Pseudo skin flash on VMAT in breast radiotherapy: Optimization of virtual bolus thickness and HU values

Does extending the body contour into air enhance surface dose calculation accuracy?

PURPOSE

In radiotherapy treatment planning systems, modelling of superficial dose may be aided by a body contour that is, by default, placed at the outermost air-tissue interface. Here we investigate the accuracy of superficial dose calculated using either the default body contour (DBC) or an extended body contour (EBC) compared to radiochromic film measurements made on a slab phantom and an anthropomorphic phantom.

METHODS

Depth dose curves in the superficial region of the slab phantom were measured using stacked radiochromic films and irradiated using static beams delivered from varying incident angles. Surface doses on the anthropomorphic phantom were measured using films taped to the outside and irradiated with dynamic beams targeting the skin. No intervening immobilization devices were between the incident beams and films. Measurements were compared with dose calculations performed with Eclipse 15.6 Acuros XB using both the DBC and EBC. The EBC was generated by extending the DBC out into air by 1 cm.

RESULTS

Differences between the DBC- and EBC-calculated dose were largest within the region ranging from the surface to a depth of 2 mm. Beyond 2 mm, calculations agreed to within 5%. For the slab phantom, the DBC- and EBC-calculated surface doses for 0-degree incident angle were 26% and 44% respectively, while measured dose was 24 ± 3%. At 60-degrees incident angle, DBC- and EBC-calculated surface doses were 33% and 66% respectively, while the measured dose was 43 ± 3%. For the anthropomorphic phantom, the DBC- and EBC-calculated surface doses were 65% and 99% of the prescription dose respectively, while the measured surface dose was 76 ± 3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Calculating with the EBC overestimated surface dose, while the DBC underestimated surface dose under conditions of oblique delivery. Overall, the default method of placing the body contour at the air-tissue interface produced a more accurate estimation of surface dose for bare skin.

Pro-active risk analysis of an in-house developed deep learning based autoplanning tool for breast Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy

Background and Purpose

With the increasing amount of in-house created deep learning models in radiotherapy, it is important to know how to minimise the risks associated with the local clinical implementation prior to clinical use. The goal of this study is to give an example of how to identify the risks and find mitigation strategies to reduce these risks in an implemented workflow containing a deep learning based planning tool for breast Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy.

Materials and Methods

The deep learning model ran on a private Google Cloud environment for adequate computational capacity and was integrated into a workflow that could be initiated within the clinical Treatment Planning System (TPS). A proactive Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) was conducted by a multidisciplinary team, including physicians, physicists, dosimetrists, technologists, quality managers, and the research and development team. Failure modes categorised as 'Not acceptable' and 'Tolerable' on the risk matrix were further examined to find mitigation strategies.

Results

In total, 39 failure modes were defined for the total workflow, divided over four steps. Of these, 33 were deemed 'Acceptable', five 'Tolerable', and one 'Not acceptable'. Mitigation strategies, such as a case-specific Quality Assurance report, additional scripted checks and properties, a pop-up window, and time stamp analysis, reduced the failure modes to two 'Tolerable' and none in the 'Not acceptable' region.

Conclusions

The pro-active risk analysis revealed possible risks in the implemented workflow and led to the implementation of mitigation strategies that decreased the risk scores for safer clinical use.

Off-isocentric VMAT technique for breast cancer: Effective dose reduction to organs at risk and its applicability based on patient anatomy

PURPOSE

This study aims to explore the off-isocentric volumetric modulated arc therapy (offVMAT) technique for breast cancer and determine its applicability based on patient anatomical parameters.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 44 breast cancer patients with varied lymph node involvement using different arc designs. Off-isocentric techniques were benchmarked against previously published arc techniques: classic arcs (clVMAT), tangential arcs (tVMAT), and split arcs (spVMAT). During optimization, target coverage was made for all plans as close as possible to the criteria D99% > 95% and Dmax < 110% of the prescribed dose. A novel patient categorization, based on anatomical parameters (auxiliary structures) rather than lymph node involvement, is introduced. This categorization considers the volume of ipsilateral organs at risk (OARs) adjacent to the target. A binary regression model was developed on these anatomical parameters. It predicts the likelihood of offVMAT (P[offVMAT]) achieving better criteria.

RESULTS

Using the regression model, patients were divided into two groups: P(offVMAT) > 0.5 and P(offVMAT) < 0.5. For the P(offVMAT) > 0.5 group, most tVMAT plans are unable to achieve the clinical objectives. Comparing offVMAT with spVMAT, offVMAT exhibited better dose parameters for the heart (V20, V10, and D2 are 7.1, 2.4, and 1.5 times lower respectively), ipsilateral lung (V20, V10, V5 and the mean dose are 1.4, 1.3, 1.2, and 1.2 times lower respectively). The average doses to the contralateral side are consistent. In the P(offVMAT) < 0.5 group, the tVMAT technique showed increased doses at medium and high levels, yet reduced doses in contralateral OARs compared to spVMAT and offVMAT. spVMAT showed lower doses in the contralateral lung relative to the offVMAT technique, while clVMAT trailed in both groups. Validation of the model yielded a 90% accuracy rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The new off-isocentric breast planning technique effectively reduces doses to ipsilateral OARs, maintaining acceptable contralateral mean doses. This technique has an advantage over other techniques for patients with intricate anatomies. It is evaluated using anatomical parameters, which are also used to build binary regression model, which shows the dependence of anatomical parameters on whether offVMAT is preferred for individual patients. Also, such anatomical parameters provide a more objective and precise comparison between different planning techniques.

A robust treatment planning approach for chest motion in postmastectomy chest wall intensity modulated radiation therapy

PURPOSE

Chest wall postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) should consider the effects of chest wall respiratory motion. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of robustness planning intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for respiratory movement, considering respiratory motion as a setup error.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study analyzed 20 patients who underwent PMRT (10 left and 10 right chest walls). The following three treatment plans were created for each case and compared. The treatment plans are a planning target volume (PTV) plan (PP) that covers the PTV within the body contour with the prescribed dose, a virtual bolus plan (VP) that sets a virtual bolus in contact with the body surface and prescribing the dose that includes the PTV outside the body contour, and a robust plan (RP) that considers respiratory movement as a setup uncertainty and performs robust optimization. The isocenter was shifted to reproduce the chest wall motion pattern and the doses were recalculated for comparison for each treatment plan.

RESULT

No significant difference was found between the PP and the RP in terms of the tumor dose in the treatment plan. In contrast, VP had 3.5% higher PTV Dmax and 5.5% lower PTV V95% than RP (p < 0.001). The RP demonstrated significantly higher lung V20Gy and Dmean by 1.4% and 0.4 Gy, respectively, than the PP. The RP showed smaller changes in dose distribution affected by chest wall motion and significantly higher tumor dose coverage than the PP and VP.

CONCLUSION

We revealed that the RP demonstrated comparable tumor doses to the PP in treatment planning and was robust for respiratory motion compared to both the PP and the VP. However, the organ at risk dose in the RP was slightly higher; therefore, its clinical use should be carefully considered.

Dosimetric effect of rotational setup errors in volumetric modulated arc therapy and field-in-field treatment of left-sided breast cancer

Setup errors are an important factor in the dosimetric accuracy of radiotherapy delivery. In this study, we investigated how rotational setup errors influence the dose distribution in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and tangential field-in-field (FiF) treatment of left-sided breast cancer with supraclavicular lymph node involvement in deep inspiration breath hold. Treatment planning computed tomography images and radiotherapy plans of 20 patients were collected retrospectively for the study. Rotational setup errors up to 3° were simulated by rotating the planning images, and the resulting dosimetric changes were calculated. With rotational setup errors up to 3°, the median decrease of V95% to clinical target volume was less than 0.8 percentage point in both VMAT and FiF plans. The dose distribution of the heart and left anterior descending artery was more stable with respect to rotations in VMAT plans compared to FiF plans. Correction of ≥1° setup errors is recommended due to increased doses to the heart and left anterior descending artery after 1° setup errors.

Quality assurance in a phase III, multicenter, randomized trial of POstmastectomy radioThErapy in Node posiTive breast cancer with or without Internal mAmmary nodaL irradiation (POTENTIAL): a planning benchmark case

PURPOSE

To report the planning benchmark case results of the POTENTIAL trial-a multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial-to evaluate the value of internal mammary nodal (IMN) irradiation for patients with high-risk breast cancer.

METHODS

All participating institutions were provided the outlines of one benchmark case, and they generated radiation therapy plans per protocol. The plans were evaluated by a quality assurance team, after which the institutions resubmitted their revised plans. The information on beams arrangement, skin flash, inhomogeneity corrections, and protocol compliance was assessed in the first and final submission.

RESULTS

The plans from 26 institutions were analyzed. Some major deviations were found in the first submission. The protocol compliance rates of dose coverage for the planning target volume of chest wall, supraclavicular fossa plus axilla, and IMN region (PTVim) were all significantly improved in the final submission, which were 96.2% vs. 69.2%, 100% vs. 76.9%, and 88.4% vs. 53.8%, respectively. For OARs, the compliance rates of heart Dmean, left anterior descending coronary artery V40Gy, ipsilateral lung V5Gy, and stomach V5Gy were significantly improved. In the first and final submission, the mean values of PTVim V100% were 79.9% vs. 92.7%; the mean values of heart Dmean were 11.5 Gy vs. 9.7 Gy for hypofractionated radiation therapy and 11.5 Gy vs. 11.0 Gy for conventional fractionated radiation therapy, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The major deviations were corrected and protocol compliance was significantly improved after revision, which highlighted the importance of planning benchmark case to guarantee the planning quality for multicenter trials.

Comparative Study of Plan Robustness for Breast Radiotherapy: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Plans with Robust Optimization versus Manual Flash Approach

A previous study investigated robustness of manual flash (MF) and robust optimized (RO) volumetric modulated arc therapy plans for breast radiotherapy based on five patients in 2020 and indicated that the RO was more robust than the MF, although the MF is still current standard practice. The purpose of this study was to compare their plan robustness in terms of dose variation to clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OARs) based on a larger sample size. This was a retrospective study involving 34 female patients. Their plan robustness was evaluated based on measured volume/dose difference between nominal and worst scenarios (ΔV/ΔD) for each CTV and OARs parameter, with a smaller difference representing greater robustness. Paired sample t-test was used to compare their robustness values. All parameters (except CTV ΔD98%) of the RO approach had smaller ΔV/ΔD values than those of the MF. Also, the RO approach had statistically significantly smaller ΔV/ΔD values (p < 0.001-0.012) for all CTV parameters except the CTV ΔV95% and ΔD98% and heart ΔDmean. This study's results confirm that the RO approach was more robust than the MF in general. Although both techniques were able to generate clinically acceptable plans for breast radiotherapy, the RO could potentially improve workflow efficiency due to its simpler planning process.

Robustness of hypofractionated breast radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery with free breathing

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the robustness with respect to the positional variations of five planning strategies in free-breathing breast hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) for patients after breast-conserving surgery.

Methods

Twenty patients who received breast HFRT with 42.72 Gy in 16 fractions were retrospectively analyzed. Five treatment planning strategies were utilized for each patient, including 1) intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning (IMRTpure); 2) IMRT planning with skin flash tool extending and filling the fluence outside the skin by 2 cm (IMRTflash); 3) IMRT planning with planning target volume (PTV) extended outside the skin by 2 cm in the computed tomography dataset (IMRTePTV); 4) hybrid planning, i.e., 2 Gy/fraction three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy combined with 0.67 Gy/fraction IMRT (IMRThybrid); and 5) hybrid planning with skin flash (IMRThybrid-flash). All plans were normalized to 95% PTV receiving 100% of the prescription dose. Six additional plans were created with different isocenter shifts for each plan, which were 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 5 mm, 7 mm, and 10 mm distally in the X (left-right) and Y (anterior-posterior) directions, namely, (X,Y), to assess their robustness, and the corresponding doses were recalculated. Variation of dosimetric parameters with increasing isocenter shift was evaluated.

Results

All plans were clinically acceptable. In terms of robustness to isocenter shifts, the five planning strategies followed the pattern IMRTePTV, IMRThybrid-flash, IMRTflash, IMRThybrid, and IMRTpure in descending order. V 95% of IMRTePTV maintained at 99.6% ± 0.3% with a (5,5) shift, which further reduced to 98.2% ± 2.0% with a (10,10) shift. IMRThybrid-flash yielded the robustness second to IMRTePTV with less risk from dose hotspots, and the corresponding V 95% maintained >95% up until (5,5).

Conclusion

Considering the dosimetric distribution and robustness in breast radiotherapy, IMRTePTV performed best at maintaining high target coverage with increasing isocenter shift, while IMRThybrid-flash would be adequate with positional uncertainty<5 mm.

Comparing brass mesh to tissue equivalent bolus materials for volumetric modulated arc therapy chest wall irradiation

PURPOSE

To compare the superficial dose when using brass mesh bolus (BMB), no bolus, or 3 mm tissue-equivalent bolus with a pseudo-flash volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) breast treatment planning technique.

METHODS

Two different beam arrangements for right-sided irradiation and one beam arrangement for bilateral irradiation were planned on an inhomogeneous thorax phantom in accordance with our clinical practice for VMAT postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Plans were optimized using pseudo-flash and representative critical organ optimization structures were used to shape the dose. Plans were delivered without bolus, with 3 mm tissue-equivalent bolus (TEB), or with one-layer BMB. Optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter (OSLD) and radiochromic film measurements were taken and analyzed to determine the superficial dose in each case and the relative enhancement from the no bolus delivery.

RESULTS

Superficial dose measured with OSLDs was found to be 76.4 ± 4.5%, 103.0 ± 6.1%, and 98.1 ± 5.8% of prescription for no physical bolus (NB), TEB, and BMB, respectively. Superficial dose was observed to increase from lateral to medial points when measured with film. However, the relative increase in superficial dose from NB was consistent across the profile with an increase of 43 ± 2.1% and 34 ± 3.3% of prescription for TEB and BMB, respectively. The results are in good agreement with expectations from the literature and the experience with tangential radiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Three millimeter TEB and one-layer BMB were shown to provide similar enhancement to the superficial dose compared to delivery without bolus. BMB, which does not significantly affect dose at depth and is more conformal to the patient surface, is an acceptable alternative to 3 mm TEB for chest wall PMRT patients treated with pseudo-flash PMRT.

Robust VMAT treatment planning for extremity soft tissue sarcomas

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a frequently employed and guideline-recommended radiotherapy (RT) modality for extremity soft tissue sarcomas (eSTS). Prior studies have demonstrated that significant tumor volume changes during treatment result in loss of target volume coverage with highly conformal techniques such as VMAT, but few solutions exist to these issues aside from adaptive replanning. Here, we describe a related but novel phenomenon in which relatively minor changes in surface volume contour (whether due to daily setup uncertainty, edema of peritumoral tissue, or progression or pseudo-progression of tumor volume itself) can result in unexpected subcutaneous hotspots. This phenomenon is of significant clinical concern given the known association between skin dose and major wound complications during preoperative RT for eSTS. By evaluating daily cone-beam CT (CBCT) images from thirteen eSTS patients treated with VMAT RT, we identify daily surface contour changes (range: 2 mm-15 mm, median: 8 mm) which are frequently below conventional adaptive replanning thresholds. When applied under experimental conditions, these external contour changes did not have major impacts on target volume coverage (range: 30.2%-91.2%, mean: 72.5%) but did result in unexpected hotspots of 125.8% on average (range: 110.0%-142.2%) in the subcutaneous tissues. To mitigate this issue, we develop a methodology for VMAT treatment planning using flash PTV and virtual bolus (VB) to produce robust treatment plans that are more resistant to target volume changes, surface contour changes, and setup uncertainties than conventional planning methods. With this methodology, robust plans were equivalent to standard plans at baseline, but, after incorporation of surface volume changes, both maintained target volume coverage (p < 0.001) and prevented development of subcutaneous hotspots (p < 0.001) better than standard plans. As such, this treatment planning methodology may facilitate development of robust VMAT treatment plans that minimize development of subcutaneous hotspots and preserve target volume coverage in the context of routine volumetric changes during preoperative RT.

Dosimetric comparison of two dose expansion methods in intensity modulated radiotherapy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

To explore the dosimetric difference between IMRT-VB plan based on the establishment of external expansion structure and virtual bolus (VB) and IMRT-SF based on the skin flash (SF) tool of the Eclipse treatment planning system in postoperative chest wall target intensity modulation radiotherapy plan of breast cancer.

METHODS

Twenty patients with breast cancer were randomly selected as subjects to develop IMRT-VB plan based on virtual bolus and IMRT-SF plan based on skin flash tool of Eclipse treatment planning system. The planning target volume, monitor unit (MU) of every single treatment and the dosimetric parameters of organ at risk (OARs) were recorded. Paired t-test was used for normal distribution data while nonparametric paired Wilcoxon rank sum test was used for non-normal distribution data.

RESULTS

Both IMRT-VB and IMRT-SF plan can expand outward to the chest wall skin and meet the dose requirements of clinical prescription. The conformal index, the homogeneity index, D_2%, D_98% and D_50% were significantly better in IMRT-SF plan than those in IMRT-VB plan (P < 0.05). The average MU of the IMRT-SF plan was much higher than that of the IMRT-VB plan (866.0 ± 68.1 MU vs. 760.9 ± 50.4 MU, P < 0.05). In terms of organ at risk protection, IMRT-SF plan had more advantages in the protection of ipsilateral lung and spinal cord than IMRT-VB plan (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicated that IMRT-SF plan displayed clinical application superiority compared to IMRT-VB plan, and the operation steps of which are simpler and faster. Besides, IMRT-SF plan took advantages in achieve effective external expansion of skin dose intensity and OARs protection.

Robustness of VMAT to setup errors in postmastectomy radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer: Impact of bolus thickness

BACKGROUND

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with varied bolus thicknesses has been employed in postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) of breast cancer to improve superficial target coverage. However, impact of bolus thickness on plan robustness remains unclear.

METHODS

The study enrolled ten patients with left-sided breast cancer who received radiotherapy using VMAT with 5 mm and 10 mm bolus (VMAT-5B and VMAT-10B). Inter-fractional setup errors were simulated by introducing a 3 mm shift to isocenter of the original plans in the anterior-posterior, left-right, and inferior-superior directions. The plans (perturbed plans) were recalculated without changing other parameters. Dose volume histograms (DVH) were collected for plan evaluation. Absolute dose differences in DVH endpoints for the clinical target volume (CTV), heart, and left lung between the perturbed plans and the original ones were used for robustness analysis.

RESULTS

VMAT-10B showed better target coverage, while VMAT-5B was superior in organs-at-risk (OARs) sparing. As expected, small setup errors of 3 mm could induce dose fluctuations in CTV and OARs. The differences in CTV were small in VMAT-5B, with a maximum difference of -1.05 Gy for the posterior shifts. For VMAT-10B, isocenter shifts in the posterior and right directions significantly decreased CTV coverage. The differences were -1.69 Gy, -1.48 Gy and -1.99 Gy, -1.69 Gy for ΔD95% and ΔD98%, respectively. Regarding the OARs, only isocenter shifts in the posterior, right, and inferior directions increased dose to the left lung and the heart. Differences in VMAT-10B were milder than those in VMAT-5B. Specifically, mean heart dose were increased by 0.42 Gy (range 0.10 ~ 0.95 Gy) and 0.20 Gy (range -0.11 ~ 0.72 Gy), and mean dose for the left lung were increased by 1.02 Gy (range 0.79 ~ 1.18 Gy) and 0.68 Gy (range 0.47 ~ 0.84 Gy) in VMAT-5B and VMAT-10B, respectively. High-dose volumes in the organs were increased by approximate 0 ~ 2 and 1 ~ 3 percentage points, respectively. Nevertheless, most of the dosimetric parameters in the perturbed plans were still clinically acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

VMAT-5B appears to be more robust to 3 mm setup errors than VMAT-10B. VMAT-5B also resulted in better OARs sparing with acceptable target coverage and dose homogeneity. Therefore 5 mm bolus is recommended for PMRT of left-sided breast cancer using VMAT.

Comprehensive nodal breast VMAT: solving the low-dose wash dilemma using an iterative knowledge-based radiotherapy planning solution

INTRODUCTION

Aimed to develop a simple and robust volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) solution for comprehensive lymph node (CLN) breast cancer without increase in low-dose wash.

METHODS

Forty CLN-breast patient data sets were utilised to develop a knowledge-based planning (KBP) VMAT model, which limits low-dose wash using iterative learning and base-tangential methods as benchmark. Another twenty data sets were employed to validate the model comparing KBP-generated ipsilateral VMAT (ipsi-VMAT) plans against the benchmarked hybrid (h)-VMAT (departmental standard) and bowtie-VMAT (published best practice) methods. Planning target volume (PTV), conformity/homogeneity index (CI/HI), organ-at-risk (OAR), remaining-volume-at-risk (RVR) and blinded radiation oncologist (RO) plan preference were evaluated.

RESULTS

Ipsi- and bowtie-VMAT plans were dosimetrically equivalent, achieving greater nodal target coverage (P < 0.05) compared to h-VMAT with minor reduction in breast coverage. CI was enhanced for a small reduction in breast HI with improved dose sparing to ipsilateral-lung and humeral head (P < 0.05) at immaterial expense to spinal cord. Significantly, low-dose wash to OARs and RVR were comparable between all plan types demonstrating a simple VMAT class solution robust to patient-specific anatomic variation can be applied to CLN breast without need for complex beam modification (hybrid plans, avoidance sectors or other). This result was supported by blinded RO review.

CONCLUSIONS

A simple and robust ipsilateral VMAT class solution for CLN breast generated using iterative KBP modelling can achieve clinically acceptable target coverage and OAR sparing without unwanted increase in low-dose wash associated with increased second malignancy risk.

Dosimetric comparison between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy followed by electron beam boost and volumetric modulated arc therapy using concomitant boost for the heart and cardiac segments in patients with left-sided breast cancer at risk for radiation-induced cardiac toxicity

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare dosimetric parameters between three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy followed by electron beam boost (3D-CRT + EB) and volumetric modulated arc therapy using simultaneous integrated boost (SIB-VMAT) in left-sided breast cancer patients.

METHODS

This study included 57 patients with left-sided breast cancer who underwent SIB-VMAT. All patients had a computed tomography-based maximum heart distance of ≥ 1 cm and were prescribed a dose of 42.56 Gy/16 fractions to the planning target volume and a concomitant-boosted target dose of 53.2 Gy or 51.2 Gy. The 3D-CRT + EB plan was retrospectively created for the purpose of comparison using tangential fields with field-in-field technique followed by electron beam irradiation.

RESULTS

The doses to the clinical target volume significantly improved in the SIB-VMAT plans. All dosimetric parameters for the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) and LAD middle position (LAD mid) in the SIB-VMAT plans were significantly lower than those for 3D-CRT + EB plans (P < 0.01), while the doses to the heart, lung, contralateral breast and non-target tissue were decreased in the 3D-CRT + EB plans compared with those in the SIB-VMAT plans (e.g., 1.9 Gy vs. 2.9 Gy; P < 0.001 for the mean dose of heart).

CONCLUSIONS

SIB-VMAT significantly improved the dose to the target while reducing the doses to the LAD and LAD mid, whereas 3D-CRT + EB significantly decreased the doses to the heart and other organs at risk in patients with left-sided breast cancer at risk for radiation-induced coronary artery disease.

Automated hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (HVMAT) for whole-breast irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost to lumpectomy area : A treatment planning study

PURPOSE

To develop an automated treatment planning approach for whole breast irradiation with simultaneous integrated boost using an automated hybrid VMAT class solution (HVMAT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five consecutive patients with left breast cancer received 50 Gy (2 Gy/fraction) to the whole breast and an additional simultaneous 10 Gy (2.4 Gy/fraction) to the tumor cavity. Ipsilateral lung, heart, and contralateral breast were contoured as main organs-at-risk. HVMAT plans were inversely optimized by combining two open fields with a VMAT semi-arc beam. Open fields were setup to include the whole breast with a 2 cm flash region and to carry 80% of beams weight. HVMAT plans were compared with three tangential techniques: conventional wedged-field tangential plans (SWF), field-in-field forward planned tangential plans (FiF), and hybrid-IMRT plans (HMRT). Dosimetric differences among the plans were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. Dose accuracy was validated using the PTW Octavius-4D phantom together with the 1500 2D-array.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found among the four techniques for both targets coverage. HVMAT plans showed consistently better PTVs dose contrast, conformity, and homogeneity (p < 0.001 for all metrics) and statistically significant reduction of high-dose breast irradiation. V55 and V60 decreased by 30.4, 26.1, and 20.8% (p < 0.05) and 12.3, 9.9, and 6.0% (p < 0.05) for SWF, FIF, and HMRT, respectively. Pretreatment dose verification reported a gamma pass-rate greater than the acceptance threshold of 95% for all HVMAT plans. In addition, HVMAT reduced the time for full planning optimization to about 20 min.

CONCLUSIONS

HVMAT plans resulted in superior target dose conformity and homogeneity compared to other tangential techniques. Due to fast planning time HVMAT can be applied for all patients, minimizing the impact on human or departmental resources.

Automatic treatment planning of VMAT for left-sided breast cancer with lymph nodes

BACKGROUND

The standard in Denmark for treating breast cancer patients receiving loco-regional irradiation is tangential 3D Conformal RadioTherapy (3DCRT), treated in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH). Treating with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) may reduce the treatment time, which is particularly important for DIBH treatments. The VMAT should be performed without increased dose to the heart, lung, and contralateral breast. This study compares VMAT and 3DCRT for left-sided breast cancer patients with intramammary lymph node involvement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty left-sided breast cancer patients were included. VMAT and tangential plans were created for all patients, with a prescription dose of 50 Gy. The tangential plans used 6 MV and for larger breast combined with 18 MV. The VMAT plans utilised two 6 MV fields in a butterfly configuration. Dose planning was done in Pinnacle³ 16.0 using the Auto-Planning module for the VMAT plans. Comparison of the plans was based on: mean doses, metrics provided by DBCG guidelines, dose-volume histograms and required number of breath-holds for treatment delivery in DIBH.

RESULTS

For most OAR, the doses were similar for VMAT and 3DCRT. The target coverage was comparable, with VMAT having a statistically significant improved dose homogeneity of the target volumes. Less than half the number of breath-hold was required for VMAT compared to 3DCRT. Mean gamma pass rates (3 mm and 3%) from ArcCHECK of the VMAT plans was 98.4% (range 96.6-99.8%).

CONCLUSION

Automatic VMAT planning of left-sided breast cancer patients with lymph node involvement can produce dose distributions comparable to those of tangential 3DCRT, while reducing the number of breath-holds in DIBH by more than a factor of two. The reduction in breath-holds is beneficial for patient comfort and reduces the risk of intra-fraction patient motion.

Replacing Manual Planning of Whole Breast Irradiation With Knowledge-Based Automatic Optimization by Virtual Tangential-Fields Arc Therapy

Purpose

To implement Knowledge Based (KB) automatic planning for right and left-sided whole breast treatment through a new volumetric technique (ViTAT, Virtual Tangential-fields Arc Therapy) mimicking conventional tangential fields (TF) irradiation.

Materials and Method

A total of 193 clinical plans delivering TF with wedged or field-in-field beams were selected to train two KB-models for right(R) and left(L) sided breast cancer patients using the RapidPlan (RP) tool implemented in the Varian Eclipse system. Then, a template for ViTAT optimization, incorporating individual KB-optimized constraints, was interactively fine-tuned. ViTAT plans consisted of four arcs (6 MV) with start/stop angles consistent with the TF geometry variability within our population; the delivery was completely blocked along the arcs, apart from the first and last 20° of rotation for each arc. Optimized fine-tuned KB templates for automatic plan optimization were generated. Validation tests were performed on 60 new patients equally divided in R and L breast treatment: KB automatic ViTAT-plans (KB-ViTAT) were compared against the original TF plans in terms of OARs/PTVs dose-volume parameters. Wilcoxon-tests were used to assess the statistically significant differences.

Results

KB models were successfully generated for both L and R sides. Overall, 1(3%) and 7(23%) out of 30 automatic KB-ViTAT plans were unacceptable compared to TF for R and L side, respectively. After the manual refinement of the start/stop angles, KB-ViTAT plans well fitted TF-performances for these patients as well. PTV coverage was comparable, while PTV D_1% was improved with KB-ViTAT by R:0.4/L:0.2 Gy (p < 0.05); ipsilateral OARs D_mean were similar with a slight (i.e., few % volume) improvement/worsening in the 15–35 Gy/2–15 Gy range, respectively. KB-ViTAT better spared contralateral OARs: D_mean of contralateral OARs was 0.1 Gy lower (p < 0.05); integral dose was R:5%/L:8% lower (p < 0.05) than TF. The overall time for the automatic plan optimization and final dose calculation was 12 ± 2 minutes.

Conclusions

Fully automatic KB-optimization of ViTAT can efficiently replace manually optimized TF planning for whole breast irradiation. This approach was clinically implemented in our institute and may be suggested as a large-scale strategy for efficiently replacing manual planning with large sparing of time, elimination of inter-planner variability and of, seldomly occurring, sub-optimal manual plans.

Split-VMAT technique to control the deep inspiration breath hold time for breast cancer radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

To improve split-VMAT technique by optimizing treatment delivery time for deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) radiotherapy in left-sided breast cancer patients, when automatic beam-interruption devices are not available.

METHODS

Ten consecutive patients were treated with an eight partial arcs (8paVMAT) plan, standard of care in our center. A four partial arcs (4paVMAT) plan was also created and actual LINAC outputs were measured, to evaluate whether there was a dosimetric difference between both techniques and potential impact on the delivered dose. Subsequently, ten other patients were consecutively treated with a 4paVMAT plan to compare the actual treatment delivery time between both techniques. The prescribed dose was 40.05 Gy/15 fractions on the PTV breast (breast or thoracic wall), lymph nodes (LN) and intramammary lymph node chain (IMN). Treatment delivery time, PTVs coverage, conformity index (CI), organs at risk (OAR) dose, monitor units (MU), and gamma index were compared.

RESULTS

Both split-VMAT techniques resulted in similar dose coverage for the PTV Breast and LN, and similar CI. For PTV IMN we observed a 5% increased coverage for the volume receiving ≥ 36 Gy with 4paVMAT, with an identical volume receiving ≥ 32 Gy. There was no difference for the OAR sparing, with the exception of the contralateral organs: there was a 0.6 Gy decrease for contralateral breast mean (p ≤ 0.01) and 1% decrease for the volume of right lung receiving ≥ 5 Gy (p = 0.024). Overall, these results indicate a modest clinical benefit of using 4paVMAT in comparison to 8paVMAT. An increase in the number of MU per arc was observed for the 4paVMAT technique, as expected, while the total number of MU remained comparable for both techniques. All the plans were measured with the Delta4 phantom and passed the gamma index criteria with no significant differences. Finally, the main difference was seen for the treatment delivery time: there was a significant decrease from 8.9 to 5.4 min for the 4paVMAT plans (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is mainly of interest for centers who are implementing the DIBH technique without automatic beam-holding devices and who therefore may require to manually switch the beam on and off during breast DIBH treatment. Split-VMAT technique with 4 partial arcs significantly reduces the treatment delivery time compared to 8 partial arcs, without compromising the target coverage and the OAR sparing. The technique decreases the number of breath holds per fraction, resulting in a shorter treatment session.

Virtual Tangential-fields Arc Therapy (ViTAT) for whole breast irradiation: Technique optimization and validation

PURPOSE

To test the performances of a volumetric arc technique named ViTAT (Virtual Tangential-fields Arc Therapy) mimicking tangential field irradiation for whole breast radiotherapy.

METHODS

ViTAT plans consisted in 4 arcs whose starting/ending position were established based on gantry angle distribution of clinical plans for right and left-breast. The arcs were completely blocked excluding the first and last 20°. Different virtual bolus densities and thicknesses were preliminarily evaluated to obtain the best plan performances. For 40 patients with tumor laterality equally divided between right and left sides, ViTAT plans were optimized considering the clinical DVHs for OARs (resulting from tangential field manual planning) to constrain them: ViTAT plans were compared with the clinical tangential-fields in terms of DVH parameters for both PTV and OARs.

RESULTS

Distal angle values were suggested in the ranges [220°,240°] for the right-breast and [115°,135°] for the left-breast cases; medial angles were [60°,40°] for the right side and [295°,315°] for the left side, limiting the risk of collision. The optimal virtual bolus had -500 HU density and 1.5 cm thickness. ViTAT plans generated dose distributions very similar to the tangential-field plans, with significantly improved PTV homogeneity. The mean doses of ipsilateral OARs were comparable between the two techniques with minor increase of the low-dose spread in the range 2-15 Gy (few % volume); contralateral OARs were slightly better spared with ViTAT.

CONCLUSION

ViTAT dose distributions were similar to tangential-fields. ViTAT should allow automatic plan optimization by developing knowledge-based DVH prediction models of patients treated with tangential-fields.