Three-dimensional printers applied for the production of beam blocks in total body irradiation treatment.

PURPOSE: Total body irradiation (TBI) in extended source surface distance (SSD) is a common treatment technique before hematopoietic stem cell transplant. The lungs are organs at risk, which often are treated with a lower dose than the whole body. METHODS: This can be achieved by the application of blocks. Three-dimensional (3D) printers are a modern tool to be used in the production process of these blocks. RESULTS: We demonstrate the applicability of a specific printer and printing material, describe the process, and evaluate the accuracy of the product. CONCLUSION: The blocks and apertures were found to be applicable in clinical routine.

Iterative metal artifact reduction improves dose calculation accuracy : Phantom study with dental implants.

PURPOSE: Metallic dental implants cause severe streaking artifacts in computed tomography (CT) data, which affect the accuracy of dose calculations in radiation therapy. The aim of this study was to investigate the benefit of the metal artifact reduction algorithm iterative metal artifact reduction (iMAR) in terms of correct representation of Hounsfield units (HU) and dose calculation accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Heterogeneous phantoms consisting of different types of tissue equivalent material surrounding metallic dental implants were designed. Artifact-containing CT data of the phantoms were corrected using iMAR. Corrected and uncorrected CT data were compared to synthetic CT data to evaluate accuracy of HU reproduction. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were calculated in Oncentra v4.3 on corrected and uncorrected CT data and compared to Gafchromic™ EBT3 films to assess accuracy of dose calculation. RESULTS: The use of iMAR increased the accuracy of HU reproduction. The average deviation of HU decreased from 1006 HU to 408 HU in areas including metal and from 283 HU to 33 HU in tissue areas excluding metal. Dose calculation accuracy could be significantly improved for all phantoms and plans: The mean passing rate for gamma evaluation with 3 % dose tolerance and 3 mm distance to agreement increased from 90.6 % to 96.2 % if artifacts were corrected by iMAR. CONCLUSION: The application of iMAR allows metal artifacts to be removed to a great extent which leads to a significant increase in dose calculation accuracy.

Second Cancer Risk after simultaneous integrated boost radiation therapy of right sided breast cancer with and without flattening filter.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate if the flattening filter free mode (FFF) of a linear accelerator reduces the excess absolute risk (EAR) for second cancer as compared to the flat beam mode (FF) in simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) radiation therapy of right-sided breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six plans were generated treating the whole breast to 50.4 Gy and a SIB volume to 63 Gy on CT data of 10 patients: intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and a tangential arc VMAT (tVMAT), each with flattening filter and without. The EAR was calculated for the contralateral breast and the lungs from dose-volume histograms (DVH) based on the linear-exponential, the plateau, and the full mechanistic dose-response model. Peripheral low-dose measurements were performed to compare the EAR in more distant regions as the thyroids and the uterus. RESULTS: FFF reduces the EAR significantly in the contralateral and peripheral organs for tVMAT and in the peripheral organs for VMAT. No reduction was found for IMRT. The lowest EAR for the contralateral breast and lung was achieved with tVMAT FFF, reducing the EAR by 25 % and 29 % as compared to tVMAT FF, and by 44 % to 58 % as compared to VMAT and IMRT in both irradiation modes. tVMAT FFF showed also the lowest peripheral dose corresponding to the lowest EAR in the thyroids and the uterus. CONCLUSION: The use of FFF mode allows reducing the EAR significantly when tVMAT is used as the treatment technique. When second cancer risk is a major concern, tVMAT FFF is considered the preferred treatment option in SIB irradiation of right-sided breast cancer.

Influence of metallic dental implants and metal artefacts on dose calculation accuracy.

PURPOSE: Metallic dental implants cause severe streaking artefacts in computed tomography (CT) data, which inhibit the correct representation of shape and density of the metal and the surrounding tissue. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of dental implants on the accuracy of dose calculations in radiation therapy planning and the benefit of metal artefact reduction (MAR). A second aim was to determine the treatment technique which is less sensitive to the presence of metallic implants in terms of dose calculation accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phantoms consisting of homogeneous water equivalent material surrounding dental implants were designed. Artefact-containing CT data were corrected using the correct density information. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were calculated on corrected and uncorrected CT data and compared to 2-dimensional dose measurements using GafChromic™ EBT2 films. RESULTS: For all plans the accuracy of dose calculations is significantly higher if performed on corrected CT data (p = 0.015). The agreement of calculated and measured dose distributions is significantly higher for VMAT than for IMRT plans for calculations on uncorrected CT data (p = 0.011) as well as on corrected CT data (p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: For IMRT and VMAT the application of metal artefact reduction significantly increases the agreement of dose calculations with film measurements. VMAT was found to provide the highest accuracy on corrected as well as on uncorrected CT data. VMAT is therefore preferable over IMRT for patients with metallic implants, if plan quality is comparable for the two techniques.

Simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) radiation therapy of right sided breast cancer with and without flattening filter - A treatment planning study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the two irradiation modes with (FF) and without flattening filter (FFF) for three different treatment techniques for simultaneous integrated boost radiation therapy of patients with right sided breast cancer. METHODS: An Elekta Synergy linac with Agility collimating device is used to simulate the treatment of 10 patients. Six plans were generated in Monaco 5.0 for each patient treating the whole breast and a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) volume: intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and a tangential arc VMAT (tVMAT), each with and without flattening filter. Plan quality was assessed considering target coverage, sparing of the contralateral breast, the lungs, the heart and the normal tissue. All plans were verified by a 2D-ionisation-chamber-array and delivery times were measured and compared. The Wilcoxon test was used for statistical analysis with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Significantly best target coverage and homogeneity was achieved using VMAT FFF with V95% = (98.7 ± 0.8) % and HI = (8.2 ± 0.9) % for the SIB and V95% = (98.3 ± 0.7) % for the PTV, whereas tVMAT showed significantly lowest doses to the contralateral organs at risk with a Dmean of (0.7 ± 0.1) Gy for the contralateral lung, (1.0 ± 0.2) Gy for the contralateral breast and (1.4 ± 0.2) Gy for the heart. All plans passed the gamma evaluation with a mean passing rate of (99.2 ± 0.8) %. Delivery times were significantly reduced for VMAT and tVMAT but increased for IMRT, when FFF was used. Lowest delivery times were observed for tVMAT FFF with (1:20 ± 0:07) min. CONCLUSION: Balancing target coverage, OAR sparing and delivery time, VMAT FFF and tVMAT FFF are considered the preferable of the investigated treatment options in simultaneous integrated boost irradiation of right sided breast cancer for the combination of an Elekta Synergy linac with Agility and the treatment planning system Monaco 5.0.