VMAT plus a few computer-optimized non-coplanar IMRT beams (VMAT+) tested for liver SBRT

Validation of Fully Automated Robust Multicriterial Treatment Planning for Head and Neck Cancer IMPT

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to compare robust intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans, automatically generated with wish-list-based multicriterial optimization as implemented in Erasmus-iCycle, with manually created robust clinical IMPT plans for patients with head and neck cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Thirty-three patients with head and neck cancer were retrospectively included. All patients were previously treated with a manually created IMPT plan with 7000 cGy dose prescription to the primary tumor (clinical target volume [CTV]7000) and 5425 cGy dose prescription to the bilateral elective volumes (CTV5425). Plans had a 4-beam field configuration and were generated with scenario-based robust optimization (21 scenarios, 3-mm setup error, and ±3% density uncertainty for the CTVs). Three clinical plans were used to configure the Erasmus-iCycle wish-list for automated generation of robust IMPT plans for the other 30 included patients, in line with clinical planning requirements. Automatically and manually generated IMPT plans were compared for (robust) target coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP). No manual fine-tuning of automatically generated plans was performed.

RESULTS

For all automatically generated plans, voxel-wise minimum D98% values for the CTVs were within clinical constraints and similar to manual plans. All investigated OAR parameters were favorable in the automatically generated plans (all P < .001). Median reductions in mean dose to OARs went up to 667 cGy for the inferior pharyngeal constrictor muscle, and median reductions in D0.03cm3 in serial OARs ranged up to 1795 cGy for the spinal cord surface. The observed lower mean dose in parallel OARs resulted in statistically significant lower NTCP for xerostomia (grade ≥2: 34.4% vs 38.0%; grade ≥3: 9.0% vs 10.2%) and dysphagia (grade ≥2: 11.8% vs 15.0%; grade ≥3: 1.8% vs 2.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Erasmus-iCycle was able to produce IMPT dose distributions fully automatically with similar (robust) target coverage and improved OAR doses and NTCPs compared with clinical manual planning, with negligible hands-on planning workload.

Reducing the lateral dose penumbra in IMPT by incorporating transmission pencil beams

OBJECTIVE

In intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), Bragg peaks result in steep distal dose fall-offs, while the lateral IMPT dose fall-off is often less steep than in photon therapy. High-energy pristine transmission ('shoot through') pencil beams have no Bragg peak in the patient, but show a sharp lateral penumbra at the target level. We investigated whether combining Bragg peaks with Transmission pencil beams('IMPT&TPB') could improve head-and-neck plans by exploiting the steep lateral dose fall-off of transmission pencil beams.

APPROACH

Our system for automated multi-criteria IMPT plan optimisation was extended for combined optimisation of BPs and TPBs. The system generates for each patient a Pareto-optimal plan using a generic 'wish-list' with prioritised planning objectives and hard constraints. For eight nasopharynx cancer patients (NPC) and eight oropharynx cancer (OPC) patients, the IMPT&TPB plan was compared to the competing conventional IMPT plan with only Bragg peaks, which was generated with the same optimiser, but without transmission pencil beams.

MAIN RESULTS

Clinical OAR and target constraints were met in all plans. By allowing transmission pencil beams in the optimisation, on average 14 of the 25 investigated OAR plan parameters significantly improved for NPC, and 9 of the 17 for OPC, while only one OPC parameter showed small but significant deterioration. Non-significant differences were found in the remaining parameters. In NPC, cochlea Dmean reduced by up to 17.5 Gy and optic nerve D2% by up to 11.1 Gy.

CONCLUSION

Compared to IMPT, IMPT&TPB resulted in comparable target coverage with overall superior OAR sparing, the latter originating from steeper dose fall-offs close to OARs.

Dosimetric comparison in sparing normal tissue dosage by using auto-SBRT planning in oligo liver tumors

Purpose

The study aimed to compare the dosimetric distribution of VMAT plans by increasing the number of half arcs in liver SBRT and investigate the effect by using automatic plan software in plan optimization.

Method

Thirty-one patients with oligo liver tumors were randomly selected. VMAT treatment plans with different numbers of coplanar half arcs were generated.

Result

Adding arcs significantly increased the PTV, D2%, D50%, and CI, but sacrificed the plan homogeneity. It also decreased the maximum dose of normal tissues such as the stomach, duodenum, and spinal cord and reduced Dmean, D500cc, and D700cc for the liver. Nevertheless, the diminishing effect gradually decayed into three arcs. Meanwhile, the addition of arcs substantially extended the beam-on time.

Conclusion

In the context of SBRT for oligo liver tumors, increasing the number of coplanar half arcs will improve PTV conformity and offer better protection for OARs, albeit at the expense of increased treatment duration. Considering the trade-off between plan quality and treatment efficiency, a three-arc plan may be more suitable for clinical implementation.

Inter- and intrafraction dose variations in robotic stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma in the prospective phase I STRONG trial

Using fiducial-marker-based robotic respiratory tumor tracking, we treated perihilar cholangiocarcinoma patients in the STRONG trial with 15 daily fractions of 4 Gy. For each of the included patients, in-room diagnostic-quality repeat CTs (rCT) were acquired pre- and post-dose delivery in 6 treatment fractions to analyze inter- and intrafraction dose variations. Planning CTs (pCTs) and rCTs were acquired in expiration breath-hold. Analogous to treatment, spine and fiducials were used to register rCTs with pCTs. In each rCT, all OARs were contoured, and the target was rigidly copied from the pCT based on grey values. The rCTs acquired were used to calculate the doses to be delivered through the treatment-unit settings. On average, target doses in rCTs and pCTs were similar. However, due to target displacements relative to the fiducials in rCTs, 10% of the rCTs showed PTV coverage losses of &gt;10%. Although target coverages had been planned below desired values in order to protect OARs, many pre-rCTs contained OAR constraint violations: 44.4% for the 6 major constraints. Most OAR dose differences between pre- and post-rCTs were not statistically significant. The dose deviations observed in repeat CTs represent opportunities for more advanced adaptive approaches to enhancing SBRT treatment quality.

Noncoplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on a Cage-Like Radiotherapy System: A Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

The incorporation of noncoplanar beam arrangements has been proposed in liver radiotherapy modalities, which can reduce the dose in normal tissues compared to coplanar techniques. Noncoplanar radiotherapy techniques for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment based on the Linac design have a limited effective arc angle to avoid collisions.

PURPOSE

To propose a novel noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system and investigate its performance in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

METHODS

The computed tomography was deflected 90° to meet the structure of a cage-like radiotherapy system and design the noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system plan in the Pinnacle3 planning system. An noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system plan was customized for each of 10 included hepatocellular carcinoma patients, with 6 dual arcs ranging from -30° to 30°. Six couch angles were set with an interval of 36° and distributed along with the longest diameter of planning target volume. The dosimetric parameters of noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system plan were compared with the noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy plan.

RESULTS

The 3 radiotherapy techniques regarding planning target volume were statistically different for D98%, D2%, conformity index, and homogeneity index with χ² = 9.692, 14.600, 8.600, and 12.600, and P = .008, .001, .014, and .002, respectively. Further multiple comparisons revealed that noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system significantly reduced the mean dose (P = .005) and V5 (P = .005) of the normal liver, the mean dose (P = .005) of the stomach, and V30 (P = .028) of the lung compared to noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy. Noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system significantly reduced the mean dose (P = .005) and V5 (P = .005) of the normal liver, the mean dose (P = .017) of the spinal cord, V50 (P = .043) of the duodenum, the maximum dose (P = .007) of the esophagus, and V30 (P = .047) of the whole lung compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy. The results indicate that noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system protects the normal liver, stomach, and lung better than noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy and protects the normal liver, spinal cord, duodenum, esophagus, and lung better than volumetric modulated arc therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system technique with the arrangement of noncoplanar arcs provided optimal dosimetric gains compared with noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy, except for the heart. Noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique based on a cage-like radiotherapy system should be considered in more clinically challenging cases.

Automated multi-criterial planning with beam angle optimization to establish non-coplanar VMAT class solutions for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

PURPOSE

Complexity in selecting optimal non-coplanar beam setups and prolonged delivery times may hamper the use of non-coplanar treatments for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization was used to define non-coplanar VMAT class solutions (CSs), each consisting of a coplanar arc and additional 1 or 2 fixed, non-coplanar partial arcs.

METHODS

Automated planning was used to generate a coplanar VMAT plan with 5 complementary computer-optimized non-coplanar IMRT beams (VMAT+5) for each of the 20 included patients. Subsequently, the frequency distribution of the 100 patient-specific non-coplanar IMRT beam directions was used to select non-coplanar arcs for supplementing coplanar VMAT. A second investigated CS with only one non-coplanar arc consisted of coplanar VMAT plus a partial arc at 90° couch angle (VMATCS90). Plans generated with the two VMATCSs were compared to coplanar VMAT.

RESULTS

VMAT+5 analysis resulted in VMATCS60: two partial non-coplanar arcs at couch angles 60° and -60° to complement coplanar VMAT. Compared to coplanar VMAT, the non-coplanar VMATCS60 and VMATCS90 yielded substantial average dose reductions in OARs associated with xerostomia and dysphagia, i.e., parotids, submandibular glands, oral cavity and swallowing muscles (p < 0.05) for the same PTV coverage and without violating hard constraints. Impact of non-coplanar treatment and superiority of either VMACS60 and VMATCS90 was highly patient dependent.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to coplanar VMAT, dose to OARs was substantially reduced with a CS with one or two non-coplanar arcs. Preferences for coplanar or one or two additional arcs are highly patient-specific, balancing plan quality and treatment time.

TBS-BAO: fully automated beam angle optimization for IMRT guided by a total-beam-space reference plan

Properly selected beam angles contribute to the quality of radiotherapy treatment plans. However, the beam angle optimization (BAO) problem is difficult to solve to optimality due to its non-convex discrete nature with many local minima. In this study, we propose TBS-BAO, a novel approach for solving the BAO problem, and test it for non-coplanar robotic CyberKnife radiotherapy for prostate cancer. First, an ideal Pareto-optimal reference dose distribution is automatically generated usinga priorimulti-criterial fluence map optimization (FMO) to generate a plan that includes all candidate beams (total-beam-space, TBS). Then, this ideal dose distribution is reproduced as closely as possible in a subsequent segmentation/beam angle optimization step (SEG/BAO), while limiting the number of allowed beams to a user-selectable preset value. SEG/BAO aims at a close reproduction of the ideal dose distribution. For each of 33 prostate SBRT patients, 18 treatment plans with different pre-set numbers of allowed beams were automatically generated with the proposed TBS-BAO. For each patient, the TBS-BAO plans were then compared to a plan that was automatically generated with an alternative BAO method (Erasmus-iCycle) and to a high-quality manually generated plan. TBS-BAO was able to automatically generate plans with clinically feasible numbers of beams (∼25), with a quality highly similar to corresponding 91-beam ideal reference plans. Compared to the alternative Erasmus-iCycle BAO approach, similar plan quality was obtained for 25-beam segmented plans, while computation times were reduced from 10.7 hours to 4.8/1.5 hours, depending on the applied pencil-beam resolution in TBS-BAO. 25-beam TBS-BAO plans had similar quality as manually generated plans with on average 48 beams, while delivery times reduced from 22.3 to 18.4/18.1 min. TBS reference plans could effectively steer the discrete non-convex BAO.

A data-driven approach to optimal beam/arc angle selection for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver cancer has shown promising therapeutic effects. Effective treatment relies not only on the precise delivery provided by image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) but also high dose gradient formed around the treatment volume to spare functional liver tissue, which is highly dependent on the beam/arc angle selection. In this study, we aim to develop a decision support model to learn human planner's beam navigation approach for beam angle/arc angle selection for liver SBRT.

METHODS

A total of 27 liver SBRT/HIGRT patients (10 IMRT, 17 VMAT/DCA) were included in this study. A dosimetric budget index was defined for each beam angle/control point considering dose penetration through the patient body and liver tissue. Optimal beam angle setting (beam angles for IMRT and start/terminal angle for VMAT/DCA) was determined by minimizing the loss function defined as the sum of total dosimetric budget index and beam span penalty function. Leave-one-out validation was exercised on all 27 cases while weighting coefficients in the loss function was tuned in nested cross validation. To compare the efficacy of the model, a model plan was generated using automatically generated beam setting while retaining the original optimization constraints in the clinical plan. Model plan was normalized to the same planning target volume (PTV) V100% as the clinical plans. Dosimetric endpoints including PTV D98%, D2%, liver V20Gy and total MU were compared between two plan groups. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test was performed with the null hypothesis being that no difference exists between two plan groups.

RESULTS

Beam setting prediction was instantaneous. Mean PTV D98% was 91.3% and 91.3% (P=0.566), while mean PTV D2% was 107.9% and 108.1% (P=0.164) for clinical plan and model plan respectively. Liver V20Gy showed no significant difference (P=0.590) with 23.3% for clinical plan and 23.4% for the model plan. Total MU is comparable (P=0.256) between the clinical plan (avg. 2,389.6) and model plan (avg. 2,319.6).

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence driven beam setting model yielded similar plan quality as hand-crafted clinical plan. It is capable of capturing human's knowledge in beam selection decision making. This model could facilitate decision making for beam angle selection while eliminating lengthy trial-and-error process of adjusting beam setting during liver SBRT treatment planning.

Enhancing Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with iCE, a Novel System for Automated Multi-Criterial Treatment Planning Including Beam Angle Optimization

In this study, the novel iCE radiotherapy treatment planning system (TPS) for automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization (BAO) was developed, and applied to optimize organ at risk (OAR) sparing and systematically investigate the impact of beam angles on radiotherapy dose in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). iCE consists of an in-house, sophisticated multi-criterial optimizer with integrated BAO, coupled to a broadly used commercial TPS. The in-house optimizer performs fluence map optimization to automatically generate an intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan with optimal beam angles for each patient. The obtained angles and dose-volume histograms are then used to automatically generate the final deliverable plan with the commercial TPS. For the majority of 26 LA-NSCLC patients, iCE achieved improved heart and esophagus sparing compared to the manually created clinical plans, with significant reductions in the median heart D_mean (8.1 vs. 9.0 Gy, p = 0.02) and esophagus D_mean (18.5 vs. 20.3 Gy, p = 0.02), and reductions of up to 6.7 Gy and 5.8 Gy for individual patients. iCE was superior to automated planning using manually selected beam angles. Differences in the OAR doses of iCE plans with 6 beams compared to 4 and 8 beams were statistically significant overall, but highly patient-specific. In conclusion, automated planning with integrated BAO can further enhance and individualize radiotherapy for LA-NSCLC.

An Investigation of Non-Coplanar Volumetric Modulated Radiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer Using a Trajectory Optimization Method

PURPOSE

This study was conducted in order to develop a trajectory optimization algorithm for non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and investigate the potential of organs at risk (OARs) sparing in locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients using non-coplanar VMAT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Firstly, a cost map that represents the ray-OAR voxel intersections at each source position was generated using a ray-tracing algorithm. A graph search algorithm was then used to determine the least-cost path from the cost map. Lastly, full arcs or partial arcs were selected based on the least-cost path to generate the non-coplanar VMAT (ncVMAT) trajectories. Clinical coplanar VMAT (coVMAT) plans for 11 patients diagnosed with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC) receiving 45 to 70 Gy in 25 fractions were replanned using non-coplanar VMAT trajectories. Both coplanar and non-coplanar plans were normalized to cover 95% of the PTV45 Gy volume with a prescription dose of 45 Gy. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), PTV coverage, and dose to the OARs were compared between coVMAT and ncVMAT plans.

RESULTS

With ncVMAT, the mean coverage of PTV50 Gy, PTV54 Gy, PTV60 Gy, and PTV70 Gy increased significantly. The mean conformity index of PTV45 Gy, PTV54 Gy, and PTV70 Gy was also improved in the ncVMAT plans. Compared with coVMAT plans, the ncVMAT plans resulted in significantly lower doses to the spinal cord, bilateral kidneys, stomach, and duodenum. The maximum dose to the spinal cord decreased by 6.11%. The mean dose to the left and right kidneys decreased by an average of 5.52% and 11.71%, respectively. The D max, D mean, and D 15% of the stomach were reduced by an average of 7.45%, 15.82%, and 16.79%, separately. The D 15% and D mean of the duodenum decreased 6.38% and 5.64%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A trajectory optimization algorithm was developed for non-coplanar VMAT. Compared with conventional coplanar VMAT, non-coplanar VMAT resulted in improved coverage and conformity to the targets. The sparing of OARs was significantly improved in non-coplanar VMAT compared with coVMAT plans for locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided whole-breast irradiation using automated planning

Background

Published treatment technique comparisons for postoperative left-sided whole breast irradiation (WBI) with deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) are scarce, small, and inconclusive. In this study, fully automated multi-criterial plan optimization, generating a single high-quality, Pareto-optimal plan per patient and treatment technique, was used to compare for a large patient cohort 1) intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with two tangential fields and 2) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with two small tangential subarcs.

Materials and methods

Forty-eight randomly selected patients recently treated with DIBH and 16 × 2.66 Gy were included. The optimizer was configured for the clinical planning protocol. Comparisons between IMRT and VMAT included dosimetric plan parameters, estimated excess relative risks (ERR) for toxicities, delivery times, MUs, and deliverability accuracy at a linac.

Results

The automatically generated IMRT and VMAT plans applied in this study were similar or higher in quality than the manually generated clinical plans. For equal PTVin V95% (98.4 ± 0.9%), VMAT had significant advantages compared to IMRT regarding breast dose homogeneity and doses in heart and ipsilateral lung, at the cost of some minor deteriorations for contralateral breast (few cases with larger deteriorations) and lung. Conformality improved from 1.38 to 1.18 (p < 0.001). With VMAT, ERR for major coronary events and ipsilateral lung tumors were reduced by 3% (range: −1–12%) and 16% (range: −3–38%), respectively. MUs and delivery times were higher for VMAT. There were no statistical differences in γ passing rates.

Conclusion

For WBI in conservative therapy of left-sided breast patients treated with DIBH, VMAT with two tangential subarcs was generally dosimetrically superior to IMRT with two tangential static fields. Results need confirmation by robustness analyses.

On the Importance of Individualized, Non-Coplanar Beam Configurations in Mediastinal Lymphoma Radiotherapy, Optimized With Automated Planning

Background and Purpose

Literature is non-conclusive regarding selection of beam configurations in radiotherapy for mediastinal lymphoma (ML) radiotherapy, and published studies are based on manual planning with its inherent limitations. In this study, coplanar and non-coplanar beam configurations were systematically compared, using a large number of automatically generated plans.

Material and Methods

An autoplanning workflow, including beam configuration optimization, was configured for young female ML patients. For each of 25 patients, 24 plans with different beam configurations were generated with autoplanning: 11 coplanar CP_x plans and 11 non-coplanar NCP_x plans with x = 5 to 15 IMRT beams with computer-optimized, patient-specific configurations, and the coplanar VMAT and non-coplanar Butterfly VMAT (B-VMAT) beam angle class solutions (600 plans in total).

Results

Autoplans compared favorably with manually generated, clinically delivered plans, ensuring that beam configuration comparisons were performed with high quality plans. There was no beam configuration approach that was best for all patients and all plan parameters. Overall there was a clear tendency towards higher plan quality with non-coplanar configurations (NCP_x≥12 and B-VMAT). NCP_x≥12 produced highly conformal plans with on average reduced high doses in lungs and patient and also a reduced heart Dmean, while B-VMAT resulted in reduced low-dose spread in lungs and left breast.

Conclusions

Non-coplanar beam configurations were favorable for young female mediastinal lymphoma patients, with patient-specific and plan-parameter-dependent dosimetric advantages of NCP_x≥12 and B-VMAT. Individualization of beam configuration approach, considering also the faster delivery of B-VMAT vs. NCP_x≥12, can importantly improve the treatments.

Complementing Prostate SBRT VMAT With a Two-Beam Non-Coplanar IMRT Class Solution to Enhance Rectum and Bladder Sparing With Minimum Increase in Treatment Time

Purpose

Enhance rectum and bladder sparing in prostate SBRT with minimum increase in treatment time by complementing dual-arc coplanar VMAT with a two-beam non-coplanar IMRT class solution (CS).

Methods

For twenty patients, an optimizer for automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization (BAO) was used to generate dual-arc VMAT plans, supplemented with five non-coplanar IMRT beams with individually optimized orientations (VMAT+5). In all plan generations, reduction of high rectum dose had the highest priority after obtaining adequate PTV coverage. A CS with two most preferred directions in VMAT+5 and largest rectum dose reductions compared to dual-arc VMAT was then selected to define VMAT+CS. VMAT+CS was compared with automatically generated i) dual-arc coplanar VMAT plans (VMAT), ii) VMAT+5 plans, and iii) IMRT plans with 30 patient-specific non-coplanar beam orientations (30-NCP). Plans were generated for a 4 x 9.5 Gy fractionation scheme. Differences in PTV doses, healthy tissue sparing, and computation and treatment delivery times were quantified.

Results

For equal PTV coverage, VMAT+CS, consisting of dual-arc VMAT supplemented with two fixed, non-coplanar IMRT beams with fixed Gantry/Couch angles of 65°/30° and 295°/-30°, significantly reduced OAR doses and the dose bath, compared to dual-arc VMAT. Mean relative differences in rectum D_mean, D_1cc, V_40GyEq and V_60GyEq were 19.4 ± 10.6%, 4.2 ± 2.7%, 34.9 ± 20.3%, and 39.7 ± 23.2%, respectively (all p<0.001). There was no difference in bladder D_1cc, while bladder D_mean reduced by 17.9 ± 11.0% (p<0.001). Also, the clinically evaluated urethra D_5%, D_10%, and D_50% showed small, but statistically significant improvements. All patient V_X with X = 2, 5, 10, 20, and 30 Gy were reduced with VMAT+CS, with a maximum relative reduction for V_10Gy of 19.0 ± 7.3% (p<0.001). Total delivery times with VMAT+CS only increased by 1.9 ± 0.7 min compared to VMAT (9.1 ± 0.7 min). The dosimetric quality of VMAT+CS plans was equivalent to VMAT+5, while optimization times were reduced by a factor of 25 due to avoidance of individualized BAO. Compared to VMAT+CS, the 30-NCP plans were only favorable in terms of dose bath, at the cost of much enhanced optimization and delivery times.

Conclusions

The proposed two-beam non-coplanar class solution to complement coplanar dual-arc VMAT resulted in substantial plan quality improvements for OARs (especially rectum) and reduced irradiated patient volumes with minor increases in treatment delivery times.

[Stereotactic body radiotherapy. How to better protect normal tissues?]

The use of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has increased rapidly over the past decade. Optimal preservation of normal tissues is a major issue because of their high sensitivity to high doses per session. Extreme hypofractionation can convert random errors into systematic errors. Optimal preservation of organs at risk requires first of all a rigorous implementation of this technique according to published guidelines. The robustness of the imaging modalities used for planning, and training medical and paramedical staff are an integral part of these guidelines too. The choice of SBRT indications, dose fractionation, dose heterogeneity, ballistics, are also means of optimizing the protection of normal tissues. Non-coplanarity and tracking of moving targets allow dosimetric improvement in some clinical settings. Automatic planning could also improve normal tissue protection. Adaptive SBRT, with new image guided radiotherapy modalities such as MRI, could further reduce the risk of toxicity.

Proton beam therapy for tumors of the upper abdomen

Proton radiotherapy has clear dosimetric advantages over photon radiotherapy. In contrast to photons, which are absorbed exponentially, protons have a finite range dependent on the initial proton energy. Protons therefore do not deposit dose beyond the tumor, resulting in great conformality, and offers the promise of dose escalation to increase tumor control while minimizing toxicity. In this review, we discuss the rationale for using proton radiotherapy in the treatment of upper abdominal tumors-hepatocellular carcinomas, cholangiocarcinomas and pancreatic cancers. We also review the clinical outcomes and technical challenges of using proton radiotherapy for the treatment of these malignancies. Finally, we discuss the ongoing clinical trials implementing proton radiotherapy for the treatment of primary liver and pancreatic tumors.

Automation in intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning-a review of recent innovations

Radiotherapy treatment planning of complex radiotherapy techniques, such as intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy, is a resource-intensive process requiring a high level of treatment planner intervention to ensure high plan quality. This can lead to variability in the quality of treatment plans and the efficiency in which plans are produced, depending on the skills and experience of the operator and available planning time. Within the last few years, there has been significant progress in the research and development of intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning approaches with automation support, with most commercial manufacturers now offering some form of solution. There is a rapidly growing number of research articles published in the scientific literature on the topic. This paper critically reviews the body of publications up to April 2018. The review describes the different types of automation algorithms, including the advantages and current limitations. Also included is a discussion on the potential issues with routine clinical implementation of such software, and highlights areas for future research.

A novel optimization framework for VMAT with dynamic gantry couch rotation

Existing volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) optimization using coplanar arcs is highly efficient but usually dosimetrically inferior to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with optimized non-coplanar beams. To achieve both dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency, we proposed in this study, a novel integrated optimization method for non-coplanar VMAT (4πVMAT). 4πVMAT with direct aperture optimization (DAO) was achieved by utilizing a least square dose fidelity objective, along with an anisotropic total variation term for regularizing the fluence smoothness, a single segment term for imposing simple apertures, and a group sparsity term for selecting beam angles. Continuous gantry/couch angle trajectories were selected using the Dijkstra's algorithm, where the edge and node costs were determined based on the maximal gantry rotation speed and the estimated fluence map at the current iteration, respectively. The couch-gantry-patient collision space was calculated based on actual machine geometry and a human subject 3D surface. Beams leading to collision are excluded from the DAO and beam trajectory selection (BTS). An alternating optimization strategy was implemented to solve the integrated DAO and BTS problem. The feasibility of 4πVMAT using one full-arc or two full-arcs was tested on nine patients with brain, lung, or prostate cancer. The plan was compared against a coplanar VMAT (2πVMAT) plan using one additional arc and collimator rotation. Compared to 2πVMAT, 4πVMAT reduced the average maximum and mean organs-at-risk dose by 9.63% and 3.08% of the prescription dose with the same target coverage. R50 was reduced by 23.0%. Maximum doses to the dose limiting organs, such as the brainstem, the major vessels, and the proximal bronchus, were reduced by 8.1 Gy (64.8%), 16.3 Gy (41.5%), and 19.83 Gy (55.5%), respectively. The novel 4πVMAT approach affords efficient delivery of non-coplanar arc trajectories that lead to dosimetric improvements compared with coplanar VMAT using more arcs.

Chest wall dose reduction using noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc radiation therapy for lung stereotactic ablative radiation therapy

PURPOSE

Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) to lung tumors close to the chest wall can cause rib fractures or chest wall pain. We evaluated and propose a clinically practical solution of using noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc radiation therapy (VMAT) to reduce chest wall dose from lung SABR.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty lung SABR VMAT plans in which the chest wall volume receiving 30 Gy or higher (V30) exceeded 30 mL were replanned by noncoplanar VMAT with opposite 15° couch kicks. Dosimetric parameters including chest wall V30 and V40; lung V5, V10, V20, and mean dose; Paddick high-dose conformity index; intermediate-dose conformity index; and monitor units (MU) for each plan were used to evaluate the plan quality. The treatment time was also estimated by delivering the entire treatment. Two-sided paired t test was used to evaluate the difference of the dosimetric parameters between coplanar 1 arc (cVMAT₁), coplanar 2 arcs (cVMAT₂), and noncoplanar two arcs (nVMAT₂) plans; differences with P < .05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

V30 and V40 for chest wall were reduced on average by 20% ± 9% and 15% ± 11% (mean ± standard deviation) from cVMAT₂ plans to nVMAT₂ plans (P < .01 for both comparisons) and by 8% ± 7% and 16% ± 13% from cVMAT₁ plans to cVMAT₂ plans (P < .003 for both comparisons). The differences in lung mean dose were <0.2 Gy among cVMAT₁, cVMAT₂, and nVMAT₂. There were no significant differences in lung V5, V10, and V20. On average, the number of MU increased 14% for nVMAT₂ compared with cVMAT₂. The Paddick high-dose conformity indexes were 0.88 ± 0.03, 0.89 ± 0.04, and 0.91 ± 0.03, and intermediate-dose conformity indexes were 3.88 ± 0.49, 3.80 ± 0.44 and 3.51 ± 0.38 for cVMAT₁, cVMAT₂, and nVMAT₂, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that noncoplanar VMAT plans are feasible, clinically practical to deliver, and significantly reduce V30 and V40 of chest wall without increasing lung dose.