Comparison of fixed-beam IMRT, helical tomotherapy, and IMPT for selected cases

Proton 3D dose measurement with a multi-layer strip ionization chamber (MLSIC) device

Objective. In current clinical practice for quality assurance (QA), intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) fields are verified by measuring planar dose distributions at one or a few selected depths in a phantom. A QA device that measures full 3D dose distributions at high spatiotemporal resolution would be highly beneficial for existing as well as emerging proton therapy techniques such as FLASH radiotherapy. Our objective is to demonstrate feasibility of 3D dose measurement for IMPT fields using a dedicated multi-layer strip ionization chamber (MLSIC) device.Approach.Our developed MLSIC comprises a total of 66 layers of strip ion chamber (IC) plates arranged, alternatively, in thexandydirection. The first two layers each has 128 channels in 2 mm spacing, and the following 64 layers each has 32/33 IC strips in 8 mm spacing which are interconnected every eight channels. A total of 768-channel IC signals are integrated and sampled at a speed of 6 kfps. The MLSIC has a total of 19.2 cm water equivalent thickness and is capable of measurement over a 25 × 25 cm2field size. A reconstruction algorithm is developed to reconstruct 3D dose distribution for each spot at all depths by considering a double-Gaussian-Cauchy-Lorentz model. The 3D dose distribution of each beam is obtained by summing all spots. The performance of our MLSIC is evaluated for a clinical pencil beam scanning (PBS) plan.Main results.The dose distributions for each proton spot can be successfully reconstructed from the ionization current measurement of the strip ICs at different depths, which can be further summed up to a 3D dose distribution for the beam. 3D Gamma Index analysis indicates acceptable agreement between the measured and expected dose distributions from simulation, Zebra and MatriXX.Significance.The dedicated MLSIC is the first pseudo-3D QA device that can measure 3D dose distribution in PBS proton fields spot-by-spot.

A multi-layer strip ionization chamber (MLSIC) device for proton pencil beam scan quality assurance

Objective. Proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) treatment fields needs to be verified before treatment deliveries to ensure patient safety. In current practice, treatment beam quality assurance (QA) is measured at a few selected depths using film or a 2D detector array, which is insensitive and time-consuming. A QA device that can measure all key dosimetric characteristics of treatment beams spot-by-spot within a single beam delivery is highly desired.Approach. We developed a multi-layer strip ionization chamber (MLSIC) prototype device that comprises of two layers of strip ionization chambers (IC) plates for spot position measurement and 64 layers of plate IC for beam energy measurement. The 768-channel strip ion chamber signals are integrated and sampled at a speed of 3.125 kHz. It has a 25.6 cm × 25.6 cm maximum measurement field size and 2 mm spatial resolution for spot position measurement. The depth resolution and maximum depth were 2.91 mm and 18.6 cm for 1.6 mm thick IC plate, respectively. The relative weight of each spot was determined from total charge by all IC detector channels.Main results. The MLSIC is able to measure ionization currents spot-by-spot. The depth dose measurement has a good agreement with the ground truth measured using a water tank and commercial one-dimensional (1D) multi-layer plate chamber. It can verify the spot position, energy, and relative weight of clinical PBS beams and compared with the treatment plans.Significance. The MLSIC is a highly efficient QA device that can measure the key dosimetric characteristics of proton treatment beams spot-by-spot with a single beam delivery. It may improve the quality and efficiency of clinical proton treatments.

Innovations and the Use of Collimators in the Delivery of Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy

Purpose

The development of collimating technologies has become a recent focus in pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy to improve the target conformity and healthy tissue sparing through field-specific or energy-layer–specific collimation. Given the growing popularity of collimators for low-energy treatments, the purpose of this work was to summarize the recent literature that has focused on the efficacy of collimators for PBS and highlight the development of clinical and preclinical collimators.

Materials and Methods

The collimators presented in this work were organized into 3 categories: per-field apertures, multileaf collimators (MLCs), and sliding-bar collimators. For each case, the system design and planning methodologies are summarized and intercompared from their existing literature. Energy-specific collimation is still a new paradigm in PBS and the 2 specific collimators tailored toward PBS are presented including the dynamic collimation system (DCS) and the Mevion Adaptive Aperture.

Results

Collimation during PBS can improve the target conformity and associated healthy tissue and critical structure avoidance. Between energy-specific collimators and static apertures, static apertures have the poorest dose conformity owing to collimating only the largest projection of a target in the beam's eye view but still provide an improvement over uncollimated treatments. While an external collimator increases secondary neutron production, the benefit of collimating the primary beam appears to outweigh the risk. The greatest benefit has been observed for low- energy treatment sites.

Conclusion

The consensus from current literature supports the use of external collimators in PBS under certain conditions, namely low-energy treatments or where the nominal spot size is large. While many recent studies paint a supportive picture, it is also important to understand the limitations of collimation in PBS that are specific to each collimator type. The emergence and paradigm of energy-specific collimation holds many promises for PBS proton therapy.

Three-dimensional dose reconstruction-based pretreatment dosimetric verification in volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

Purpose

We performed three-dimensional (3D) dose reconstruction-based pretreatment verification to evaluate gamma analysis acceptance criteria in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer.

Materials and Methods

Pretreatment verification for 28 VMAT plans for prostate cancer was performed using the COMPASS system with a dolphin detector. The 3D reconstructed dose distribution of the treatment planning system calculation (TC) was compared with that of COMPASS independent calculation (CC) and COMPASS reconstruction from the dolphin detector measurement (CR). Gamma results (gamma failure rate and average gamma value [GFR and γAvg]) and dose-volume histogram (DVH) deviations, 98%, 2% and mean dose-volume difference (DD_98%, DD_2% and DD_mean), were evaluated. Gamma analyses were performed with two acceptance criteria, 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm.

Results

The GFR in 2%/2 mm criteria were less than 8%, and those in 3%/3 mm criteria were less than 1% for all structures in comparisons between TC, CC, and CR. In the comparison between TC and CR, GFR and γAvg in 2%/2 mm criteria were significantly higher than those in 3%/3 mm criteria. The DVH deviations were within 2%, except for DD_mean (%) for rectum and bladder.

Conclusions

The 3%/3 mm criteria were not strict enough to identify any discrepancies between planned and measured doses, and DVH deviations were less than 2% in most parameters. Therefore, gamma criteria of 2%/2 mm and DVH related parameters could be a useful tool for pretreatment verification for VMAT in prostate cancer.

Early clinical outcomes of helical tomotherapy/intensity-modulated proton therapy combination in nasopharynx cancer

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of combining helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in treating patients with nasopharynx cancer (NPC). From January 2016 to March 2018, 98 patients received definitive radiation therapy (RT) with concurrent chemotherapy (CCRT). Using simultaneous integrated boost and adaptive re‐plan, 3 different dose levels were prescribed: 68.4 Gy in 30 parts to gross tumor volume (GTV), 60 Gy in 30 parts to high‐risk clinical target volume (CTV), and 36 Gy in 18 parts to low‐risk CTV. In all patients, the initial 18 fractions were delivered by HT, and, after rival plan evaluation on the adaptive re‐plan, the later 12 fractions were delivered either by HT in 63 patients (64.3%, HT only) or IMPT in 35 patients (35.7%, HT/IMPT combination), respectively. Propensity‐score matching was conducted to control differences in patient characteristics. In all patients, grade ≥ 2 mucositis (69.8% vs 45.7%, P = .019) and grade ≥ 2 analgesic usage (54% vs 37.1%, P = .110) were found to be less frequent in HT/IMPT group. In matched patients, grade ≥ 2 mucositis were still less frequent numerically in HT/IMPT group (62.9% vs 45.7%, P = .150). In univariate analysis, stage IV disease and larger GTV volume were associated with increased grade ≥ 2 mucositis. There was no significant factor in multivariate analysis. With the median 14 month follow‐up, locoregional and distant failures occurred in 9 (9.2%) and 12 (12.2%) patients without difference by RT modality. In conclusion, comparable early oncologic outcomes with more favorable acute toxicity profiles were achievable by HT/IMPT combination in treating NPC patients.

Reducing the probability of radiation-induced hepatic toxicity by changing the treatment modality from helical tomotherapy to fixed-beam intensity-modulated radiotherapy

Purpose

To estimate and compare the risk of radiation-induced hepatic toxicity (RIHT) in helical tomotherapy and fixed-beam intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Materials and Methods

Twenty patients with unresectable HCC treated with tomotherapy were selected. We performed tomotherapy re-planning to reduce the non-target normal liver volume receiving a dose of more than 15 Gy (NTNL-V_15Gy), and we created a fixed-beam IMRT plan (FB-P). We compared the dosimetric results as well as the estimated probability of RIHT among the tomotherapy initial plan (T-IP), the tomotherapy re-plan (T-RP), and the FB-P.

Results

Comparing the T-RP and FB-P, the homogeneity index was 0.11 better with the T-RP. However, the mean NTNL-V_15Gy was 6.3% lower with the FB-P. These differences result in a decline in the probability of RIHT from 0.216 in the T-RP to 0.115 in the FB-P. In patients whose NTNL-V_15Gy was higher than 43.2% with the T-RP, the probability of RIHT markedly reduced from 0.533 to 0.274.

Conclusions

By changing the treatment modality from tomotherapy to fixed-beam IMRT, we could reduce the liver dose and the probability of RIHT without scarifying the target coverage, especially in patients whose liver dose is high.

Dosimetric Comparison and Potential for Improved Clinical Outcomes of Paediatric CNS Patients Treated with Protons or IMRT

Background: We compare clinical outcomes of paediatric patients with CNS tumours treated with protons or IMRT. CNS tumours form the second most common group of cancers in children. Radiotherapy plays a major role in the treatment of many of these patients but also contributes to late side effects in long term survivors. Radiation dose inevitably deposited in healthy tissues outside the clinical target has been linked to detrimental late effects such as neurocognitive, behavioural and vascular effects in addition to endocrine abnormalities and second tumours. Methods: A literature search was performed using keywords: protons, IMRT, CNS and paediatric. Of 189 papers retrieved, 10 were deemed relevant based on title and abstract screening. All papers directly compared outcomes from protons with photons, five papers included medulloblastoma, four papers each included craniopharyngioma and low grade gliomas and three papers included ependymoma. Results: This review found that while proton beam therapy offered similar clinical target coverage, there was a demonstrable reduction in integral dose to normal structures. Conclusions: This in turn suggests the potential for superior long term outcomes for paediatric patients with CNS tumours both in terms of radiogenic second cancers and out-of-field adverse effects.

Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging: current status, future aspects

Simultaneous positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is a promising novel technology for oncology diagnosis and staging and neurologic and cardiac applications. Our institution's current research protocol results in a total imaging time of approximately 45 to 70 minutes with simultaneous PET/MR imaging, making this a feasible total body imaging protocol. Further development of MR-based attenuation correction will improve PET quantification. Quantitatively accurate multiparametric PET/MR data sets will likely improve diagnosis of disease and help guide and monitor the therapies for individualized patient care.

An in-silico comparison of proton beam and IMRT for postoperative radiotherapy in completely resected stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) for stage IIIA completely-resected non-small cell lung cancer (CR-NSCLC) has been shown to improve local control; however, it is unclear that this translates into a survival benefit. One explanation is that the detrimental effect of PORT on critical organs at risk (OARs) negates its benefit. This study reports an in-silico comparative analysis of passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT)- and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) with intensity modulated photon beam radiotherapy (IMRT) PORT.

METHODS

The computed tomography treatment planning scans of ten patients with pathologic stage IIIA CR-NSCLC treated with IMRT were used. IMRT, PSPT, and IMPT plans were generated and analyzed for dosimetric endpoints. The proton plans were constructed with two or three beams. All plans were optimized to deliver 50.4 Gy(RBE) in 1.8 Gy(RBE) fractions to the target volume.

RESULTS

IMPT leads to statistically significant reductions in maximum spinal cord, mean lung dose, lung volumes treated to 5, 10, 20, and 30 Gy (V5, V10, V20, V30), mean heart dose, and heart volume treated to 40 Gy (V40), when compared with IMRT or PSPT. PSPT reduced lung V5 but increased lung V20, V30, and heart and esophagus V40.

CONCLUSIONS

IMPT demonstrates a large decrease in dose to all OARs. PSPT, while reducing the low-dose lung bath, increases the volume of lung receiving high dose. Reductions are seen in dosimetric parameters predictive of radiation pneumonitis and cardiac morbidity and mortality. This reduction may correlate with a decrease in dose-limiting toxicity and improve the therapeutic ratio.

Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy

BACKGROUND

To test the hypothesis that the therapeutic ratio of intensity-modulated photon therapy using helical tomotherapy (HT) for retreatment of head and neck carcinomas can be improved by robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

METHODS

Comparative dose planning with robust IMPT was performed for 7 patients retreated with HT.

RESULTS

On average, HT yielded dose gradients steeper in a distance ≤ 7.5 mm outside the target (p<0.0001, F-test) and more conformal high dose regions down to the 50% isodose than IMPT. Both methods proved comparably robust against set-up errors of up to 2 mm, and normal tissue exposure was satisfactory. The mean body dose was smaller with IMPT.

CONCLUSIONS

IMPT was found not to be uniformly superior to HT and the steeper average dose fall-off around the target volume is an argument pro HT under the methodological implementations used. However, looking at single organs at risk, the normal tissue sparing of IMPT can surpass tomotherapy for an individual patient. Therefore, comparative dose planning is recommended, if both methods are available.

The effects of motion on the dose distribution of proton radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Proton radiotherapy of the prostate basal or whole seminal vesicles using scattering delivery systems is an effective treatment of prostate cancer that has been evaluated in prospective trials. Meanwhile, the use of pencil beam scanning (PBS) can further reduce the dose in the beam entrance channels and reduce the dose to the normal tissues. However, PBS dose distributions can be affected by intra‐ and interfractional motion. In this treatment planning study, the effects of intra‐ and interfractional organ motion on PBS dose distributions are investigated using repeated CT scans at close and distant time intervals. The minimum dose (Dmin) and the dose to 2% and 98% of the volumes (D2% and D98%), as well as EUD in the clinical target volumes (CTV), is used as measure of robustness. In all patients, D98% was larger than 96% and D2% was less than 106% of the prescribed dose. The combined information from Dmin, D98% and EUD led to the conclusion that there are no relevant cold spots observed in any of the verification plans. Moreover, it was found that results of single field optimization are more robust than results from multiple field optimizations.

PACS numbers: 87.55.D‐, 87.55.de, 87.53.Bn, 87.55.dk, 87.55.ne

Beyond Gaussians: a study of single-spot modeling for scanning proton dose calculation

Active spot scanning proton therapy is becoming increasingly adopted by proton therapy centers worldwide. Unlike passive-scattering proton therapy, active spot scanning proton therapy, especially intensity-modulated proton therapy, requires proper modeling of each scanning spot to ensure accurate computation of the total dose distribution contributed from a large number of spots. During commissioning of the spot scanning gantry at the Proton Therapy Center in Houston, it was observed that the long-range scattering protons in a medium may have been inadequately modeled for high-energy beams by a commercial treatment planning system, which could lead to incorrect prediction of field size effects on dose output. In this study, we developed a pencil beam algorithm for scanning proton dose calculation by focusing on properly modeling individual scanning spots. All modeling parameters required by the pencil beam algorithm can be generated based solely on a few sets of measured data. We demonstrated that low-dose halos in single-spot profiles in the medium could be adequately modeled with the addition of a modified Cauchy-Lorentz distribution function to a double-Gaussian function. The field size effects were accurately computed at all depths and field sizes for all energies, and good dose accuracy was also achieved for patient dose verification. The implementation of the proposed pencil beam algorithm also enabled us to study the importance of different modeling components and parameters at various beam energies. The results of this study may be helpful in improving dose calculation accuracy and simplifying beam commissioning and treatment planning processes for spot scanning proton therapy.

Comparison of different adjuvant radiotherapy approaches in childhood bladder/prostate rhabdomyosarcoma treated with conservative surgery

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Multimodality treatment approaches provide high local control and satisfying overall survival (OS) for children with localized bladder and/or prostate rhabdomyosarcoma (BP-RMS). However, current strategies including surgery and conventional radiotherapy are compromised by high rates of long-term genitourinary adverse effects. Therefore, a planning study combining organ preserving surgery with three different innovative adjuvant radiotherapy approaches was performed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A case of a 21-month-old boy with BP-RMS treated with polychemotherapy according to the CWS 2002-P protocol, prostatectomy, partial cystectomy, and adjuvant high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) was used to perform a planning study comparing HDR-BT with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning.

RESULTS

All modalities provide good coverage of the target volume and spare critical normal tissues. Rectum doses could be reduced by 2/3 using IMPT and by 1/3 using BT compared to IMRT. In terms of sparing the pelvis growth plates, BT and IMPT are also superior to IMRT.

CONCLUSION

All modalities provide good sparing of normal tissue. BT and IMPT are superior to IMRT with regard to doses on rectum and growth plates. BT is equivalent to IMPT in adequately selected tumors.

Comparison of IMRT techniques in the radiotherapeutic management of head and neck cancer: is tomotherapy "better" than step-and-shoot IMRT?

Currently, the most common method of delivering intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is through step-and-shoot, segmental multi-leaf collimator (SMLC)-based techniques. Although rotational delivery methods such as helical tomotherapy (HT) have been proposed as offering advantages in the treatment of head and neck cancer, a lack of clinical data exists on its potential utility. This study compared dosimetric, clinical, and quality-of-life endpoints among 149 patients treated by HT and SMLC-IMRT for head and neck cancer. Dosimetric analysis revealed that the use of HT resulted in significant improvements with respect to mean dose (23.5 versus 27.9 Gy, p = 0.03) and V30 (30.1 versus 43.9 Gy, p = 0.01) to the contralateral (spared) parotid gland. However, the incidence of grade 3+ xerostomia in the late setting was 10% and 8% among patients treated by HT and SMLC-IMRT, respectively (p = 0.46). There were no significant differences in any of the quality of life endpoints among patients treated by HT and SMLC-IMRT (p > 0.05, for all). Acknowledging the biases inherent in this retrospective analysis, we found that the dosimetric advantages observed with HT compared to SMLC-IMRT failed to translate into significant improvements in clinical outcome. Prospective studies are needed to further evaluate how HT may affect the therapeutic ratio.

Molecular imaging-based dose painting: a novel paradigm for radiation therapy prescription

Dose painting is the prescription of a nonuniform radiation dose distribution to the target volume based on functional or molecular images shown to indicate the local risk of relapse. Two prototypical strategies for implementing this novel paradigm in radiation oncology are reviewed: subvolume boosting and dose painting by numbers. Subvolume boosting involves the selection of a "target within the target," defined by image segmentation on the basis of the quantitative information in the image or morphologically, and this is related to image-based target volume selection and delineation. Dose painting by numbers is a voxel-level prescription of dose based on a mathematical transformation of the image intensity of individual pixels. The quantitative use of images to decide both where and how to delivery radiation therapy in an individual case is also called theragnostic imaging. Dose painting targets are imaging surrogates for cellular or microenvironmental phenotypes associated with poor radioresponsiveness. In this review, the focus is on the following positron emission tomography tracers: FDG and choline as surrogates for tumor burden, fluorothymidine as a surrogate for proliferation (or cellular growth fraction) and hypoxia-sensitive tracers, including [(18)F] fluoromisonidazole, EF3, EF5, and (64)Cu-labeled copper(II) diacetyl-di(N(4)-methylthiosemicarbazone) as surrogates of cellular hypoxia. Research advances supporting the clinicobiological rationale for dose painting are reviewed as are studies of the technical feasibility of optimizing and delivering realistic dose painted radiation therapy plans. Challenges and research priorities in this exciting research field are defined and a possible design for a randomized clinical trial of dose painting is presented.

The potential benefit of radiotherapy with protons in head and neck cancer with respect to normal tissue sparing: a systematic review of literature

PURPOSE

Clinical studies concerning head and neck cancer patients treated with protons reporting on radiation-induced side effects are scarce. Therefore, we reviewed the literature regarding the potential benefits of protons compared with the currently used photons in terms of lower doses to normal tissue and the potential for fewer subsequent radiation-induced side effects, with the main focus on in silico planning comparative (ISPC) studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed by two independent researchers on ISPC studies that included proton-based and photon-based irradiation techniques.

RESULTS

Initially, 877 papers were retrieved and 14 relevant and eligible ISPC studies were identified and included in this review. Four studies included paranasal sinus cancer cases, three included nasopharyngeal cancer cases, and seven included oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, and/or laryngeal cancer cases. Seven studies compared the most sophisticated photon and proton techniques: intensity-modulated photon therapy versus intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Four studies compared different proton techniques. All studies showed that protons had a lower normal tissue dose, while keeping similar or better target coverage. Two studies found that these lower doses theoretically translated into a significantly lower incidence of salivary dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

The results of ISPC studies indicate that protons have the potential for a significantly lower normal tissue dose, while keeping similar or better target coverage. Scanned IMPT probably offers the most advantage and will allow for a substantially lower probability of radiation-induced side effects. The results of these ISPC studies should be confirmed in properly designed clinical trials.

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.

The role of protons in modern and biologically-guided radiotherapy

With the introduction of new biologically based imaging possibilities, a higher degree of individualisation and adaptation of radiotherapy will be possible. Better knowledge of the biology of the target and its sub-volumes will enable dose prescriptions tailored to the individual patients, tissues and sub-volumes. Repeated imaging during the course of treatment will in addition enable adaptation of the treatment to cope with anatomical, as well as biological changes of the patient and of the target tissues. To translate these bright future perspectives into significant improvements in clinical outcome, advanced tools to tailor the physical dose distributions are needed. The most conformal radiotherapy technique known to mankind and clinically available today is proton therapy; in particular Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) with active spot scanning can not only tailor the dose to the desired target, but also effectively avoid sensitive structures in the proximity of the target to a degree far better than other conformal techniques such as Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy with photons (IMRT). The development of IMPT is now mature enough for clinical introduction on a broad scale. Proton therapy is still more expensive than conventional radiotherapy, but with the present rapid increase in the number of proton facilities worldwide and new initiatives to improve efficiency, the difference in affordability will continue to decrease and in comparison with the benefits, soon diminish even further. Contrary to what is sometimes claimed, the demands for better physical dose distributions and better avoidance of non-target tissue, has never been higher. Prolonged expected survival in many groups of patients emphasises the need to reduce late toxicities. The success of concomitant systemic therapies, with their tendency to cause higher morbidity stresses even further the increased need for subtle dose-sculpting methodologies and tools. There is no contradiction between striving for better physical dose distributions and a more biologically based approach. On the contrary, physical dose distributions are the tools to which achieve a treatment that can meet the biological demands.

Clinical applications of volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

To present treatment planning case studies for several treatment sites for which volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) could have a positive impact; and to share an initial clinical experience with VMAT for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Four case studies are presented to show the potential benefit of VMAT compared with conformal and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques in pediatric cancer, bone marrow-sparing whole-abdominopelvic irradiation (WAPI), and SBRT of the lung and spine. Details of clinical implementation of VMAT for SBRT are presented. The VMAT plans are compared with conventional techniques in terms of dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency.

RESULTS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy reduced the treatment time of spine SBRT by 37% and improved isodose conformality. Conformal and VMAT techniques for lung SBRT had similar dosimetric quality, but VMAT had improved target coverage and took 59% less time to deliver, although monitor units were increased by 5%. In a complex pediatric pelvic example, VMAT reduced treatment time by 78% and monitor units by 25% compared with IMRT. A double-isocenter VMAT technique for WAPI can spare bone marrow while maintaining good delivery efficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy is a new technology that may benefit different patient populations, including pediatric cancer patients and those undergoing concurrent chemotherapy and WAPI. Volumetric modulated arc therapy has been used and shown to be beneficial for significantly improving delivery efficiency of lung and spine SBRT.

Overestimation of low-dose radiation in intensity-modulated radiotherapy with sliding-window technique

PURPOSE

To analyze different control-system limitations on the measured dose distributions in low-dose regions of simplified intensity fields with an electronic portal imaging device to ascertain the optimal settings for the control-system limitations in the planning system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The authors created one field with an "optimal fluence" of intensity 1.0 (full dose) and one field with intensity 0.0 (no dose) in the central part of the field. The influence of different dose rates (DRs) and maximum leaf speeds (LS) on the calculated and measured dose and dose profiles were analyzed.

RESULTS

Good agreement between calculated and measured dose in the case of a field of intensity 1.0 was found. For the field with intensity 0.0, the measured dose was 20-60% lower than the dose calculated by the "actual fluence". The results were found dependent on the DR and LS.

CONCLUSION

The overestimation in regions of optimal intensity 0.0 by the planning system cannot be resolved by the user. Taking the measured dose in the region of desired intensity 1.0 and other technical limitations (like beam hold interrupts or spikes in the cross and longitudinal profiles) into consideration, the application of an LS of 2.5 cm/s and a DR of 500 MU/min is recommended in order to minimize radiation dose applied to organs at risk, which are located in regions of low intensity, like, for example, the spinal cord.

Study of robustness of IMPT and IMRT for prostate cancer against organ movement

PURPOSE

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy with photons (IMRT) and protons (IMPT) produces dose distributions that have high conformality to the planning target volume and sufficient sparing of the organs at risk if calculated on a single static computed tomography (CT) scan. For prostate cancer patients, organ movement with related changes to the density distribution in the irradiated volume occurs during the treatment course. We evaluated the sensitivity of IMPT and IMRT plans to organ movement.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

IMPT and IMRT treatment plans were evaluated for 4 patients with an average of 16 CT data sets per patient. The treatment plans were recalculated on all treatment CT scans, and the dose was accumulated in the reference geometry using a deformable registration algorithm. Accurate dose calculation methods were applied for both IMPT and IMRT.

RESULTS

With IMPT, unacceptably low total doses in the gross tumor volume were observed for patients with gas in the rectum on the planning CT scan. To achieve a total equivalent uniform dose (EUD) and EUD spread similar to that with IMRT, two methods were crucial for IMPT-a rectal gas water-equivalent density overwrite in the original planning CT scan and initial beam weight setting to achieve a homogeneous dose distribution for the whole planning target volume for each field separately. An improvement in the total EUD for the prostate and rectal wall was also observed for IMRT with the water-equivalent density overwrite of the rectal cavities.

CONCLUSION

The sensitivities of IMPT and IMRT to organ movement are of the same order if appropriate planning strategies are applied. The latter is especially crucial for IMPT.

Real-time motion-adaptive-optimization (MAO) in TomoTherapy

IMRT delivery follows a planned leaf sequence, which is optimized before treatment delivery. However, it is hard to model real-time variations, such as respiration, in the planning procedure. In this paper, we propose a negative feedback system of IMRT delivery that incorporates real-time optimization to account for intra-fraction motion. Specifically, we developed a feasible workflow of real-time motion-adaptive-optimization (MAO) for TomoTherapy delivery. TomoTherapy delivery is characterized by thousands of projections with a fast projection rate and ultra-fast binary leaf motion. The technique of MAO-guided delivery calculates (i) the motion-encoded dose that has been delivered up to any given projection during the delivery and (ii) the future dose that will be delivered based on the estimated motion probability and future fluence map. These two pieces of information are then used to optimize the leaf open time of the upcoming projection right before its delivery. It consists of several real-time procedures, including 'motion detection and prediction', 'delivered dose accumulation', 'future dose estimation' and 'projection optimization'. Real-time MAO requires that all procedures are executed in time less than the duration of a projection. We implemented and tested this technique using a TomoTherapy research system. The MAO calculation took about 100 ms per projection. We calculated and compared MAO-guided delivery with two other types of delivery, motion-without-compensation delivery (MD) and static delivery (SD), using simulated 1D cases, real TomoTherapy plans and the motion traces from clinical lung and prostate patients. The results showed that the proposed technique effectively compensated for motion errors of all test cases. Dose distributions and DVHs of MAO-guided delivery approached those of SD, for regular and irregular respiration with a peak-to-peak amplitude of 3 cm, and for medium and large prostate motions. The results conceptually proved that the proposed method is applicable for real-time motion compensation in TomoTherapy delivery. Extension of the method to real-time adaptive radiation therapy (ART) that compensates for all kinds of delivery errors was proposed. Further validation and clinical implementation is underway.

Planning and delivery of intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is an advanced form of external beam radiation therapy. IMRT offers an additional dimension of freedom as compared with field shaping in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy because the radiation intensities within a radiation field can be varied according to the preferences of locations within a given beam direction from which the radiation is directed to the tumor. This added freedom allows the treatment planning system to better shape the radiation doses to conform to the target volume while sparing surrounding normal structures. The resulting dosimetric advantage has shown to translate into clinical advantages of improving local and regional tumor control. It also offers a valuable mechanism for dose escalation to tumors while simultaneously reducing radiation toxicities to the surrounding normal tissue and sensitive structures. In less than a decade, IMRT has become common practice in radiation oncology. Looking forward, the authors wonder if IMRT has matured to such a point that the room for further improvement has diminished and so it is pertinent to ask what the future will hold for IMRT. This article attempts to look from the perspective of the current state of the technology to predict the immediate trends and the future directions. This article will (1) review the clinical experience of IMRT; (2) review what we learned in IMRT planning; (3) review different treatment delivery techniques; and finally, (4) predict the areas of advancements in the years to come.

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.