Normal Brain Sparing With Increasing Number of Beams and Isocenters in Volumetric-Modulated Arc Beam Radiosurgery of Multiple Brain Metastases

Insights into the dosimetric and geometric characteristics of stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

GammaKnife (GK) and CyberKnife (CK) have been the mainstay stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) solution for multiple brain metastases (MBM) for several years. Recent technological advancement has seen an increase in single-isocentre C-arm linac-based SRS. This systematic review focuses on dosimetric and geometric insights into contemporary MBM SRS and thereby establish if linac-based SRS has matured to match the mainstay SRS delivery systems.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were interrogated which yielded 891 relevant articles that narrowed to 20 articles after removing duplicates and applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Primary studies which reported the use of SRS for treatment of MBM SRS and reported the technical aspects including dosimetry were included. The review was limited to English language publications from January 2015 to August 2023. Only full-length papers were included in the final analysis. Opinion papers, commentary pieces, letters to the editor, abstracts, conference proceedings and editorials were excluded. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. The reporting of conformity indices (CI) and gradient indices, V12Gy, monitor units and the impact of translational and rotational shifts were extracted and analysed.

RESULTS

The single-isocentre technique for MBM dominated recent SRS studies and the most studied delivery platforms were Varian. The C-arm linac-based SRS plan quality and normal brain tissue sparing was comparable to GK and CK and in some cases better. The most used nominal beam energy was 6FFF, and optimised couch and collimator angles could reduce mean normal brain dose by 11.3%. Reduction in volume of the healthy brain receiving a certain dose was dependent on the number and size of the metastases and the relative geometric location. GK and CK required 4.5-8.4 times treatment time compared with linac-based SRS. Rotational shifts caused larger changes in CI in C-arm linac-based single-isocentre SRS.

CONCLUSION

C-arm linac-based SRS produced comparable MBM plan quality and the delivery is notably shorter compared to GK and CK SRS.

Radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases using volumetric modulated arc therapy: a single institutional series

Background

Patients with brain metastases (BM) live longer due to improved diagnosis and oncologic treatments. The association of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) with brain radiosurgery (SRS) allows complex dose distributions and faster treatment delivery to multiple lesions.

Materials and methods

This study is a retrospective analysis of SRS for brain metastasis using VMAT. The primary endpoints were local disease-free survival (LDFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary outcomes were intracranial disease-free survival (IDFS) and meningeal disease-free survival (MDFS).

Results

The average number of treated lesions was 5.79 (range: 2-20) per treatment in a total of 113 patients. The mean prescribed dose was 18 Gy (range: 12-24 Gy). The median LDFS was 46 months. The LDFS in 6, 12, and 24 months was for 86%, 79%, and 63%, respectively. Moreover, brain progression occurred in 50 patients. The median overall survival was 47 months. The OS in 75%, 69%, and 61% patients was 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. IDFS was 6 and 24 months in 35% and 14% patients, respectively. The mean MDFS was 62 months; it was 6 and 24 months for 87% and 83% of patients. Acute severe toxicity was relatively rare. During follow-up, the rates of radionecrosis and neurocognitive impairment were low (10%).

Conclusion

The use of VMAT-SRS for multiple BM was feasible, effective, and associated with low treatment-related toxicity rates. Thus, treatment with VMAT is a safe technique to plan to achieve local control without toxicity.

Quality of Automated Stereotactic Radiosurgery Plans in Patients with 4 to 10 Brain Metastases

Simple Summary

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) are promising treatment options for patients with multiple brain metastases in the current era of personalized medicine. Recent international guidelines propose SRS also in patients with more than three brain metastases with low-volume disease. Optimal treatment quality with sparing of healthy brain tissue is essential to avoid SRS/SRT complications such as brain necrosis. The aim of this study was to compare linac (linear accelerator)-based SRS/SRT plan quality of automated planning, intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) and manually planned dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans as well as single- and multiple-isocenter techniques. We found that automated planning with DCA or IMRT can make linac-based SRS/SRT plan quality with single isocenter comparable with a manually planned DCA plan with a separate isocenter for each metastasis.

Abstract

The purpose was to compare linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery and hypofractionated radiotherapy plan quality of automated planning, intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and manual dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans as well as single- and multiple-isocenter techniques for multiple brain metastases (BM). For twelve patients with four to ten BM, seven non-coplanar linac-based plans were created: a manually planned DCA plan with a separate isocenter for each metastasis, a single-isocenter dynamic IMRT plan, an automatically generated single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) plan, four automatically generated single-isocenter DCA plans with three or five couch angles, with high or low sparing of normal tissue. Paddick conformity index, gradient index (GI), mean dose, total V_12Gy and V_5Gy of uninvolved brain, number of monitor units (MUs), irradiation time and pass rate were compared. The GI was significantly higher for VMAT than for separate-isocenter, IMRT, and all automatically generated plans. The number of MUs was lowest for VMAT, followed by automatically generated DCA and IMRT plans and highest for manual DCA plans. Irradiation time was the shortest for automatically planned DCA plans. Automatically generated linac-based single-isocenter plans for multiple BM reduce the number of MUs and irradiation time with at least comparable GI and V_5Gy relative to the reference separate-isocenter DCA plans.

Transition From Manual to Automated Planning and Delivery of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Stereotactic Radiosurgery: Clinical, Dosimetric, and Quality Assurance Results

PURPOSE

Properly planned single isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) radiosurgery plans exhibit high quality and efficiency. We report here the largest clinical experience to date, to our knowledge, comparing manual planning with a new automated platform designed to standardize and simplify radiosurgery planning and delivery processes.

METHODS

We treated 693 patients with single isocenter VMAT radiosurgical plans generated by either our conventional manual (mVMAT) or a recently implemented automated (HyperArc^TM) technique. All plans targeted the gross tumor volume without margin. Radiochromic film was used for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA). We evaluated local control and toxicity data for a subgroup of 107 patients having 377 metastatic tumors that were treated with HyperArc.

RESULTS

The median Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) conformity index was 1.14 and was not different between the 2 techniques. The median Paddick gradient index was 5.42 for HyperArc versus 7.09 for mVMAT (P < .001). The median mean brain doses were 4.6% and 5.1% for HyperArc and mVMAT, respectively (P = .04). The PSQA for both techniques met clinical criteria, but 97% of the HyperArc plans satisfied the gamma tolerance limit recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group No. 218, compared with 94% of the mVMAT plans (P = .02). The median treatment-planning times were not significantly different. The median treatment times were 10.5 and 11.4 minutes for HyperArc and mVMAT, respectively (P < .001). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of local control was 90.1% at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

HyperArc produces high-quality radiosurgical plans that are at least as good as mVMAT plans created by an expert manual planner with easier planning and more efficient delivery workflow. A less experienced planner can produce very high-quality radiosurgical plans even for patients with more than 10 targets. The use of a single-isocenter technique for multiple targets with no PTV margin did not compromise clinical outcomes, and 1-year local control for treated targets remained congruent with historical series.

Dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency of robotic radiosurgery for brain metastases: Comparison with C-arm linear accelerator based plans

The incidence of brain metastases is increasing and various treatment modalities exist for brain metastases. The aim of this study was to investigate the dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency of robotic radiosurgery (CyberKnife) for multiple brain metastases compared with C‐arm linear accelerator (linac) based plans. C‐arm linac based plans included intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and non‐coplanar VMAT with 1, 3 and 5 non‐coplanar arcs, respectively (NC1, NC3 and NC5). For 20 patients, six plans with a prescription dose of 30 Gy in three fractions were generated. The gradient index (GI), conformity index (CI), maximum dose (D_max) of organs at risk (OARs), normal brain tissue volume (V_3 Gy–V_24 Gy), monitor units (MUs) and beam on time (BT) were evaluated. The GI of CyberKnife plans (3.60 ± 0.70) was lower than IMRT (6.21 ± 2.26, P < 0.05), VMAT (6.04 ± 1.93, P < 0.05), NC1 (5.16 ± 1.71, P < 0.05), NC3 (5.02 ± 1.59, P < 0.05) and NC5 (5.03 ± 1.72, P < 0.05). The CI of the VMAT plans (both coplanar and non‐coplanar) was larger than IMRT and CK plans. The D_max for most OARs of the CyberKnife plan was lower than the C‐arm linac based plans, although some differences were not statistically significant. The normal brain tissue volume of CyberKnife plan was lower than the C‐arm linac based plans, and the normal brain tissue volume of non‐coplanar VMAT plans was lower than IMRT and VMAT plans at high‐moderate dose level. However, the MUs and BT of CyberKnife plans was more than C‐arm linac based plans. CyberKnife plan was better than C‐arm linac based plans in protecting normal brain tissue and OARs for patients with multiple brain metastases. C‐arm linac based plan with non‐coplanar arc provided better protection of normal brain tissue than coplanar plan. However, the BT of CyberKnife plan was longer than C‐arm linac based plans.

LINAC based stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: guidance for clinical implementation

Introduction: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a promising treatment option for patients with multiple brain metastases (BM). Recent technical advances have made LINAC based SRS a patient friendly technique, allowing for accurate patient positioning and a short treatment time. Since SRS is increasingly being used for patients with multiple BM, it remains essential that SRS be performed with the highest achievable quality in order to prevent unnecessary complications such as radionecrosis. The purpose of this article is to provide guidance for high-quality LINAC based SRS for patients with BM, with a focus on single isocenter non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods: The article is based on a consensus statement by the study coordinators and medical physicists of four trials which investigated whether patients with multiple BM are better palliated with SRS instead of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT): A European trial (NCT02353000), two American trials and a Canadian CCTG lead intergroup trial (CE.7). This manuscript summarizes the quality assurance measures concerning imaging, planning and delivery. Results: To optimize the treatment, the interval between the planning-MRI (gadolinium contrast-enhanced, maximum slice thickness of 1.5 mm) and treatment should be kept as short as possible (< two weeks). The BM are contoured based on the planning-MRI, fused with the planning-CT. GTV-PTV margins are minimized or even avoided when possible. To maximize efficiency, the preferable technique is single isocenter (non-)coplanar VMAT, which delivers high doses to the target with maximal sparing of the organs at risk. The use of flattening filter free photon beams ensures a lower peripheral dose and shortens the treatment time. To bench mark SRS treatment plan quality, it is advisable to compare treatment plans between hospitals. Conclusion: This paper provides guidance for quality assurance and optimization of treatment delivery for LINAC-based radiosurgery for patients with multiple BM.

Frameless Image-Guided Radiosurgery for Multiple Brain Metastasis Using VMAT: A Review and an Institutional Experience

We undertook a structured review of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using linear particle accelerator (linac) equipment, focusing on volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technology, and frameless image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT), for the treatment of brain metastases. We analyzed the role of linac SRS and its clinical applications, exploring stereotactic localization. Historically, there was a shift from fixed frames to frameless approaches, moving toward less invasive treatments. Thus, we reviewed the concepts of VMAT for multiple-target applications, comparing its dosimetric and technical features to those of other available techniques. We evaluated relevant technical issues and discussed the planning parameters that have gained worldwide acceptance to date. Thus, we reviewed the current literature on the clinical aspects of SRS, especially its main indications and how the advantages of VMAT may achieve clinical benefits in such scenarios. Finally, we reported our institutional results on IGRT-VMAT for SRS treatments for patients with multiple brain metastases.

Single-Fraction Stereotactic Radiosurgery Versus Hippocampal-Avoidance Whole Brain Radiation Therapy for Patients With 10 to 30 Brain Metastases: A Dosimetric Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare normal tissue dosimetry between hippocampal-avoidance whole brain radiation therapy (HA-WBRT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with 10 to 30 brain metastases, and to describe a novel SRS strategy we term Spatially Partitioned Adaptive RadiosurgEry (SPARE).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A retrospective review identified SRS treatment plans with >10 brain metastases located >5 mm from the hippocampi. Our Gamma Knife Icon (GKI) SPARE (GKI-Spr) technique treats multiple metastases with single-fraction SRS partitioned over consecutive days while limiting the total treatment time to ≤60 minutes per day. Hippocampal and normal brain dosimetry were compared among GKI-Spr, single-fraction single-day GKI (GKI-Sfr), and 30 Gy in 10 fractions HA-WBRT. Dose metrics were converted to equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions.

RESULTS

Ten cases were analyzed. Compared with HA-WBRT, GKI-Spr significantly reduced the median equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions hippocampal maximum point dose, mean dose, and dose to 40% of the hippocampi (D40%) by 86%, 93%, and 93%, respectively, and similarly for GKI-Sfr by 81%, 92%, and 91%, respectively. The normal brain median mean dose was reduced by 95% with GKI-Spr and 94% with GKI-Sfr. Compared with GKI-Sfr, GKI-Spr further reduced all normal brain and hippocampal dose metrics (P ≤ .014).

CONCLUSIONS

GKI yields superior hippocampal and normal brain dosimetry compared with HA-WBRT, and GKI-Spr results in further dosimetric advantages.

Investigation of irradiated volume in linac-based brain hypo-fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy

Background

Emerging techniques such as brain hypo-fractionated radiotherapy (HF-RT) involve complex cases with limited guidelines for plan quality and normal tissue tolerances. The purpose of the present study was to statistically parameterize irradiated volume independently of dose prescription, or margin to determine what spread in achievable irradiated volume one may expect for a given case.

Methods

We defined EXT as the total tissue within the external contour of the patient (including the target) and we defined BMP as the contour of the brain minus PTV. Irradiated volumes of EXT and BMP at specific doses (i.e. 50, 60%, etc., of the prescribed dose) were extracted from 135 single-target HF-RT clinical cases, each planned with a single-arc, homogeneous (SAHO) approach in which target maximum dose (Dmax) was constrained to <130% of the prescribed dose. Irradiated volumes were subsequently measured for cases involving 2 targets (N = 29), 3 targets (N = 7) and >3 targets (N = 10) to investigate the effect of target number. We also examined the effect of shape complexity. A series of best fit curves with confidence and prediction intervals were generated for irradiated volume versus total target volume and the resulting model was subsequently validated on a subsequent set of 23 consecutive prospective cases not originally used in curve-fitting. A subset of 30 HF-RT cases were re-planned with a well-published four-arc, heterogeneous (FAHE) radiosurgery planning approach (Dmax could exceed 130%) to demonstrate how technique affects irradiated volume.

Results

For SAHO, strong correlation (R² > 0.98) was found for predicting irradiated volumes. For a given total target volume, irradiated-volume increased by a range of 1.4–2.9× for >3 versus single-targets depending on isodose level. Shape complexity had minor impact on irradiated volume. There was no statistical difference in irradiated volumes between validation and input data (p > 0.2). The FAHE-generated irradiated volumes yielded curves and prediction and confidence bands that agreed well with published data indicating that the proposed approach is feasible for cross-institutional comparisons.

Conclusions

A description of irradiated volume for linac-based HF-RT is proposed based on population data. We have demonstrated that the proposed approach is feasible for inter and intra-institutional comparisons.

Stereotactic radiosurgery alone for multiple brain metastases? A review of clinical and technical issues

Over the past three decades several randomized trials have enabled evidence-based practice for patients presenting with limited brain metastases. These trials have focused on the role of surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with or without whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). As a result, it is clear that local control should be optimized with surgery or SRS in patients with optimal prognostic factors presenting with up to 4 brain metastases. The routine use of adjuvant WBRT remains debatable, as although greater distant brain control rates are observed, there is no impact on survival, and modern outcomes suggest adverse effects from WBRT on patient cognition and quality of life. With dramatic technologic advances in radiation oncology facilitating the adoption of SRS into mainstream practice, the optimal management of patients with multiple brain metastases is now being put forward. Practice is evolving to SRS alone in these patients despite a lack of level 1 evidence to support a clinical departure from WBRT. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current state of the evidence for patients presenting with limited and multiple metastases, and to present an in-depth analysis of the technology and dosimetric issues specific to the treatment of multiple metastases.