The effect of beam interruption during FFF-VMAT plans for SBRT

Comparison of the dose distribution of the VMAT radiotherapy technique depending on the beam used: FFF-X10MV and FFF-X15MV

Background

The aim of the study was to answer the question of whether flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter-free (FFF) beams can be used alternately in the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment technique, regardless of the size of the irradiated volume [small (S) or large (L) planning target volume (PTV)].

Materials and methods

Two groups of patients were examined: a group with a S-PTV-laryngeal cancer and a group with a L-PTV - gynecological volume. For each patient, two treatment plans were made for beams (energies): FFF-X10MV and FF-X15MV. Then, a statistical analysis, nonparametric test, and independent groups were performed, comparing the beams' impact on the analyzed treatment plans.

Results

In the case of laryngeal irradiation (S-PTV), there are no statistically significant differences between the energy used and the assessed parameters of the plan. In the case of gynecological volume (L-PTV), only statistically significant differences were noted for the number of monitor units depending on the energy used. For a large irradiated volume (gynecological case), the use of FFF beams increases the number of monitor units by 39,4% in relation to the FF beam.

Conclusions

In the case of gynecological neoplasms, statistically significant differences were found in the number of monitor units. Therefore, in the case of irradiation of L-PTV, it is recommended that flattening-filtering beams are used due to the smaller number of monitors. In the case of S-PTV, no statistically significant differences were found between the types of beams used (FF or FFF) and the treatment plan parameters analyzed in the study.

Comparing phase- and amplitude-gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom

PURPOSE

To compare the dosimetric impact and treatment delivery efficacy of phase-gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs amplitude-gated VMAT for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer by using realistic three-dimensional-printed phantoms.

METHODS

Four patient-specific moving lung phantoms that closely simulate the heterogeneity of lung tissue and breathing patterns were fabricated with four planning computed tomography (CT) images for lung SBRT cases. The phantoms were designed to be bisected for the measurement of two-dimensional dose distributions by using EBT3 dosimetry film. The dosimetric accuracy of treatment under respiratory motion was analyzed with the gamma index (2%/1 mm) between the plan dose and film dose measured under phase- and amplitude-gated VMAT. For the validation of the direct usage of the real-time position management (RPM) data for respiratory motion, the relationship between the RPM signal and the diaphragm position was measured by four-dimensional CT. By using data recorded during the beam delivery of both phase- and amplitude-gated VMAT, the total time intervals were compared for each treatment mode.

RESULTS

Film dosimetry showed a 5.2 ± 4.2% difference of gamma passing rate (2%/1 mm) on average between the phase- vs amplitude-gated VMAT [77.7% (72.7%-85.9%) for the phase mode and 82.9% (81.4%-86.2%) for the amplitude mode]. For delivery efficiency, frequent interruptions were observed during the phase-gated VMAT, which stopped the beam delivery and required a certain amount of time before resuming the beam. This abnormality in phase-gated VMAT caused a prolonged treatment delivery time of 366 s compared with 183 s for amplitude-gated VMAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the dosimetric accuracy and delivery efficacy between the gating methods, amplitude mode is superior to phase mode for gated VMAT treatment.

Validation of new transmission detector transmission factors for online dosimetry: an experimental study

Background

The demand for dose verification during treatment has risen with the increasing use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in modern radiation therapy. This study aims to validate the transmission factors of a new transmission detector, the Dolphin online monitoring system (IBA Dosimetry, Schwarzenbruck, Germany), for clinical use.

Methods

The transmission factors of the Dolphin detector were evaluated using 6 MV, 6 flattening filter free (FFF), 10 MV, and 10 FFF clinical beams from a TrueBeam STx linear accelerator system. Two-dimensional (2D) dose distributions were measured through portal dosimetry with and without Dolphin to derive the transmission factors. The measurements were performed using 10 IMRT and 10 VMAT treatment plans. The transmission factors were calculated using a non-negative least squares problem solver for the 2D dose matrix. Normalized plans were generated using the derived transmission factors. Patient-specific quality assurance with normalized plans was performed using portal dosimetry and an ArcCheck detector to verify the transmission factors. The gamma passing rates were calculated for the 2%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm criteria.

Results

The transmission factors for the 6 MV, 6 FFF, 10 MV, and 10 FFF beams, were 0.878, 0.824, 0.913, and 0.883, respectively. The average dose difference between the original plan without Dolphin and the normalized plan with Dolphin was less than 1.8% for all measurements. The mean passing rates of the gamma evaluation were 98.1 ± 2.1 and 82.9 ± 12.6 for the 2%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm criteria, respectively, for portal dosimetry of the original plan. In the case of the portal dosimetry of the normalized plan, the mean passing rates of the gamma evaluation were 97.2 ± 2.8 and 79.1 ± 14.8 for the 2%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm criteria, respectively.

Conclusions

The Dolphin detector can be used for online dosimetry when valid transmission factors are applied to the clinical plan.