The impact of the offset distance between the planning target volume and isocenter on irradiation time in TomoTherapy: A phantom study

Influence of the Planning Parameters of a New Algorithm on the Dosimetric Quality, Beam-On Time and Delivery Accuracy of Tomotherapy Plans

BACKGROUND

This work aimed to determine the optimum VOLOTM Ultra algorithm parameters for tomotherapy treatments.

METHODS

1056 treatment plans were generated with VOLOTM Ultra for 36 patients and six anatomical locations. The impact of varying four parameters was studied: the accelerated treatment (AT), leaf open/close time (LOT) cutoff, normal tissue objective (NTO) weight, and number of iterations. The beam-on time and dosimetric metrics were quantified for the target volumes and organs at risk (OARs). Delivery quality assurance measurements were obtained for 36 plans to assess the delivery accuracy.

RESULTS

The mean beam-on time for the helical tomotherapy and TomoDirect (TD) plans decreased by 26.6 ± 2.8% and 17.4 ± 4.3%, respectively, when the accelerated treatment parameter was increased from 0 to 10, at the expense of the planning target volume (PTV) coverage (2% lower D98%) and OAR dose (up to 15% increase). For TD plans, it seems preferable to systematically use an AT value of 10. Increasing the number of iterations beyond six seems unnecessary. In this study, an NTO weight of approximately 10 appears to be ideal and eliminates the need to use rings in the treatment plan. Finally, no correlation was found between the leaf open/close time cutoff and the delivery accuracy, while a leaf open/close cutoff of 60 ms seemed to degrade dosimetry quality.

CONCLUSION

Optimal values for the AT, LOT cutoff, NTO weight, and number of optimization rounds were identified and should help improve the management of patients whose tomotherapy treatments are planned with VOLOTM Ultra.

Impact of delivery time factor on treatment time and plan quality in tomotherapy

Delivery time factor (DTF) is a new parameter introduced by the RayStation treatment planning system for tomotherapy treatment planning. This study investigated the effects of this factor on various tomotherapy plans. Twenty-five patients with cancer (head and neck, 6; lung, 9; prostate, 10) were enrolled in this study. Helical tomotherapy plans with a field width of 2.5 cm, pitch of 0.287, and DTF of 2.0 were created. All the initial plans were recalculated by changing the DTF parameter from 1.0 to 3.0 in increments of 0.1. Then, DTF's impact on delivery efficiency and plan quality was evaluated. Treatment time and modulation factor increased monotonically with increasing DTF. Increasing the DTF by 0.1 increased the treatment time and modulation factor by almost 10%. This relationship was similar for all treatment sites. Conformity index (CI), homogeneity index, and organ at risk doses were improved compared to plans with a DTF of 1.0, except for the CI in the lung cancer case. However, the improvement in most indices ceased at a certain DTF; nevertheless, treatment time continued to increase following an increase in DTF. DTF is a critical parameter for improving the quality of tomotherapy plans.

[Impact of Aperture Shape Controller on Knowledge-based VMAT Planning of Prostate Cancer]

PURPOSE

Knowledge-based planning (KBP) has disadvantages of high monitor unit (MU) and complex multi-leaf collimator (MLC) motion. We investigated the optimal aperture shape controller (ASC) level for the KBP to reduce these factors in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer.

METHODS

The KBP model was created based on 51 clinical plans (CPs) of patients who underwent the VMAT for prostate cancer. Another 10 CPs were selected randomly, and the KBPs with/without ASC, changed stepwise from very low (KBP-VL) to very high (KBP-VH), were performed with a single auto-optimization. The parameters of dose-volume histograms (DVHs) and MLC performance metrics were evaluated. We obtained the modulation complexity score for VMAT (MCSv), closed leaf score (CLS), small aperture score (SAS), leaf travel (LT), and total MU.

RESULTS

The ASC did not affect the DVH parameters negatively. The following comparisons of MLC performance were obtained (KBP vs. KBP-VL vs. KBP-VH, respectively): 0.25 vs. 0.27 vs. 0.30 (MCSv), 0.19 vs. 0.18 vs. 0.16 (CLS), 0.50 vs. 0.45 vs. 0.40 (SAS_{10 mm}), 0.73 vs. 0.68 vs. 0.63 (SAS_{20 mm}), 768.35 mm vs. 671.50 mm vs. 551.32 mm (LT), and 672.87 vs. 642.36 vs. 607.59 (MU). There were significant differences between KBP and KBP-VH for MCSv and LT (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The KBP using an ASC set to the very high level could reduce the complexity of MLC motion significantly more without deterioration of the DVH parameters compared with the KBP in VMAT for prostate cancer.