Field-in-field breast planning for a jawless, double-stack MLC LINAC using flattening-filter-free beams

Intensity Modulated Therapy for Patients With Breast Cancer. Practical Guidelines and Tips for an Effective Treatment Planning Strategy

Purpose

Practical guidelines and tips for effective and robust radiation therapy treatment planning for patients with breast cancer are addressed for fixed-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. The concepts described here are general and valid on all treatment planning systems. However, some details shown here have been applied to the Varian platforms used at the authors' institutions.

Methods and Materials

The specific aspects of using C-arm- or O-ring-mounted linear accelerators are covered in the document, as well as tips for dealing with certain resource constraints, target cropping, and skin flash aiming to reduce risks of skin toxicity and to manage (residual after breath control) respiration motion or edema.

Results

A decision tree is presented, and practical solutions for cases where a target volume is contoured or not and where volumetric modulated arc therapy or fixed-beam intensity modulation should be applied and details about the technical implementation (tangential IMRT, butterfly IMRT or VMAT, and large partial VMAT arcs) are discussed. Target cropping and skin flash implications are discussed in detail, and links to plan robustness are outlined.

Conclusions

Practical guidelines for breast planning are presented and summarized with a decision tree and technical summaries.

An IMRT planning technique for treating whole breast or chest wall with regional lymph nodes on Halcyon and Ethos

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

Field size limitations on Halcyon and Ethos treatment machines largely preclude use of the conventional monoisocentric three-field technique for breast/chest wall and regional lymph nodes. We present an alternative, IMRT-based planning approach that facilitates treatment on Halcyon and Ethos while preserving plan quality.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Eight breast and regional node cases (four left-sided, four right-sided) were planned for an Ethos machine using a 15-17 field IMRT technique. Institutional plan quality metrics for CTV and PTV coverage and OAR sparing were assessed. Five plans (four right-sided, one left-sided) were also planned using a hybrid 3D multisocenter technique. CTV coverage and OAR sparing were compared to the IMRT plans. Eclipse scripting tools were developed to aid in beam placement and plan evaluation through a set of dosimetric scorecards, and both are shared publicly.

RESULTS

On average, the IMRT plans achieved breast CTV and PTV coverage at 50 Gy of 97.9% and 95.7%, respectively. Supraclavicular CTV and PTV coverages at 45 Gy were 100% and 95.5%. Axillary lymph node CTV and PTV coverages at 45 Gy were 100% and 97.1%, and IMN CTV coverage at 45 Gy was 99.2%. Mean ipsilateral lung V20 Gy was 19.3%, and average mean heart dose was 1.6 Gy for right-sided cases and 3.0 Gy for left-sided. In comparison to the hybrid 3D plans, IMRT plans achieved higher breast and supraclavicular CTV coverage (99.9% vs. 98.6% and 99.9% vs. 93.4%), higher IMN coverage (99.6% vs. 78.2%), and lower ipsilateral lung V20 Gy (19.6% vs. 28.2%).

CONCLUSION

Institutional plan quality benchmarks were achieved for all eight cases using the IMRT-based planning approach. The IMRT-based planning approach offered superior conformity and OAR sparing than a competing hybrid 3D approach.

Benchmarking halcyon ring delivery system for hypofractionated breast radiotherapy: Validation and clinical implementation of the fast-forward trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and efficacy of an iterative CBCT-guided breast radiotherapy with Fast-Forward trial of 26 Gy in five fractions on a Halcyon Linac. This study quantifies Halcyon plan quality, treatment delivery accuracy and efficacy by comparison with those of clinical TrueBeam plans.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) patients (four right, six left) who underwent Fast-Forward trial at our institute on TrueBeam (6MV beam) were re-planned on Halcyon (6MV-FFF). Three site-specific partial coplanar VMAT arcs and an Acuros-based dose engine were used. For benchmarking, PTV coverage, organs-at-risk (OAR) doses, beam-on time, and quality assurance (QA) results were compared for both plans.

RESULTS

The average PTV was 806 cc. Compared to TrueBeam plans, Halcyon provided highly conformal and homogeneous plans with similar mean PTVD95 (25.72  vs. 25.73 Gy), both global maximum hotspot < 110% (p = 0.954) and similar mean GTV dose (27.04  vs. 26.80 Gy, p = 0.093). Halcyon provided lower volume of ipsilateral lung receiving 8 Gy (6.34% vs. 8.18%, p = 0.021), similar heart V1.5 Gy (16.75% vs. 16.92%, p = 0.872), V7Gy (0% vs. 0%), mean heart dose (0.96  vs. 0.9 Gy, p = 0.228), lower maximum dose to contralateral breast (3.2  vs. 3.6 Gy, p = 0.174), and nipple (19.6  vs. 20.1 Gy, p = 0.363). Compared to TrueBeam, Halcyon plans provided similar patient-specific QA pass rates and independent in-house Monte Carlo second check results of 99.6% vs. 97.9% (3%/2 mm gamma criteria) and 98.6% versus 99.2%, respectively, suggesting similar treatment delivery accuracy. Halcyon provided shorter beam-on time (1.49  vs. 1.68 min, p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Compared to the SBRT-dedicated TrueBeam, Halcyon VMAT plans provided similar plan quality and treatment delivery accuracy, yet potentially faster treatment via one-step patient setup and verification with no patient collision issues. Rapid delivery of daily APBI on Fast-Forward trial on Halcyon with door-to-door patient time < 10 min, could reduce intrafraction motion errors, and improve patient comfort and compliance. We have started treating APBI on Halcyon. Clinical follow-up results are warranted. We recommend Halcyon users consider implementing the protocol to remote and underserved APBI patients in Halcyon-only clinics.

Efficient method for whole-breast irradiation therapy using Halcyon linear accelerators

Background

The Halcyon is a linear accelerator‐based treatment machine designed for a high‐throughput simplified workflow. The machine features a compact jawless design, dual‐layer multileaf collimators, and a single 6‐MV flattening filter‐free (FFF) beam. However, the machine's 6‐MV FFF beam may restrict its applicability to conventional techniques, such as field‐in‐field (FiF) radiotherapy, for breast cancer treatment. This study developed a practical and efficient hybrid method for imaging, planning, and irradiation procedures for whole‐breast irradiation using Halcyon linear accelerators.

Materials and methods

The proposed method involves five major steps: (1) field arrangement, (2) planning target volume (PTV) generation and evaluation, (3) basal plan generation, (4) inverse planning intensity–modulated radiation therapy plan generation, and (5) plan evaluation and irradiation. The PTV is generated using isodose curves plotted on the basis of tangential fields, which are applied to create a basal plan. Subsequently, a basal‐dose‐compensation approach is applied to further optimize the treatment plan. This efficient workflow necessitates executing only one onboard cone‐beam computed tomography procedure. This study included 10 patients with early‐stage breast cancer who were treated at our center. The performance of the proposed method was evaluated by comparing its corresponding irradiation time and dose statistics with those derived for a dynamically flattened beam‐based FiF (DFB‐FiF) method.

Results

All plans were normalized to ensure that 98% of the prescribed dose covered 95% of the PTV. On average, the global maximum doses in the proposed and DFB‐FiF methods were lower than 106%. The homogeneity index for right‐sided (left‐sided) breast cancer was 0.053 (0.056) in the proposed method and 0.073 (0.076) in the DFB‐FiF method. The dose statistics of normal tissues, including the contralateral breast, heart, and lungs, were comparable between the methods. However, the irradiation time per monitor unit in the proposed method was approximately five times faster than that in the DFB‐FiF method, but the planning time and complexity were similar between the methods.

Conclusions

This study developed and evaluated an efficient and practical hybrid method for whole‐breast irradiation using the Halcyon. This method can significantly reduce the irradiation time, while providing comparable dose statistics to the DFB‐FiF method.

Examination of conversion method of dose distribution of lung cancer IMRT using fluence reversible calculation function in O-ring type linac and C-type linac

Generally, converting irradiation plans between C-arm linacs (C-linac) when the linac fails is possible without recalculating the dose distribution using a treatment planning system (TPS), because they have similar mechanical structure. However, the O-ring-type linac (O-linac) differs from the C-linac in forming the dose distribution. Therefore, if O-linac breaks down, it is necessary to formulate a treatment plan from scratch. In this study, we investigated a method for converting irradiation from an O-linac to a C-linac. Thirty patients with lung cancer who underwent volumetric-modulated arc therapy with an O-linac were included in this study. The O-linac dose distribution was converted into energy fluence by the function of the TPS. The alternative linac multi-leaf collimator (MLC) was then optimized to achieve energy fluence. The homogeneity index, conformity index, and planning treatment volume (D95%, D2%) of the converted plan were compared with the original plan. For organ at risk (OAR), the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) of the lung, esophagus, heart, and spinal cord were evaluated. Additionally, the shapes of the isodose curves were compared using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). There was no significant difference between the target and OARs (p > 0.05). The mean DSCs of 30% to 100% isodose curves of the prescribed dose and the isodose ≥ 105% and ≤ 20%were > 0.8 and < 0.8, respectively. Due to the structural differences of MLC, the dose-volume and generation positions were different in the dose range of ≥ 105% and ≤ 20%; hence, DSCs decreased. However, no statistically significant difference in the DVH was identified for either treatment plan. Based on this result, we propose a simple replanning method for performing MLC fitting after converting the dose to the energy fluence.

Comparison of sliding window and field-in-field techniques for tangential whole breast irradiation using the Halcyon and Synergy Agility systems

BACKGROUND

To implement a tangential treatment technique for whole breast irradiation using the Varian Halcyon and to compare it with Elekta Synergy Agility plans.

METHODS

For 20 patients two comparable treatment plans with respect to dose coverage and normal tissue sparing were generated. Tangential field-in-field treatment plans (Pinnacle/Synergy) were replanned using the sliding window technique (Eclipse/Halcyon). Plan specific QA was performed using the portal Dosimetry and the ArcCHECK phantom. Imaging and treatment dose were evaluated for treatment delivery on both systems using a modified CIRS Phantom.

RESULTS

The mean number of monitor units for a fraction dose of 2.67 Gy was 515 MUs and 260 MUs for Halcyon and Synergy Agility plans, respectively. The homogeneity index and dose coverage were similar for both treatment units. The plan specific QA showed good agreement between measured and calculated plans. All Halcyon plans passed portal dosimetry QA (3%/2 mm) with 100% points passing and ArcCheck QA (3%/2 mm) with 99.5%. Measurement of the cumulated treatment and imaging dose with the CIRS phantom resulted in lower dose to the contralateral breast for the Halcyon plans.

CONCLUSIONS

For the Varian Halcyon a plan quality similar to the Elekta Synergy device was achieved. For the Halcyon plans the dose contribution from the treatment fields to the contralateral breast was even lower due to less interleaf transmission of the Halcyon MLC and a lower contribution of scattered dose from the collimator system.

Dosimetric comparison of VitalBeam® and HalcyonTM 2.0 for hypofractionated VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost treatment of early-stage left-sided breast cancer

Purpose

This study compared the quality of treatment plans for early‐stage, left‐sided breast cancer, as planned for and delivered by the Halcyon^TM and VitalBeam^®.

Materials and methods

Fifteen patients diagnosed with early‐stage left‐sided breast cancer, who had received VMAT with hypofractionated SIB, were recruited. All cases were planned using Halcyon^TM comprising a dual‐layer MLC (DL‐MLC) and VitalBeam^® with a Millennium 120 MLC (VB‐MLC). For the PTVs, the quality of coverage (QC), conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated for each plan. The dosimetric differences between the two treatment plans were statistically compared using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank test (p < 0.05). To evaluate delivery efficiency, the average delivery time for each patient's treatment plan was recorded and compared.

Results

For the PTVs, the two plans (DL‐MLC and VB‐MLC) were comparable in terms of the QC, CI, and HI. However, V_30Gy and D_mean for the heart in the DL‐MLC plan were significantly reduced by 0.49% and 14.6%, respectively, compared with those in the VB‐MLC plan (p < 0.05). The D_mean value for the ipsilateral lung in the DL‐MLC plan significantly decreased by 5.5%, compared with that in the VB‐MLC plan (p < 0.05). In addition, the delivery times for the DL‐MLC and VB‐MLC plans were 79 ± 10 and 101 ± 11 s, respectively.

Conclusions

DL‐MLC plans were found to improve OAR sparing. In particular, when treating left‐sided breast cancer via DL‐MLC plans, the risk of heart toxicity is expected to be reduced.

Using flattening filter free beams in electronic tissue compensation whole breast irradiation with deep inspiration breath hold

PURPOSE

In order to reduce heart dose, DIBH has become a common practice in left-sided whole breast irradiation. This technique involves a significant strain on patients due to the breath-hold requirements. We hereby investigate the dosimetric and delivery feasibility of using flattening filter free (FFF) energies with electronic tissue compensation (ECOMP) planning technique to reduce the required breath-hold lengths and increase patient compatibility.

METHODS

Fifteen left-sided, postlumpectomy patients previously receiving DIBH whole-breast radiotherapy (266cGy x 16fx) were retrospectively planned using ECOMP for both 6X and 6X-FFF. A dosimetric comparison was made between the two plans for each patient using various dosimetric constraints. Delivery feasibility was analyzed by recalculating the 6X ECOMP plan with 6X-FFF without replanning (6X-FFF QA) and delivering both plans for a one-to-one comparison using Gamma analysis. Beam-on times for the 6X and 6X-FFF plans were measured. For all tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used with P < 0.05 as significant.

RESULTS

No statistical difference was observed between 6X and 6X-FFF plans for most dosimetric endpoints except contralateral breast D_max (P = 0.0008) and skin D_max (p = 0.03) and D_min (P = 0.01) for which 6X-FFF showed favorable results when compared with 6X. 6X-FFF significantly reduced beam-on times for all patients by 22%-42% (average 32%). All plan QAs passed departmental gamma criteria (10% low-dose threshold, 3%/3mm, >95% passing).

CONCLUSION

ECOMP planning with FFF was found feasible for left-sided breast patients with DIBH. Plan quality is comparable, if not better, than plans using flattened beams. FFF ECOMP could significantly reduce beam-on time and required breath-hold lengths thereby increasing patient compatibility for this treatment while offering satisfactory plan quality and delivery accuracy.

Comprehensive validation of halcyon 2.0 plans and the implementation of patient specific QA with multiple detector platforms

Purpose

To perform a comprehensive validation of plans generated on a preconfigured Halcyon 2.0 with preloaded beam model, including evaluations of new features and implementing the patient specific quality assurance (PSQA) process with multiple detectors.

Methods

A total of 56 plans were generated in Eclipse V15.6 (Varian Medical System) with a preconfigured Halcyon treatment machine. Ten plans were developed via the AAPM TG‐119 test suite with both IMRT and VMAT techniques. 34 clinically treated plans using C‐arm LINAC from 24 patients were replanned on Halcyon using IMRT or VMAT techniques for a variety of sites including: brain, head and neck, lung, breast, abdomen, and pelvis. Six of those plans were breast VMAT plans utilizing the extended treatment field technique available with Halcyon 2.0. The dynamically flattened beam (DFB), another new feature on Halcyon 2.0, was also used for an AP/PA spine and four field box pelvis, as well as ten 3D breast plans. All 56 plans were measured with an ion chamber (IC), film, portal dosimetry (PD), ArcCHECK, and Delta4. Tolerance and action limits were calculated and compared to the recommendations of TG‐218.

Results

TG‐119 IC and film confidence limits met those set by the task group, except for IMRT target point dose. Forty‐four of 46 clinical plans were within 3% for IC measurements. Average gamma passing rates with 3% dose difference and 2mm distance‐to‐agreement for IMRT/VMAT plans were: Film – 96.8%, PD – 99.9%, ArcCHECK – 99.1%, and Delta4 – 99.2%. Calculated action limits were: Film – 86.3%, PD – 98.4%, ArcCHECK – 96.1%, and Delta4 – 95.7%. Extended treatment field technique was fully validated and 3D plans with DFB had similar results to IMRT/VMAT plans.

Conclusion

Halcyon plan deliveries were verified with multiple measurement devices. New features of Halcyon 2.0 were also validated. Traditional PSQA techniques and process specific tolerance and action limits were successfully implemented.

Technical Note: Dosimetric characterization of the dynamic beam flattening MLC sequence on a ring shaped, Jawless Linear Accelerator with double stacked MLC

PURPOSE

To characterize the dosimetric features and limitations of the dynamic beam flattening (DBF) on the Halcyon 2.0 linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems).

METHODS

A predefined multi-leaf collimator (MLC) sequence was introduced and used to flatten the 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF) beam on the Halcyon 2.0. Dosimetric characterizations of the flattened beams, including beam flatness, symmetry, percent depth dose (PDD), output factor and MU linearity, were investigated. Flatness and symmetry were obtained from profile measurements with both radiographic films (EDR2) and a two dimensional ion-chamber array (IC Profiler, Sun Nuclear Corporation). MU linearity, output factors, and PDDs were measured in a water tank with a CC13 ion chamber (Scanditronix Wellhöfer, Nuremburg, Germany). In addition, the effect of the DBF sequence on 3D plan quality was evaluated by creating DBF plans for a 4-field box rectum and an AP/PA spine plan. Patient specific QA was performed on these plans.

RESULTS

At 100 cm SSD and 10 cm depth, a flatness of <3% was observed on both transversal and radial profiles for all square field sizes ≥10 cm with DBF. For both larger and smaller field sizes the flatness showed a tendency to increase as the fields got bigger or smaller, respectively. Similar trends in flatness were observed at all depths measured. All measured output factors for square field sizes ≥5 cm were within 1% of the TPS prediction. Linearity was ≤2.02% for all measurements. For both treatment sites, the MD judged the plans created for the Halcyon without the use of DBF not to be clinically acceptable, however considered both the TrueBeam plan and the Halcyon plan with the DBF sequence to be clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

The DBF sequence on the Halcyon and its characteristics were investigated. The analysis indicates that the DBF sequence can be used on the Halcyon to generate clinically acceptable 3D treatment plans.