Segmentation and leaf sequencing for intensity modulated arc therapy

A dosimetric comparison between CyberKnife and tomotherapy treatment plans for single brain metastasis

PURPOSE

Radiosurgery (RS) is a well-established treatment in selected patients with brain metastasis. The aim of this study is to compare the differences between CyberKnife (CK) and TomoTherapy (HT) treatment plans of RS of single brain metastasis (BM) to define when HT should be used in cases beyond Cyberknife-when both systems are readily available for the radiation oncologist.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Nineteen patients with single brain metastasis treated with CK were re-planned for radiosurgery using TomoTherapy Hi-ART system. Two planning approaches have been used for TomoTherapy plans: the classical one (HT) and the improved conformity (icHT) that produces dose distributions more similar to those of RS plans. PTV coverage, Conformity Index (CI), Paddick Conformity Index (nCI), Homogeneity Index (HI), Gradient Index (GI), and beam on time of CK, HT, and icHT plans were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

A good coverage was found for CK, HT, and icHT plans. A difference between mean HI of CK and icHT plans was observed (p = 0.007). Better dose gradients compared to both icHT and HT modalities were observed in CK plans. icHT modality showed improved mean CI respect to HT modality, similar to that obtained in CK plans.

CONCLUSIONS

CK plans show higher conformity and lower GI than icHT and HT plans. TomoTherapy demonstrates the advantage of being a device capable to reach different clinical objectives depending on the different planning modality employed. CyberKnife and TomoTherapy are both optimal RS devices, the choice to use one over another has to be clinically guided.

Dose comparisons for conformal, IMRT and VMAT prostate plans

PURPOSE

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a relatively new treatment technique in radiation therapy. A comparison study of conformal, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and single- and double-arc VMAT plans was undertaken to evaluate the dosimetric impact of this new technology in prostate cases. The research questions were as follows: how does VMAT dosimetry compare with IMRT and conformal plans?; does VMAT increase the volume of bowel receiving lower doses?; are one or two VMAT arcs required for standard prostate cases?

METHODS

Eight prostate cancer and post-prostatectomy patients were randomly selected for this study. Conformal, IMRT and single and double Arc VMAT plans were generated and dosimetric evaluations were performed. Each plan was prescribed a total of 75.6 Gy over a course of 42 fractions to the planning target volume (PTV).

RESULTS

The Healthy Tissue Conformity Index and the conformation number results revealed the IMRT and two VMAT techniques to have superior dosimetry to the PTV compared with the conformal plans. The maximum dose delivered to the PTV was significantly higher with the single-arc VMAT technique compared with the conformal or double-arc VMAT plans. There were no significant differences between the planning techniques for the bladder and small bowel dosimetry. However, IMRT and VMAT plans delivered less radiation to the rectum and femoral heads, and a single-arc VMAT plan was optimal for the right femoral head and the two VMAT techniques were optimal to the IMRT plans for the left femoral head.

CONCLUSIONS

Single- and double-arc VMAT consistently resulted in favourable or slightly superior dosimetry when compared with static gantry IMRT for prostate cases. Both the VMAT techniques and static gantry IMRT resulted in superior critical tissue sparing when compared with conformal plans.

Intensity-modulated arc therapy: principles, technologies and clinical implementation

Intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) was proposed by Yu (1995 Phys. Med. Biol. 40 1435-49) as an alternative to tomotherapy. Over more than a decade, much progress has been made. The advantages and limitations of the IMAT technique have also been better understood. In recent years, single-arc forms of IMAT have emerged and become commercially adopted. The leading example is the volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), a single-arc form of IMAT that delivers apertures of varying weights with a single-arc rotation that uses dose-rate variation of the treatment machine. With commercial implementation of VMAT, wide clinical adoption has quickly taken root. However, there remains a lack of general understanding for the planning of such arc treatments, as well as what delivery limitations and compromises are made. Commercial promotion and competition add further confusion for the end users. It is therefore necessary to provide a summary of this technology and some guidelines on its clinical implementation. The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the works from the radiotherapy community that led to wide clinical adoption, and point out the issues that still remain, providing some perspective on its further developments. Because there has been vast experience in IMRT using multiple intensity-modulated fields, comparisons between IMAT and IMRT are also made in the review within the areas of planning, delivery and quality assurance.

Arc-modulated radiation therapy based on linear models

This paper reports an inverse arc-modulated radiation therapy planning technique based on linear models. It is implemented with a two-step procedure. First, fluence maps for 36 fixed-gantry beams are generated using a linear model-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) optimization algorithm. The 2D fluence maps are decomposed into 1D fluence profiles according to each leaf pair position. Second, a mixed integer linear model is used to construct the leaf motions of an arc delivery that reproduce the 1D fluence profile previously derived from the static gantry IMRT optimization. The multi-leaf collimator (MLC) sequence takes into account the starting and ending leaf positions in between the neighbouring apertures, such that the MLC segments of the entire treatment plan are deliverable in a continuous arc. Since both steps in the algorithm use linear models, implementation is simple and straightforward. Details of the algorithm are presented, and its conceptual correctness is verified with clinical cases representing prostate and head-and-neck treatments.

Analysis of RapidArc optimization strategies using objective function values and dose-volume histograms

RapidArc is a novel treatment planning and delivery system that has recently been made available for clinical use. Included within the Eclipse treatment planning system are a number of different optimization strategies that can be employed to improve the quality of the final treatment plan. The purpose of this study is to systematically assess three categories of strategies for four phantoms, and then apply proven strategies to clinical head and neck cases. Four phantoms were created within Eclipse with varying shapes and locations for the planning target volumes and organs at risk. A baseline optimization consisting of a single 359.8° arc with collimator at 45° was applied to all phantoms. Three categories of strategies were assessed and compared to the baseline strategy. They include changing the initialization parameters, increasing the total number of control points, and increasing the total optimization time. Optimization log files were extracted from the treatment planning system along with final dose‐volume histograms for plan assessment. Treatment plans were also generated for four head and neck patients to determine whether the results for phantom plans can be extended to clinical plans. The strategies that resulted in a significant difference from baseline were: changing the maximum leaf speed prior to optimization (p<0.05), increasing the total number of segments by adding an arc (p<0.05), and increasing the total optimization time by either continuing the optimization (p<0.01) or adding time to the optimization by pausing the optimization (p<0.01). The reductions in objective function values correlated with improvements in the dose‐volume histogram (DVH). The addition of arcs and pausing strategies were applied to head and neck cancer cases, which demonstrated similar benefits with respect to the final objective function value and DVH. Analysis of the optimization log files is a useful way to intercompare treatment plans that have the same dose‐volume objectives and importance values. The results for clinical head and neck plans were consistent with phantom plans.

PACS number: 87.55.x, 87.55.D, 87.55.de 87.55.dk

A generalized inverse planning tool for volumetric-modulated arc therapy

The recent development in linear accelerator control systems, named volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), has generated significant interest in arc-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The VMAT delivery technique features simultaneous changes in dose rate, gantry angle and gantry rotation speed as well as multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf positions while radiation is on. In this paper, we describe a generalized VMAT planning tool that is designed to take full advantage of the capabilities of the new linac control systems. The algorithm incorporates all of the MLC delivery constraints such as restrictions on MLC leaf interdigitation and the MLC leaf velocity constraints. A key feature of the algorithm is that it is able to plan for both single- and multiple-arc deliveries. Compared to conventional step-and-shoot IMRT plans, our VMAT plans created using this tool can achieve similar or better plan quality with less MU and better delivery efficiency. The accuracy of the obtained VMAT plans is also demonstrated through plan verifications performed on an Elekta Synergy linear accelerator equipped with a conventional MLC of 1 cm leaf width using a PreciseBeam VMAT linac control system.

Comparing planning time, delivery time and plan quality for IMRT, RapidArc and Tomotherapy

The purpose of this study is to examine plan quality, treatment planning time, and estimated treatment delivery time for 5- and 9-field sliding window IMRT, single and dual arc RapidArc, and tomotherapy. For four phantoms, 5- and 9-field IMRT, single and dual arc RapidArc and tomotherapy plans were created. Plans were evaluated based on the ability to meet dose-volume constraints, dose homogeneity index, radiation conformity index, planning time, estimated delivery time, integral dose, and volume receiving more than 2 and 5 Gy. For all of the phantoms, tomotherapy was able to meet the most optimization criteria during planning (50% for P1, 67% for P2, 0% for P3, and 50% for P4). RapidArc met less of the optimization criteria (25% for P1, 17% for P2, 0% for P3, and 0% for P4), while IMRT was never able to meet any of the constraints. In addition, tomotherapy plans were able to produce the most homogeneous dose. Tomotherapy plans had longer planning time, longer estimated treatment times, lower conformity index, and higher integral dose. Tomotherapy plans can produce plans of higher quality and have the capability to conform dose distributions better than IMRT or RapidArc in the axial plane, but exhibit increased dose superior and inferior to the target volume. RapidArc, however, is capable of producing better plans than IMRT for the test cases examined in this study.

Treatment of lung cancer using volumetric modulated arc therapy and image guidance: a case study

BACKGROUND

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a radiotherapy technique in which the gantry rotates while the beam is on. Gantry speed, multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf position and dose rate vary continuously during the irradiation. For optimum results, this type of treatment should be subject to image guidance. The application of VMAT and image guidance to the treatment of a lung cancer patient is described.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In-house software AutoBeam was developed to facilitate treatment planning for VMAT beams. The algorithm consisted of a fluence optimisation using the iterative least-squares technique, a segmentation and then a direct-aperture optimisation. A dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions was planned, using a single arc with 35 control points at 10 degrees intervals. The resulting plan was transferred to a commercial treatment planning system for final calculation. The plan was verified using a 0.6 cm(3) ionisation chamber and film in a rectangular phantom. The patient was treated supine on a customised lung board and imaged daily with cone-beam CT for the first three days then weekly thereafter.

RESULTS

The VMAT plan provided slightly improved coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) and slightly lower volume of lung irradiated to 20 Gy (V(20)) than a three-field conformal plan (PTV minimum dose 85.0 Gy vs. 81.8 Gy and lung V(20) 31.5% vs. 34.8%). The difference between the measured and planned dose was -1.1% (measured dose lower) and 97.6% of the film passed a gamma test of 3% and 3mm. The VMAT treatment required 90 s for delivery of a single fraction of 2 Gy instead of 180 s total treatment time for the conformal plan.

CONCLUSION

VMAT provides a quality dose distribution with a short treatment time as shown in an example of a lung tumour. The technique should allow for more efficient delivery of high dose treatments, such as used for hypofractionated radiotherapy of small volume lung tumours, and the technique may also be used in conjunction with Active Breathing Control, where fewer breath holds will be required.

Volumetric modulated arc therapy: planning and evaluation for prostate cancer cases

PURPOSE

To develop an optimization method using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and evaluate VMAT plans relative to the standard intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) approach in prostate cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A single gantry rotation was modeled using 177 equispaced beams. Multileaf collimator apertures and dose rates were optimized with respect to gantry angle subject to dose-volume-based objectives. Our VMAT implementation used conjugate gradient descent to optimize dose rate, and stochastic sampling to find optimal multileaf collimator leaf positions. A treatment planning study of 11 prostate cancer patients with a prescription dose of 86.4 Gy was performed to compare VMAT with a standard five-field IMRT approach. Plan evaluation statistics included the percentage of planning target volume (PTV) receiving 95% of prescribed dose (V95), dose to 95% of PTV (D95), mean PTV dose, tumor control probability, and dosimetric endpoints of normal organs, whereas monitor unit (MU) and delivery time were used to assess delivery efficiency.

RESULTS

Patient-averaged PTV V95, D95, mean dose, and tumor control probability in VMAT plans were 96%, 82.6 Gy, 88.5 Gy, and 0.920, respectively, vs. 97%, 84.0 Gy, 88.9 Gy, and 0.929 in IMRT plans. All critical structure dose requirements were met. The VMAT plans presented better rectal wall sparing, with a reduction of 1.5% in normal tissue complication probability. An advantage of VMAT plans was that the average number of MUs (290 MU) was less than for IMRT plans (642 MU).

CONCLUSION

The VMAT technique can reduce beam on time by up to 55% while maintaining dosimetric quality comparable to that of the standard IMRT approach.

Experimental measurements and Monte Carlo simulations for dosimetric evaluations of intrafraction motion for gated and ungated intensity modulated arc therapy deliveries

Respiratory gated radiation therapy allows for a smaller margin expansion for the planning target volume (PTV) to account for respiratory induced motion and is emerging as a common method to treat lung and liver tumors. We investigated the dosimetric effect of free motion and gated delivery for intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) with experimental measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. The impact of PTV margin and duty cycle for gated delivery is studied with Monte Carlo simulations. A motion phantom is used for this study. Two sets of contours were drawn on the mid-inspiration CT scan of this motion phantom. For each set of contours, an IMAT plan to be delivered with constant dose rate was created. The plans were generated on a CT scan of the phantom in the static condition with 3 mm PTV margin and applied to the motion phantom under four conditions: static, full superior-inferior (SI) motion (A = 1 cm, T = 4 s) and gating conditions (25% and 50% duty cycles) with full SI motion. A 6 by 15 cm piece of radiographic film was placed in the sagittal plane of the phantom and then irradiated under all measurement conditions. Film calibration was performed with a step-wedge method to convert optical density to dose. Gated IMAT delivery was first validated in 2D by comparing static film with that from gating and full motion. A previously verified simulation tool for IMRT that takes the log files from the multileaf collimator (MLC) controller and the gating system were adapted to simulate the delivered IMAT treatment for full 3D dosimetric analysis. The IMAT simulations were validated against the 2D film measurements. The resultant IMAT simulations were evaluated with dose criteria, dose-volume histograms and 3D gamma analysis. We validated gated IMAT deliveries when we compared the static film with the one from gating using 25% duty cycle using 2D gamma analysis. Within experimental and setup uncertainties, film measurements agreed with their corresponding simulated plans using 2D gamma analysis. Finally, when planning with margins designed for gating with 25% duty cycle and applying 50% or no gating during treatment, the dose differences in D(min,) D(99%) and D(95%) of the clinical target volume can be up to 27 cGy, 20 cGy and 18 cGy, respectively, for a plan with 200 cGy prescription dose. We have experimentally delivered gated IMAT with constant dose rate to a motion phantom and assessed their accuracies with film dosimetry and Monte Carlo simulations. Film dosimetry demonstrated that 25% gating and static plans are within 2%, 2 mm. The Monte Carlo simulation method was employed to generate dose delivered in 3D to a motion phantom, and the dosimetric results were reported. Since our film measurements agreed well with Monte Carlo simulations, we can reliably use this simulation tool to further study the dosimetric effects of target motion and effectiveness of gating for IMAT deliveries.

Monte Carlo simulation of RapidArc radiotherapy delivery

RapidArc radiotherapy technology from Varian Medical Systems is one of the most complex delivery systems currently available, and achieves an entire intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment in a single gantry rotation about the patient. Three dynamic parameters can be continuously varied to create IMRT dose distributions-the speed of rotation, beam shaping aperture and delivery dose rate. Modeling of RapidArc technology was incorporated within the existing Vancouver Island Monte Carlo (VIMC) system (Zavgorodni et al 2007 Radiother. Oncol. 84 S49, 2008 Proc. 16th Int. Conf. on Medical Physics). This process was named VIMC-Arc and has become an efficient framework for the verification of RapidArc treatment plans. VIMC-Arc is a fully automated system that constructs the Monte Carlo (MC) beam and patient models from a standard RapidArc DICOM dataset, simulates radiation transport, collects the resulting dose and converts the dose into DICOM format for import back into the treatment planning system (TPS). VIMC-Arc accommodates multiple arc IMRT deliveries and models gantry rotation as a series of segments with dynamic MLC motion within each segment. Several verification RapidArc plans were generated by the Eclipse TPS on a water-equivalent cylindrical phantom and re-calculated using VIMC-Arc. This includes one 'typical' RapidArc plan, one plan for dual arc treatment and one plan with 'avoidance' sectors. One RapidArc plan was also calculated on a DICOM patient CT dataset. Statistical uncertainty of MC simulations was kept within 1%. VIMC-Arc produced dose distributions that matched very closely to those calculated by the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) that is used in Eclipse. All plans also demonstrated better than 1% agreement of the dose at the isocenter. This demonstrates the capabilities of our new MC system to model all dosimetric features required for RapidArc dose calculations.

Dose-volume and biological-model based comparison between helical tomotherapy and (inverse-planned) IMAT for prostate tumours

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) are two arc-based approaches to the delivery of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Through plan comparisons we have investigated the potential of IMAT, both with constant (conventional or IMAT-C) and variable (non-conventional or IMAT-NC, a theoretical exercise) dose-rate, to serve as an alternative to helical tomotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six patients with prostate tumours treated by HT with a moderately hypo-fractionated protocol, involving a simultaneous integrated boost, were re-planned as IMAT treatments. A method for IMAT inverse-planning using a commercial module for static IMRT combined with a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) arc-sequencing was developed. IMAT plans were compared to HT plans in terms of dose statistics and radiobiological indices.

RESULTS

Concerning the planning target volume (PTV), the mean doses for all PTVs were similar for HT and IMAT-C plans with minimum dose, target coverage, equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and tumour control probability (TCP) values being generally higher for HT; maximum dose and degree of heterogeneity were instead higher for IMAT-C. In relation to organs at risk, mean doses and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) values were similar between the two modalities, except for the penile bulb where IMAT was significantly better. Re-normalizing all plans to the same rectal toxicity (NTCP=5%), the HT modality yielded higher TCP than IMAT-C but there was no significant difference between HT and IMAT-NC. The integral dose with HT was higher than that for IMAT.

CONCLUSIONS

with regards to the plan analysis, the HT is superior to IMAT-C in terms of target coverage and dose homogeneity within the PTV. Introducing dose-rate variation during arc-rotation, not deliverable with current linac technology, the simulations result in comparable plan indices between (IMAT-NC) and HT.