapy (MI4π-VMAT) for the complex targets of head and neck cancers. METHODS: Twenty-five previously treated patients of HNC underwent re-planning to improve the dose distributions with either coplanar VMAT technique (CP-VMAT) or noncoplanar MI4π-VMAT plans. The latter, involving 3-6 noncoplanar arcs and 2-3 isocenters were re-optimized using the same priorities and objectives. Dosimetric comparison on standard metrics from dose-volume histograms was performed to appraise relative merits of the two techniques. Pretreatment quality assurance was performed with IMRT phantoms to assess deliverability and accuracy of the MI4π-VMAT plans. The gamma agreement index (GAI) analysis with criteria of 3 mm distance to agreement (DTA) and 3% dose difference (DD) was applied. RESULTS: CP-VMAT and MI4π-VMAT plans achieved the same degree of coverage for all target volumes related to near-to-minimum and near-to-maximum doses. MI4π-VΜΑΤ plans resulted in an improved sparing of organs at risk. The average mean dose reduction to the parotids, larynx, oral cavity, and pharyngeal muscles were 3 Gy, 4 Gy, 5 Gy, and 4.3 Gy, respectively. The average maximum dose reduction to the brain stem, spinal cord, and oral cavity was 6.0 Gy, 3.8 Gy, and 2.4 Gy. Pretreatment QA results showed that plans can be reliably delivered with mean gamma agreement index of 97.0 ± 1.1%. CONCLUSIONS: MI4π-VMAT plans allowed to decrease the dose-volume-metrics for relevant OAR and results are reliable from a dosimetric standpoint. Early clinical experience has begun and future studies will report treatment outcome.

Dosimetric comparison of head and neck cancer patients planned with multivendor volumetric modulated arc therapy technology.

AIM: Purpose of this study is to dosimetrically compare head and neck (H and N) cancer patients planned with multivendor volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technology. VMAT treatment planning can be done using biological (treatment planning system [TPSB]: Monaco) or physical (TPSP: Eclipse)-based cost function optimization techniques. Planning and dosimetric comparisons were done in both techniques for H and N cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty H and N patients were retrospectively selected for this study. VMAT plans were generated using TPSP (V11.0) and TPSB (V3.0) TPS. A total dose of 66 Gy (planning target volume 1 [PTV1]) and 60 Gy (PTV2) were prescribed to primary and nodal target volumes. Clinical planning objectives were achieved by both the optimization techniques. Dosimetric parameters were calculated for PTVs, and quantitative analyses were performed for critical organs. Monitor units were compared between two TPSs, and gamma analysis was performed between I'matriXX measured and TPS calculated. RESULTS: Clinically, acceptable VMAT plans showed comparable dose distributions between TPSB and TPSP optimization techniques. Comparison of mean dose, homogeneity index, and conformity index for PTV1 showed no statistical difference (P - 0.922, 0.096, and 0.097); however, in PTV2 statistically significant difference was observed (P - 0.024, 0.008, and 0.002) between TPSB and TPSP. TPSB optimization showed statistically significant superiority for spinal cord and brainstem (D1% P - 0.0078, 0.00002) whereas improved parotid sparing was observed in TPSP optimization (mean dose P - 0.00205). Gamma analysis illustrated that both systems could produce clinically deliverable plans. CONCLUSION: VMAT plans by TPSP and TPSB offered clinically acceptable dose distributions. TPSB-based optimization showed enhanced sparing of serial organs whereas TPSP-based optimization showed superior sparing of parallel organs.

Planning and Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Based Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Acoustic Schwannoma--6MV Flattening Filter Free Photon Beam.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the dosimetric and clinical feasibility of volumetric modulated arc based hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (RapidArc) treatment for large acoustic schwannoma (AS>10 cc). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten AS patients were immobilized using BrainLab mask. They were subject to multimodality imaging (magnetic resonance and computed tomography) to contour target and organs at risk (brainstem and cochlea). Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) based stereotactic plans were optimized in Eclipse (V11) treatment planning system (TPS) using progressive resolution optimizer-III and final dose calculations were performed using analytical anisotropic algorithm with 1.5 mm grid resolution. All AS presented in this study were treated with VMAT based HSRT to a total dose of 25 Gy in 5 fractions (5 fractions/ week). VMAT plan contains 2-4 non-coplanar arcs. Treatment planning was performed to achieve at least 99% of PTV volume (D99) receives 100% of prescription dose (25 Gy), while dose to OAR's were kept below the tolerance limits. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) were analyzed to assess plan quality. Treatments were delivered using upgraded 6 MV un-flattened photon beam (FFF) from Clinac-iX machine. Extensive pretreatment quality assurance measurements were carried out to report on quality of delivery. Point dosimetry was performed using three different detectors, which includes CC13 ion-chamber, Exradin A14 ion-chamber and Exradin W1 plastic scintillator detector (PSD) which have measuring volume of 0.13 cm3, 0.009 cm3 and 0.002 cm3 respectively. RESULTS: Average PTV volume of AS was 11.3 cc (±4.8), and located in eloquent areas. VMAT plans provided complete PTV coverage with average conformity index of 1.06 (±0.05). OAR's dose were kept below tolerance limit recommend by American Association of Physicist in Medicine task group-101(brainstem V0.5 cc<23 Gy, cochlea maximum<25 Gy and Optic pathway<25 Gy). PSD resulted in superior dosimetric accuracy compared with other two detectors (p=0.021 for PSD.

Feasibility study of deep inspiration breath-hold based volumetric modulated arc therapy for locally advanced left sided breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for locally advanced left sided breast cancer patients undergoing radical mastectomy. DIBH immobilizes the tumor bed providing dosimetric benefits over free breathing (FB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten left sided post mastectomy patients were immobilized in a supine position with both the arms lifted above the head on a hemi-body vaclock. Two thermoplastic masks were prepared for each patient, one for normal free breathing and a second made with breath-hold to maintain reproducibility. DIBH CT scans were performed in the prospective mode of the Varian real time position management (RPM) system. The planning target volume (PTV) included the left chest wall and supraclavicular nodes and PTV prescription dose was 5000cGy in 25 fractions. DIBH-3DCRT planning was performed with the single iso-centre technique using a 6MV photon beam and the field-in-field technique. VMAT plans for FB and DIBH contained two partial arcs (179o-300oCCW/CW). Dose volume histograms of PTV and OAR's were analyzed for DIBH-VMAT, FB-VMAT and DIBH-3DCRT. In DIBH mode daily orthogonal (0o and 90o) KV images were taken to determine the setup variability and weekly twice CBCT to verify gating threshold level reproducibility. RESULTS: DIBH-VMAT reduced the lung and heart dose compared to FB-VMAT, while maintaining similar PTV coverage. The mean heart V30Gy was 2.3% ±2.7, 5.1% ±3.2 and 3.3% ±7.2 and for left lung V20Gy was 18.57% ±2.9, 21.7% ±3.9 and 23.5% ±5.1 for DIBH-VMAT, FB-VMAT and DIBH-3DCRT respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DIBH-VMAT significantly reduced the heart and lung dose for left side chest wall patients compared to FB-VMAT. PTV conformity index, homogeneity index, ipsilateral lung dose and heart dose were better for DIBH-VMAT compared to DIBH-3DCRT. However, contralateral lung and breast volumes exposed to low doses were increased with DIBH-VMAT.

Critical appraisal of the accuracy of Acuros-XB and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm compared to measurement and calculations with the compass system in the delivery of RapidArc clinical plans.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of the two dose calculation engines available for RapidArc planning (both released for clinical use) is investigated in comparison to the COMPASS data. METHODS: Two dose calculation algorithms (Acuros-XB and Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA)) were used to calculate RA plans and compared to calculations with the Collapsed Cone Convolution algorithm (CC) from the COMPASS system (IBA Dosimetry). CC calculations, performed on patient data, are based on experimental fluence measurements with a 2D array of ion chambers mounted on the linac head. The study was conducted on clinical cases treated with RA. Five cases for each of the following groups were included: Brain, Head and Neck, Thorax, Pelvis and stereotactic body radiation therapy for hypo-fractionated treatments with small fields. COMPASS measurements were performed with the iMatrixx-2D array. RapidArc plans were optimized for delivery using 6MV photons from a Clinac-iX (Varian, Palo Alto, USA). RESULTS: For almost all parameters, the better agreement was between Acuros-XB and COMPASS independently from the anatomical site and fractionation. The same result was obtained from the mean dose difference per organ with Acuros-CC average differences below 0.5% while for AAA-CC data, average deviations exceeded 0.5% and in the case of the pelvis 1%. Relevance of observed differences determined with the 3D gamma analysis resulted in a pass rate exceeding 99.5% for Acuros-CC and exceeding 97.5% for AAA-CC. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that i) a good agreement exists between COMPASS-CC calculations based on measured fluences with respect to dose distributions obtained with both Acuros-XB and AAA algorithms; ii) 3D dose distributions reconstructed from actual delivery coincide very precisely with the planned data; iii) a slight preference in favor of Acuros-XB was observed suggesting the preference for this algorithm in clinical applications.