Treatment planning for spinal radiosurgery : A competitive multiplatform benchmark challenge.

PURPOSE: To investigate the quality of treatment plans of spinal radiosurgery derived from different planning and delivery systems. The comparisons include robotic delivery and intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) approaches. Multiple centers with equal systems were used to reduce a bias based on individual's planning abilities. The study used a series of three complex spine lesions to maximize the difference in plan quality among the various approaches. METHODS: Internationally recognized experts in the field of treatment planning and spinal radiosurgery from 12 centers with various treatment planning systems participated. For a complex spinal lesion, the results were compared against a previously published benchmark plan derived for CyberKnife radiosurgery (CKRS) using circular cones only. For two additional cases, one with multiple small lesions infiltrating three vertebrae and a single vertebra lesion treated with integrated boost, the results were compared against a benchmark plan generated using a best practice guideline for CKRS. All plans were rated based on a previously established ranking system. RESULTS: All 12 centers could reach equality (n = 4) or outperform (n = 8) the benchmark plan. For the multiple lesions and the single vertebra lesion plan only 5 and 3 of the 12 centers, respectively, reached equality or outperformed the best practice benchmark plan. However, the absolute differences in target and critical structure dosimetry were small and strongly planner-dependent rather than system-dependent. Overall, gantry-based IMAT with simple planning techniques (two coplanar arcs) produced faster treatments and significantly outperformed static gantry intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and multileaf collimator (MLC) or non-MLC CKRS treatment plan quality regardless of the system (mean rank out of 4 was 1.2 vs. 3.1, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: High plan quality for complex spinal radiosurgery was achieved among all systems and all participating centers in this planning challenge. This study concludes that simple IMAT techniques can generate significantly better plan quality compared to previous established CKRS benchmarks.

CyberKnife robotic spinal radiosurgery in prone position: dosimetric advantage due to posterior radiation access?

CyberKnife spinal radiosurgery suffers from a lack of posterior beams due to workspace limitations. This is remedied by a newly available tracking modality for fiducial-free, respiration-compensated spine tracking in prone patient position. We analyzed the potential dosimetric benefit in a planning study. Fourteen exemplary cases were compared in three scenarios: supine (PTV=CTV), prone (PTV=CTV), and prone position with an additional margin (PTV=CTV+2 mm), to incorporate reduced accuracy of respiration-compensated tracking. Target and spinal cord constraints were chosen according to RTOG 0631 protocol for spinal metastases. Plan quality was scored based on four predefined parameters: dose to cord (D0.1cc and D1cc), high dose (V10Gy), and low dose (V4Gy) volume of healthy tissue. Prescription dose was 16 Gy to the highest isodose line encompassing 90% of the target. Results were related to target size and position. All plans fulfilled RTOG 0631 constraints for coverage and dose to cord. When no additional margin was applied, a majority of eight cases benefitted from prone position, mainly due to a reduction of V4Gy by 23% ± 26%. In the 2 mm prone scenario, the benefit was nullified by an average increase of V10Gy by 43% ± 24%, and an increase of D1cc to cord (four cases). Spinal cord D0.1cc was unchanged (< ± 1 Gy) in all but two cases for both prone scenarios. Conformity (nCI) and number of beams were equivalent in all scenarios, but supine plans used a significantly higher number of monitor units (+16%) than prone. Posterior beam access can reduce dose to healthy tissue in CyberKnife spinal radiosurgery when no additional margin is applied. When a target margin of 2 mm is added, this potential gain is lost. Relative anterior-posterior position and size of the target are selection criteria for prone treatment.

Cochlear-optimized treatment planning in photon and proton radiosurgery for vestibular schwannoma patients.

Objective: To investigate the potential to reduce the cochlear dose with robotic photon radiosurgery or intensity-modulated proton therapy planning for vestibular schwannomas. Materials and Methods: Clinically delivered photon radiosurgery treatment plans were compared to five cochlear-optimized plans: one photon and four proton plans (total of 120). A 1x12 Gy dose was prescribed. Photon plans were generated with Precision (Cyberknife, Accuray) with no PTV margin for set-up errors. Proton plans were generated using an in-house automated multi-criterial planning system with three or nine-beam arrangements, and applying 0 or 3 mm robustness for set-up errors during plan optimization and evaluation (and 3 % range robustness). The sample size was calculated based on a reduction of cochlear Dmean > 1.5 Gy(RBE) from the clinical plans, and resulted in 24 patients. Results: Compared to the clinical photon plans, a reduction of cochlear Dmean > 1.5 Gy(RBE) could be achieved in 11/24 cochlear-optimized photon plans, 4/24 and 6/24 cochlear-optimized proton plans without set-up robustness for three and nine-beam arrangement, respectively, and in 0/24 proton plans with set-up robustness. The cochlea could best be spared in cases with a distance between tumor and cochlea. Using nine proton beams resulted in a reduced dose to most organs at risk. Conclusion: Cochlear dose reduction is possible in vestibular schwannoma radiosurgery while maintaining tumor coverage, especially when the tumor is not adjacent to the cochlea. With current set-up robustness, proton therapy is capable of providing lower dose to organs at risk located distant to the tumor, but not for organs adjacent to it. Consequently, photon plans provided better cochlear sparing than proton plans.

Technical feasibility of online adaptive stereotactic treatments in the abdomen on a robotic radiosurgery system.

Background and purpose: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been proven to be beneficial for several disease sites in the (lower) abdomen. However, the quality of the treatment plan, based on a single planning computed tomography (CT), can be compromised due to large inter-fraction motion of the target and organs at risk (OARs) in this anatomical region. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of online adaptive SBRT treatments on a robotic radiosurgery system and to record estimated total treatment times. Materials and methods: For two disease sites, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) and oligometastatic lymph nodes, four patients with repeat CTs were included in the feasibility study. Quick treatment plan templates were generated based on the planning CT and validated by running them on the plan and fraction CTs. For two cases a dummy run was performed and the individual steps were timed. Dose delivery was the largest contributor to the total treatment time, followed by contour adaptation. Results: Running the quick plan templates resulted in plans similar to unrestricted plans, obeying the OAR constraints. The dummy runs showed that online adaptive treatments were completed in 64 to 83 min respectively for oligometastases and LAPC, comparable to other clinically available solutions. Conclusions: This study showed the feasibility of online re-planning for two challenging disease sites within a clinically acceptable time frame on a robotic radiosurgery system, making use of commercially available elements that are not integrated by the vendor.

Individualized automated planning for dose bath reduction in robotic radiosurgery for benign tumors.

OBJECT: To explore the use of automated planning in robotic radiosurgery of benign vestibular schwannoma (VS) tumors for dose reduction outside the planning target volume (PTV) to potentially reduce risk of secondary tumor induction. METHODS: A system for automated planning (AUTOplans) for VS patients was set up. The goal of AUTO- planning was to reduce the dose bath, including the occurrence of high dose spikes leaking from the PTV into normal tissues, without worsening PTV coverage, OAR doses, or treatment time. For 20 VS patients treated with 1x12 Gy, the AUTOplan was compared with the plan generated with conventional, manual trial-and-error planning (MANplan). RESULTS: With equal PTV coverage, AUTOplans showed clinically negligible differences with MANplans in OAR sparing (largest mean difference for all OARs: ΔD2% = 0.2 Gy). AUTOplan dose distributions were more compact: mean/maximum reductions of 23.6/53.8% and 9.6/28.5% in patient volumes receiving more than 1 or 6 Gy, respectively (p<0.001). AUTOplans also showed smaller dose spikes with mean/maximum reductions of 22.8/37.2% and 14.2/40.4% in D2% for shells at 1 and 7 cm distance from the PTV, respectively (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Automated planning for benign VS tumors highly outperformed manual planning with respect to the dose bath outside the PTV, without deteriorating PTV coverage or OAR sparing, or significantly increasing treatment time.