Recent developments in non-coplanar radiotherapy

DiffRecon: Diffusion-based CT reconstruction with cross-modal deformable fusion for DR-guided non-coplanar radiotherapy

In non-coplanar radiotherapy, DR is commonly used for image guiding which needs to fuse intraoperative DR with preoperative CT. But this fusion task performs poorly, suffering from unaligned and dimensional differences between DR and CT. CT reconstruction estimated from DR could facilitate this challenge. Thus, We propose a unified generation and registration framework, named DiffRecon, for intraoperative CT reconstruction based on DR using the diffusion model. Specifically, we use the generation model for synthesizing intraoperative CTs to eliminate dimensional differences and the registration model for aligning synthetic CTs to improve reconstruction. To ensure clinical usability, CT is not only estimated from DR but the preoperative CT is also introduced as prior. We design a dual-encoder to learn prior knowledge and spatial deformation among pre- and intra-operative CT pairs and DR parallelly for 2D/3D feature deformable conversion. To calibrate the cross-modal fusion, we insert cross-attention modules to enhance the 2D/3D feature interaction between dual encoders. DiffRecon has been evaluated by both image quality metrics and dosimetric indicators. The high image synthesis metrics are with RMSE of 0.02±0.01, PSNR of 44.92±3.26, and SSIM of 0.994±0.003. The mean gamma passing rates between rCT and sCT for 1%/1 mm, 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm acceptance criteria are 95.2%, 99.4% and 99.9% respectively. The proposed DiffRecon can reconstruct CT accurately from a single DR projection with excellent image generation quality and dosimetric accuracy. These demonstrate that the method can be applied in non-coplanar adaptive radiotherapy workflows.

Serial and parallel organ-at-risk-specific noncoplanar arc optimization for small versus large target volumes in liver SBRT

Noncoplanar arc optimization has been shown to reduce OAR doses in SRS/SRT and has the potential to reduce doses to OARs in SBRT. Extracranial targets have additional considerations, including large OARs and, in the case of the liver, volume constraints on the healthy liver. Considering pathlengths through OARs that encompass target volumes may lead to specific dose reductions as in the encompassing healthy liver tissue. These optimizations must also leverage delivery efficiency and trajectory sampling to ensure ease of clinical translation. The purpose of this research is to generate optimized static-couch arcs that separately consider serial and parallel OARs and arc delivery efficiency, with a trajectory sampling metric, towards the aim of reducing dose to OARs and the surrounding healthy liver tissue. Separate BEV cost maps were created for parallel, and serial OARs by means of a fast ray-triangle intersection algorithm. An additional BEV cost map was created for the liver which, by definition, encompasses the liver tumors. The individual costs of these maps were summed and combined with the sampling metric for 100 000 random combinations of arc trajectories. A search algorithm was applied to find an arc trajectory solution that satisfied BEV cost and sampling optimization, while also ensuring an efficient delivery was possible with a low number of arcs. This method of arc selection was evaluated for 16 liver SBRT patients characterized by small and large target volumes. Comparisons were made with a clinical arc template of coplanar arcs. Dosimetric plan quality was evaluated using published guidelines and metrics from RTOG1112. Four of five plan quality metrics for the liver were significantly reduced when planned with optimized noncoplanar arcs. Median (range) reductions of the volumes receiving 10, 18, and 21 Gy were found of 140.4 (295.8) cc (p = 0.001), 28.2 (230.6) cc (p = 0.002) and 18.5 (155.5) cc (p = 0.04). A significant increase in median (range) dose to the right kidney of 0.2 ± 0.9 Gy (p = 0.03) was also found using optimized noncoplanar arcs, which was below the tolerance of 10 Gy for all cases. The average number of arcs chosen was 4 ± 1. Optimizing serial and parallel OARs separately during static couch noncoplanar arc selection significantly reduced the dose to the liver during SBRT using a moderate number of arcs.

Organs-at-risk dose and normal tissue complication probability with dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) for head and neck cancer

We compared dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) to state-of-the-art volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for 46 head and neck cancer cases. DTRT had lower dose to salivary glands and swallowing structure, resulting in lower predicted xerostomia and dysphagia compared to VMAT. DTRT is deliverable on C-arm linacs with high dosimetric accuracy.

Robustness analysis of dynamic trajectory radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy plans for head and neck cancer

Background and purpose

Dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) has been shown to improve healthy tissue sparing compared to volumetric arc therapy (VMAT). This study aimed to assess and compare the robustness of DTRT and VMAT treatment-plans for head and neck (H&N) cancer to patient-setup (PS) and machine-positioning uncertainties.

Materials and methods

The robustness of DTRT and VMAT plans previously created for 46 H&N cases, prescribed 50-70 Gy to 95 % of the planning-target-volume, was assessed. For this purpose, dose distributions were recalculated using Monte Carlo, including uncertainties in PS (translation and rotation) and machine-positioning (gantry-, table-, collimator-rotation and multi-leaf collimator (MLC)). Plan robustness was evaluated by the uncertainties' impact on normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) for xerostomia and dysphagia and on dose-volume endpoints. Differences between DTRT and VMAT plan robustness were compared using Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test (α  = 5 %).

Results

Average NTCP for moderate-to-severe xerostomia and grade ≥ II dysphagia was lower for DTRT than VMAT in the nominal scenario (0.5 %, p = 0.01; 2.1 %, p < 0.01) and for all investigated uncertainties, except MLC positioning, where the difference was not significant. Average differences compared to the nominal scenario were ≤ 3.5 Gy for rotational PS (≤ 3°) and machine-positioning (≤ 2°) uncertainties, <7 Gy for translational PS uncertainties (≤ 5 mm) and < 20 Gy for MLC-positioning uncertainties (≤ 5 mm).

Conclusions

DTRT and VMAT plan robustness to the investigated uncertainties depended on uncertainty direction and location of the structure-of-interest to the target. NTCP remained on average lower for DTRT than VMAT even when considering uncertainties.

Dosimetrically motivated beam-angle optimization for non-coplanar arc radiotherapy with and without dynamic collimator rotation

BACKGROUND

Non-coplanar techniques have shown to improve the achievable dose distribution compared to standard coplanar techniques for multiple treatment sites but finding optimal beam directions is challenging. Dynamic collimator trajectory radiotherapy (colli-DTRT) is a new intensity modulated radiotherapy technique that uses non-coplanar partial arcs and dynamic collimator rotation.

PURPOSE

To solve the beam angle optimization (BAO) problem for colli-DTRT and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) by determining the table-angle and the gantry-angle ranges of the partial arcs through iterative 4π fluence map optimization (FMO) and beam direction elimination.

METHODS

BAO considers all available beam directions sampled on a gantry-table map with the collimator angle aligned to the superior-inferior axis (colli-DTRT) or static (NC-VMAT). First, FMO is performed, and beam directions are scored based on their contributions to the objective function. The map is thresholded to remove the least contributing beam directions, and arc candidates are formed by adjacent beam directions with the same table angle. Next, FMO and arc candidate trimming, based on objective function penalty score, is performed iteratively until a desired total gantry angle range is reached. Direct aperture optimization on the final set of colli-DTRT or NC-VMAT arcs generates deliverable plans. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT plans were created for seven clinically-motivated cases with targets in the head and neck (two cases), brain, esophagus, lung, breast, and prostate. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT were compared to coplanar VMAT plans as well as to class-solution non-coplanar VMAT plans for the brain and head and neck cases. Dosimetric validation was performed for one colli-DTRT (head and neck) and one NC-VMAT (breast) plan using film measurements.

RESULTS

Target coverage and conformity was similar for all techniques. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT plans had improved dosimetric performance compared to coplanar VMAT for all treatment sites except prostate where all techniques were equivalent. For the head and neck and brain cases, mean dose reduction-in percentage of the prescription dose-to parallel organs was on average 0.7% (colli-DTRT), 0.8% (NC-VMAT) and 0.4% (class-solution) compared to VMAT. The reduction in D2% for the serial organs was on average 1.7% (colli-DTRT), 2.0% (NC-VMAT) and 0.9% (class-solution). For the esophagus, lung, and breast cases, mean dose reduction to parallel organs was on average 0.2% (colli-DTRT) and 0.3% (NC-VMAT) compared to VMAT. The reduction in D2% for the serial organs was on average 1.3% (colli-DTRT) and 0.9% (NC-VMAT). Estimated delivery times for colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT were below 4 min for a full gantry angle range of 720°, including transitions between arcs, except for the brain case where multiple arcs covered the whole table angle range. These times are in the same order as the class-solution for the head and neck and brain cases. Total optimization times were 25%-107% longer for colli-DTRT, including BAO, compared to VMAT.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully developed dosimetrically motivated BAO for colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT treatment planning. colli-DTRT and NC-VMAT are applicable to multiple treatment sites, including body sites, with beneficial or equivalent dosimetric performances compared to coplanar VMAT and reasonable delivery times.

Comparison of patient setup accuracy for optical surface-guided and X-ray-guided imaging with respect to the impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy

PURPOSE

The objective of this work is to estimate the patient positioning accuracy of a surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system using an optical surface scanner compared to an X‑ray-based imaging system (IGRT) with respect to their impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).

METHODS

Patient positioning data, both acquired with SGRT and IGRT systems at the same linacs, serve as a basis for determination of positioning accuracy. A total of 35 patients with two different open face masks (578 datasets) were positioned using X‑ray stereoscopic imaging and the patient position inside the open face mask was recorded using SGRT. The measurement accuracy of the SGRT system (in a "standard" and an SRS mode with higher resolution) was evaluated using both IGRT and SGRT patient positioning datasets taking into account the measurement errors of the X‑ray system. Based on these clinically measured datasets, the positioning accuracy was estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. The relevant evaluation criterion, as standard of practice in cranial SRT, was the 95th percentile.

RESULTS

The interfractional measurement displacement vector of the SGRT system, σSGRT, in high resolution mode was estimated at 2.5 mm (68th percentile) and 5 mm (95th percentile). If the standard resolution was used, σSGRT increased by about 20%. The standard deviation of the axis-related σSGRT of the SGRT system ranged between 1.5 and 1.8 mm interfractionally and 0.5 and 1.0 mm intrafractionally. The magnitude of σSGRT is mainly due to the principle of patient surface scanning and not due to technical limitations or vendor-specific issues in software or hardware. Based on the resulting σSGRT, MC simulations served as a measure for the positioning accuracy for non-coplanar couch rotations. If an SGRT system is used as the only patient positioning device in non-coplanar fields, interfractional positioning errors of up to 6 mm and intrafractional errors of up to 5 mm cannot be ruled out. In contrast, MC simulations resulted in a positioning error of 1.6 mm (95th percentile) using the IGRT system. The cause of positioning errors in the SGRT system is mainly a change in the facial surface relative to a defined point in the brain.

CONCLUSION

In order to achieve the necessary geometric accuracy in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy, use of an X‑ray-based IGRT system, especially when treating with non-coplanar couch angles, is highly recommended.

Impact of the gradient in gantry-table rotation on dynamic trajectory radiotherapy plan quality

BACKGROUND

To improve organ at risk (OAR) sparing, dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) extends VMAT by dynamic table and collimator rotation during beam-on. However, comprehensive investigations regarding the impact of the gantry-table (GT) rotation gradient on the DTRT plan quality have not been conducted.

PURPOSE

To investigate the impact of a user-defined GT rotation gradient on plan quality of DTRT plans in terms of dosimetric plan quality, dosimetric robustness, deliverability, and delivery time.

METHODS

The dynamic trajectories of DTRT are described by GT and gantry-collimator paths. The GT path is determined by minimizing the overlap of OARs with planning target volume (PTV). This approach is extended to consider a GT rotation gradient by means of a maximum gradient of the path (G m a x ${G}_{max}$ ) between two adjacent control points (G = | Δ table angle / Δ gantry angle | $G = | \Delta {{\mathrm{table\ angle}}/\Delta {\mathrm{gantry\ angle}}} |$ ) and maximum absolute change of G (Δ G m a x ${{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ ). Four DTRT plans are created with different maximum G&∆G:G m a x ${G}_{max}$ &Δ G m a x ${{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$  = 0.5&0.125 (DTRT-1), 1&0.125 (DTRT-2), 3&0.125 (DTRT-3) and 3&1‍(DTRT-4), including 3-4 dynamic trajectories, for three clinically motivated cases in the head and neck and brain region (A, B, and C). A reference VMAT plan for each case is created. For all plans, plan quality is assessed and compared. Dosimetric plan quality is evaluated by target coverage, conformity, and OAR sparing. Dosimetric robustness is evaluated against systematic and random patient-setup uncertainties between± 3 mm $ \pm 3\ {\mathrm{mm}}$ in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions, and machine uncertainties between± 4 ∘ $ \pm 4^\circ \ $ in the dynamically rotating machine components (gantry, table, collimator rotation). Delivery time is recorded. Deliverability and delivery accuracy on a TrueBeam are assessed by logfile analysis for all plans and additionally verified by film measurements for one case. All dose calculations are Monte Carlo based.

RESULTS

The extension of the DTRT planning process with user-definedG m a x & Δ G m a x ${G}_{max}\& {{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ to investigate the impact of the GT rotation gradient on plan quality is successfully demonstrated. With increasingG m a x & Δ G m a x ${G}_{max}\& {{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ , slight (case C,D m e a n , p a r o t i d l . ${D}_{mean,\ parotid\ l.}$ : up to‍-1‍Gy) and substantial (case A,D 0.03 c m 3 , o p t i c n e r v e r . ${D}_{0.03c{m}^3,\ optic\ nerve\ r.}$ : up to -9.3 Gy, case‍B,D m e a n , b r a i n $\ {D}_{mean,\ brain}$ : up to -4.7‍Gy) improvements in OAR sparing are observed compared to VMAT, while maintaining similar target coverage. All plans are delivered on the TrueBeam. Expected and actual machine position values recorded in the logfiles deviated by <0.2° for gantry, table and collimator rotation. The film measurements agreed by >96% (2%‍global/2 mm Gamma passing rate) with the dose calculation. With increasingG m a x & Δ G m a x ${G}_{max}\& {{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ , delivery time is prolonged by <2 min/trajectory (DTRT-4) compared to VMAT and DTRT-1. The DTRT plans for case A and B and the VMAT plan for case C plan reveal the best dosimetric robustness for the considered uncertainties.

CONCLUSION

The impact of the GT rotation gradient on DTRT plan quality is comprehensively investigated for three cases in the head and neck and brain region. Increasing freedom in this gradient improves dosimetric plan quality at the cost of increased delivery time for the investigated cases. No clear dependency of GT rotation gradient on dosimetric robustness is observed.

Technical note: A collision prediction tool using Blender

Non-coplanar radiotherapy treatment techniques on C-arm linear accelerators have the potential to reduce dose to organs-at-risk in comparison with coplanar treatment techniques. Accurately predicting possible collisions between gantry, table and patient during treatment planning is needed to ensure patient safety. We offer a freely available collision prediction tool using Blender, a free and open-source 3D computer graphics software toolset. A geometric model of a C-arm linear accelerator including a library of patient models is created inside Blender. Based on the model, collision predictions can be used both to calculate collision-free zones and to check treatment plans for collisions. The tool is validated for two setups, once with and once without a full body phantom with the same table position. For this, each gantry-table angle combination with a 2° resolution is manually checked for collision interlocks at a TrueBeam system and compared to simulated collision predictions. For the collision check of a treatment plan, the tool outputs the minimal distance between the gantry, table and patient model and a video of the movement of the gantry and table, which is demonstrated for one use case. A graphical user interface allows user-friendly input of the table and patient specification for the collision prediction tool. The validation resulted in a true positive rate of 100%, which is the rate between the number of correctly predicted collision gantry-table combinations and the number of all measured collision gantry-table combinations, and a true negative rate of 89%, which is the ratio between the number of correctly predicted collision-free combinations and the number of all measured collision-free combinations. A collision prediction tool is successfully created and able to produce maps of collision-free zones and to test treatment plans for collisions including visualisation of the gantry and table movement.

Technical note: Feasibility of gating for dynamic trajectory radiotherapy - Mechanical accuracy and dosimetric performance

BACKGROUND

Dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) extends state-of-the-art volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) by dynamic table and collimator rotations during beam-on. The effects of intrafraction motion during DTRT delivery are unknown, especially regarding the possible interplay between patient and machine motion with additional dynamic axes.

PURPOSE

To experimentally assess the technical feasibility and quantify the mechanical and dosimetric accuracy of respiratory gating during DTRT delivery.

METHODS

A DTRT and VMAT plan are created for a clinically motivated lung cancer case and delivered to a dosimetric motion phantom (MP) placed on the table of a TrueBeam system using Developer Mode. The MP reproduces four different 3D motion traces. Gating is triggered using an external marker block, placed on the MP. Mechanical accuracy and delivery time of the VMAT and DTRT deliveries with and without gating are extracted from the logfiles. Dosimetric performance is assessed by means of gamma evaluation (3% global/2 mm, 10% threshold).

RESULTS

The DTRT and VMAT plans are successfully delivered with and without gating for all motion traces. Mechanical accuracy is similar for all experiments with deviations <0.14° (gantry angle), <0.15° (table angle), <0.09° (collimator angle) and <0.08 mm (MLC leaf positions). For DTRT (VMAT), delivery times are 1.6-2.3 (1.6- 2.5) times longer with than without gating for all motion traces except one, where DTRT (VMAT) delivery is 5.0 (3.6) times longer due to a substantial uncorrected baseline drift affecting only DTRT delivery. Gamma passing rates with (without) gating for DTRT/VMAT were ≥96.7%/98.5% (≤88.3%/84.8%). For one VMAT arc without gating it was 99.6%.

CONCLUSION

Gating is successfully applied during DTRT delivery on a TrueBeam system for the first time. Mechanical accuracy is similar for VMAT and DTRT deliveries with and without gating. Gating substantially improved dosimetric performance for DTRT and VMAT.

Automated isocenter optimization approach for treatment planning for gyroscopic radiosurgery

BACKGROUND

Radiosurgery is a well-established treatment for various intracranial tumors. In contrast to other established radiosurgery platforms, the new ZAP-X® allows for self-shielding gyroscopic radiosurgery. Here, treatment beams with variable beam-on times are targeted towards a small number of isocenters. The existing planning framework relies on a heuristic based on random selection or manual selection of isocenters, which often leads to a higher plan quality in clinical practice.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work is to study an improved approach for radiosurgery treatment planning, which automatically selects the isocenter locations for the treatment of brain tumors and diseases in the head and neck area using the new system ZAP-X® .

METHODS

We propose a new method to automatically obtain the locations of the isocenters, which are essential in gyroscopic radiosurgery treatment planning. First, an optimal treatment plan is created based on a randomly selected nonisocentric candidate beam set. The intersections of the resulting subset of weighted beams are then clustered to find isocenters. This approach is compared to sphere-packing, random selection, and selection by an expert planner for generating isocenters. We retrospectively evaluate plan quality on 10 acoustic neuroma cases.

RESULTS

Isocenters acquired by the method of clustering result in clinically viable plans for all 10 test cases. When using the same number of isocenters, the clustering approach improves coverage on average by 31 percentage points compared to random selection, 15 percentage points compared to sphere packing and 2 percentage points compared to the coverage achieved with the expert selected isocenters. The automatic determination of location and number of isocenters leads, on average, to a coverage of 97 ± 3% with a conformity index of 1.22 ± 0.22, while using 2.46 ± 3.60 fewer isocenters than manually selected. In terms of algorithm performance, all plans were calculated in less than 2 min with an average runtime of 75 ± 25 s.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the feasibility of an automatic isocenter selection by clustering in the treatment planning process with the ZAP-X® system. Even in complex cases where the existing approaches fail to produce feasible plans, the clustering method generates plans that are comparable to those produced by expert selected isocenters. Therefore, our approach can help reduce the effort and time required for treatment planning in gyroscopic radiosurgery.

Dosimetric Comparision of Coplanar versus Noncoplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Treatment of Bilateral Breast Cancers

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetric parameters of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans using coplanar and noncoplanar beams in patients with bilateral breast cancer/s (BBCs) in terms of organ at risk sparing and target volume coverage. The hypothesis was to test whether VMAT with noncoplanar beams can result in lesser dose delivery to critical organs such as heart and lung, which will result in lesser overall toxicity.

Materials and Methods

Data of nine BBC cases treated at our hospital were retrieved. Computed tomography simulation data of these cases was used to generate noncoplanar VMAT plans and the parameters were compared with standard VMAT coplanar plans. Contouring was done using radiation therapy oncology group guidelines. Forty-five Gray in 25 fractions was planned followed by 10 Gy in five fractions boost in breast conservation cases.

Results

No significant difference in planning target volume (PTV) coverage was found for the right breast/chestwall (P = 0.940), left breast/chestwall (P = 0.872), and in the total PTV (P = 0.929). Noncoplanar beams resulted in better cardiac sparing in terms of Dmean heart. The difference in mean dose was >1 Gy (8.80 ± 0.28 - 7.28 ± 0.33, P < 0.001). The Dmean, V20 and V30 values for total lung slightly favor noncoplanar beams, although there was no statistically significant difference. The average monitor units (MUs) were similar for coplanar plans (1515 MU) and noncoplanar plans (1455 MU), but the overall treatment time was higher in noncoplanar plans due to more complex setup and beam arrangement. For noncoplanar VMAT plans, the mean conformity index was slightly better although the homogeneity indices were similar.

Conclusion

VMAT plans with noncoplanar beam arrangements had significant dosimetric advantages in terms of sparing of critical organs, that is Dmean of heart doses with almost equivalent lung doses and equally good target coverage. Larger studies with clinical implications need to be considered to validate this data.

Fully automated segmentally boosted VMAT

PURPOSE

Treatment planning for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) typically involves the use of multiple arcs to achieve sufficient intensity modulation. Alternatively, we can perform segment boosting to achieve similar intensity modulation while also reducing the number of control points used. Here, we propose the MetaPlanner Boosted VMAT (MPBV) approach, which generates boosted VMAT plans through a fully automated framework.

METHODS

The proposed MPBV approach is an open-source framework that consists of three main stages: meta-optimization of treatment plan hyperparameters, fast beam angle optimization on a coarse dose grid to select desirable segments for boosting, and final plan generation (i.e., constructing the boosted VMAT arc and performing optimization).

RESULTS

Performance for the MPBV approach is evaluated on 21 prostate cases and 6 head and neck cases using clinically relevant plan quality metrics (i.e., target coverage, dose conformity, dose homogeneity, and OAR sparing). As compared to two baseline methods with multiple arcs, MPBV maintains or improves dosimetric performance for the evaluated metrics while substantially reducing average estimated delivery times (from 2.6 to 2.1 min).

CONCLUSION

Our proposed MPBV approach provides an automated framework for producing high-quality VMAT plans that uses fewer control points and reduces delivery time as compared to traditional approaches with multiple arcs. MPBV applies automated treatment planning to segmentally boosted VMAT to address the beam utilization inefficiencies of traditional VMAT approaches that use multiple full arcs.

Angle of concavity in planning target volume can be adopted as selection criteria for intensity-modulated radiation therapy or three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique in brain tumors

Introduction

With innovation of medical imaging, radiotherapy attempts to conform the high dose region to the planning target volume (PTV). The present work aimed to assess the angle of concavity in PTV can be adopted as selection criteria for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) technique in Brain tumors.

Materials and Methods

Thirty previously irradiated patients with brain tumors were replanned with both 3DCRT and IMRT technique. Angle of concavity (dip) in the PTV near the organs at risk was measured in the contoured structure set images of each patient. These cases were divided into three groups where angles were 0°, >120° and <120°. Dose of 60 Gy/30# was fixed.

Results

In Group 1, the IMRT plan had better TV95% as compared to 3DCRT respectively with significant P value (P = 0.002). Mean of conformity index (CI) and Homogeneity Index (HI) were comparable. For Group 2 (angle >120°), the IMRT plan had better TV95% as compared to 3DCRT respectively with a significant P value (P = 0.021). HI and CI were not significant. For Group 3 (<120°), IMRT plan had better TV95% as compared to 3DCRT respectively with a significant P value (P = 0.001). HI and CI were better in IMRT arm with significant P value.

Conclusion

The results from this study showed that the angle of concavity can be considered as an additional objective tool for selection criteria whether tumor can be treated with IMRT or 3DCRT. Tumors where angle of concavity was <120°, HI and CI provided more uniformity and conformity of dose distribution inside PTV with significant P values.

Auto-commissioning of a Monte Carlo electron beam model with application to photon MLC shaped electron fields

Objective.Presently electron beam treatments are delivered using dedicated applicators. An alternative is the usage of the already installed photon multileaf collimator (pMLC) enabling efficient electron treatments. Currently, the commissioning of beam models is a manual and time-consuming process. In this work an auto-commissioning procedure for the Monte Carlo (MC) beam model part representing the beam above the pMLC is developed for TrueBeam systems with electron energies from 6 to 22 MeV.Approach.The analytical part of the electron beam model includes a main source representing the primary beam and a jaw source representing the head scatter contribution each consisting of an electron and a photon component, while MC radiation transport is performed for the pMLC. The auto-commissioning of this analytical part relies on information pre-determined from MC simulations, in-air dose profiles and absolute dose measurements in water for different field sizes and source to surface distances (SSDs). For validation calculated and measured dose distributions in water were compared for different field sizes, SSDs and beam energies for eight TrueBeam systems. Furthermore, a sternum case in an anthropomorphic phantom was considered and calculated and measured dose distributions were compared at different SSDs.Main results.Instead of the manual commissioning taking up to several days of calculation time and several hours of user time, the auto-commissioning is carried out in a few minutes. Measured and calculated dose distributions agree generally within 3% of maximum dose or 2 mm. The gamma passing rates for the sternum case ranged from 96% to 99% (3% (global)/2 mm criteria, 10% threshold).Significance.The auto-commissioning procedure was successfully implemented and applied to eight TrueBeam systems. The newly developed user-friendly auto-commissioning procedure allows an efficient commissioning of an MC electron beam model and eases the usage of advanced electron radiotherapy utilizing the pMLC for beam shaping.

Efficiency enhancements of a Monte Carlo beamlet based treatment planning process: implementation and parameter study

Objective.The computational effort to perform beamlet calculation, plan optimization and final dose calculation of a treatment planning process (TPP) generating intensity modulated treatment plans is enormous, especially if Monte Carlo (MC) simulations are used for dose calculation. The goal of this work is to improve the computational efficiency of a fully MC based TPP for static and dynamic photon, electron and mixed photon-electron treatment techniques by implementing multiple methods and studying the influence of their parameters.Approach.A framework is implemented calculating MC beamlets efficiently in parallel on each available CPU core. The user can specify the desired statistical uncertainty of the beamlets, a fractional sparse dose threshold to save beamlets in a sparse format and minimal distances to the PTV surface from which 2 × 2 × 2 = 8 (medium) or even 4 × 4 × 4 = 64 (large) voxels are merged. The compromise between final plan quality and computational efficiency of beamlet calculation and optimization is studied for several parameter values to find a reasonable trade-off. For this purpose, four clinical and one academic case are considered with different treatment techniques.Main results.Setting the statistical uncertainty to 5% (photon beamlets) and 15% (electron beamlets), the fractional sparse dose threshold relative to the maximal beamlet dose to 0.1% and minimal distances for medium and large voxels to the PTV to 1 cm and 2 cm, respectively, does not lead to substantial degradation in final plan quality compared to using 2.5% (photon beamlets) and 5% (electron beamlets) statistical uncertainty and no sparse format nor voxel merging. Only OAR sparing is slightly degraded. Furthermore, computation times are reduced by about 58% (photon beamlets), 88% (electron beamlets) and 96% (optimization).Significance.Several methods are implemented improving computational efficiency of beamlet calculation and plan optimization of a fully MC based TPP without substantial degradation in final plan 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.

Feasibility, Method and Early Outcome of Image-Guided Volumetric Modulated Arc Radiosurgery Followed by Resection for AJCC Stage IIA–IIIB High-Risk Large Intraocular Melanoma

Simple Summary

The aim of this trial was to define one optimal contemporary treatment procedure for large intraocular melanoma. Radiosurgery is a highly effective treatment in cancer. In this trial, all consecutive patients with large intraocular melanoma treated with multimodality treatment, comprising 4D image-guided volumetric modulated arc radiosurgery procedure followed by resection, were evaluated. In the short-term follow-up there was no clinical toxicity due to external beam radiation therapy, and no local tumor recurrence. In 98% of the cases, the eye bulb could be maintained with partial residual visual acuity in the mean follow-up of 18 months. The outcome estimates one optimal treatment procedure for high-risk, large intraocular melanoma, with excellent results in the first follow-up.

Abstract

The main objective of this prospective observational study was the characterization of the feasibility and early outcome of image-guided (IG) volumetric modulated arc (VMAT) radiosurgery (SRS) followed by resection for patients with large intraocular melanoma. Our study included consecutive patients with unfavorable-risk melanoma, enrolled in an ophthalmic oncology center. IG-VMAT-SRS was applied by high-resolution 4D image guidance and monitoring. Current stereotactic technique parameters were evaluated for comparison. Side effects and eye function, based on a 5-point CTC assessment score, were quantified. In patients with tumors located more than 0.7–1 mm apart from the optic nerve, partial to complete volume-sparing of the optic nerve head could be achieved. In 95.5% of this subgroup, the vitality of the optic nerve and vision could be preserved by the multimodality-treatment approach (mean follow-up: 18 months (7.5–36 months)). The advanced technology of stereotactic radiotherapy demonstrated the achievability of steep dose gradients around the high-dose volume, with 4D-IG-VMAT dose application. These results enforce IG-VMAT-SRS followed by resection as one of the major therapeutic options for patients with large intraocular melanoma. The combination of 4D-IG high-precision SRS and resection provides an effective treatment for large intraocular melanoma, with few side effects, and enables an eye bulb and even vision preserving modus operandi.

Enabling non-isocentric dynamic trajectory radiotherapy by integration of dynamic table translations

Objective. The purpose of this study is to develop a treatment planning process (TPP) for non-isocentric dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) using dynamic gantry rotation, collimator rotation, table rotation, longitudinal, vertical and lateral table translations and intensity modulation and to validate the dosimetric accuracy. Approach. The TPP consists of two steps. First, a path describing the dynamic gantry rotation, collimator rotation and dynamic table rotation and translations is determined. Second, an optimization of the intensity modulation along the path is performed. We demonstrate the TPP for three use cases. First, a non-isocentric DTRT plan for a brain case is compared to an isocentric DTRT plan in terms of dosimetric plan quality and delivery time. Second, a non-isocentric DTRT plan for a craniospinal irradiation (CSI) case is compared to a multi-isocentric intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan. Third, a non-isocentric DTRT plan for a bilateral breast case is compared to a multi-isocentric volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan. The non-isocentric DTRT plans are delivered on a TrueBeam in developer mode and their dosimetric accuracy is validated using radiochromic films. Main results. The non-isocentric DTRT plan for the brain case is similar in dosimetric plan quality and delivery time to the isocentric DTRT plan but is expected to reduce the risk of collisions. The DTRT plan for the CSI case shows similar dosimetric plan quality while reducing the delivery time by 45% in comparison with the IMRT plan. The DTRT plan for the breast case showed better treatment plan quality in comparison with the VMAT plan. The gamma passing rates between the measured and calculated dose distributions are higher than 95% for all three plans. Significance. The versatile benefits of non-isocentric DTRT are demonstrated with three use cases, namely reduction of collision risk, reduced setup and delivery time and improved dosimetric plan quality.

Organ-at-risk sparing with dynamic trajectory radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: comparison with volumetric arc therapy on a publicly available library of cases

Background

Dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) extends volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with dynamic table and collimator rotation during beam-on. The aim of the study is to establish DTRT path-finding strategies, demonstrate deliverability and dosimetric accuracy and compare DTRT to state-of-the-art VMAT for common head and neck (HN) cancer cases.

Methods

A publicly available library of seven HN cases was created on an anthropomorphic phantom with all relevant organs-at-risk (OARs) delineated. DTRT plans were generated with beam incidences minimizing fractional target/OAR volume overlap and compared to VMAT. Deliverability and dosimetric validation was carried out on the phantom.

Results

DTRT and VMAT had similar target coverage. For three locoregionally advanced oropharyngeal carcinomas and one adenoid cystic carcinoma, mean dose to the contralateral salivary glands, pharynx and oral cavity was reduced by 2.5, 1.7 and 3.1 Gy respectively on average with DTRT compared to VMAT. For a locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma, D_0.03 cc to the ipsilateral optic nerve was above tolerance (54.0 Gy) for VMAT (54.8 Gy) but within tolerance for DTRT (53.3 Gy). For a laryngeal carcinoma, DTRT resulted in higher dose than VMAT to the pharynx and brachial plexus but lower dose to the upper oesophagus, thyroid gland and contralateral carotid artery. For a single vocal cord irradiation case, DTRT spared most OARs better than VMAT. All plans were delivered successfully on the phantom and dosimetric validation resulted in gamma passing rates of 93.9% and 95.8% (2%/2 mm criteria, 10% dose threshold).

Conclusions

This study provides a proof of principle of DTRT for common HN cases with plans that were deliverable on a C-arm linac with high accuracy. The comparison with VMAT indicates substantial OAR sparing could be achieved.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-022-02092-5.

Intrafractional monitoring of patients using four different immobilization mask systems for cranial radiotherapy

Background and purpose

Patients receiving cranial radiotherapy are immobilized with a thermoplastic mask to restrict patient motion. Depending on the target volume margins and treatment dose, different mask systems are used. Intrafractional movements can be monitored using stereoscopic X-ray imaging. The aim of the present work was to compare the magnitudes of intrafractional deviation for different mask systems.

Material and methods

Four different head mask systems (open face mask, open mask, stereotactic mask, double mask) used in the treatment of 40 patients were investigated. In total 487 treatment fractions and 3708 X-ray images were collected. Deviations were calculated by comparison of the acquired X-ray images with digitally reconstructed radiographs. The results of intrafractional X-ray deviations for translational and rotational axes were compared between the different mask systems.

Results

Deviations were below 0.6 mm for translations and below 0.6° for rotations for all mask systems. Along the lateral and longitudinal directions the stereotactic mask was superior, while along the vertical direction the double mask showed the lowest deviations. For low rotational deviations the double mask is the best amongst all other mask systems.

Conclusion

As expected, the lowest movement was shown using cranial stereotactic mask systems. The results have shown deviations lower than 0.6 mm and 0.6° using any of the four thermoplastic mask systems.

Integrated MRI-guided radiotherapy - opportunities and challenges

MRI can help to categorize tissues as malignant or non-malignant both anatomically and functionally, with a high level of spatial and temporal resolution. This non-invasive imaging modality has been integrated with radiotherapy in devices that can differentially target the most aggressive and resistant regions of tumours. The past decade has seen the clinical deployment of treatment devices that combine imaging with targeted irradiation, making the aspiration of integrated MRI-guided radiotherapy (MRIgRT) a reality. The two main clinical drivers for the adoption of MRIgRT are the ability to image anatomical changes that occur before and during treatment in order to adapt the treatment approach, and to image and target the biological features of each tumour. Using motion management and biological targeting, the radiation dose delivered to the tumour can be adjusted during treatment to improve the probability of tumour control, while simultaneously reducing the radiation delivered to non-malignant tissues, thereby reducing the risk of treatment-related toxicities. The benefits of this approach are expected to increase survival and quality of life. In this Review, we describe the current state of MRIgRT, and the opportunities and challenges of this new radiotherapy approach.

Mean Arc Distance (MAD): a quantity to compare trajectory 4πsampling in single target cranial stereotactic radiotherapy

Purpose:C-arm linac-based radiotherapy has seen a recent interest in 4 methods of delivery using simultaneous rotations of couch and gantry to reduce doses to organs-at-risk (OARs) and increase dose compactness. While many methods use heuristics to generate trajectories that avoid OARs, combined with arbitrary trajectory restrictions to prevent oversampling, a quantity has not yet been developed to succinctly compare sampling of the 4 space for candidate trajectories as a surrogate for dosimetric compactness.Methods:Evenly spaced sampling points were distributed across a 4 sphere centred on isocentre. A metric, mean arc distance (MAD), was defined that quantifies the average arc distance between all fields in a radiotherapy trajectory and their nearest sampling point. The relationship between isodose volume and MAD was examined in 2,047 plans: 900 unique trajectories of fixed port DCA plans, 900 unique trajectories of contiguous field DCA plans, 192 VMAT plans (eight volumes in four locations, each with six trajectories) in matRad with 5 VMAT plans repeated for validation in a clinical planning system, and 10 clinical VMAT cases replanned with five trajectories in a clinical treatment planning system.Results:All isodose volumes greater than 10 % of the prescription dose decreased with decreasing MAD in all comparisons. In the range of 10 % to 100 % of the prescription dose, the rate of isodose volume decrease was exponential as a function of MAD in all comparisons. Reduction of absolute isodose volume is seen with increased 4 sampling, with larger target volumes exhibiting larger absolute reductions. Very low isodoses (0 % to 10 % of prescription) increased with decreasing MAD.Conclusions:MAD is a 4 sampling quantity useful in quantifying the decrease of isodose volume, relevant for sparing normal tissues. By quantifying this feature, candidate dynamic trajectories can be efficiently compared for 4 sampling. This quantity is explored here for single target cranial radiotherapy but may have applications to other radiotherapy treatment site.

Development of a Monte Carlo based robustness calculation and evaluation tool

Background

Evaluating plan robustness is a key step in radiotherapy.

Purpose

To develop a flexible Monte Carlo (MC)‐based robustness calculation and evaluation tool to assess and quantify dosimetric robustness of intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment plans by exploring the impact of systematic and random uncertainties resulting from patient setup, patient anatomy changes, and mechanical limitations of machine components.

Methods

The robustness tool consists of two parts: the first part includes automated MC dose calculation of multiple user‐defined uncertainty scenarios to populate a robustness space. An uncertainty scenario is defined by a certain combination of uncertainties in patient setup, rigid intrafraction motion and in mechanical steering of the following machine components: angles of gantry, collimator, table‐yaw, table‐pitch, table‐roll, translational positions of jaws, multileaf‐collimator (MLC) banks, and single MLC leaves. The Swiss Monte Carlo Plan (SMCP) is integrated in this tool to serve as the backbone for the MC dose calculations incorporating the uncertainties. The calculated dose distributions serve as input for the second part of the tool, handling the quantitative evaluation of the dosimetric impact of the uncertainties. A graphical user interface (GUI) is developed to simultaneously evaluate the uncertainty scenarios according to user‐specified conditions based on dose‐volume histogram (DVH) parameters, fast and exact gamma analysis, and dose differences. Additionally, a robustness index (RI) is introduced with the aim to simultaneously evaluate and condense dosimetric robustness against multiple uncertainties into one number. The RI is defined as the ratio of scenarios passing the conditions on the dose distributions. Weighting of the scenarios in the robustness space is possible to consider their likelihood of occurrence. The robustness tool is applied on IMRT, a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), a dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT), and a dynamic mixed beam radiotherapy (DYMBER) plan for a brain case to evaluate the robustness to uncertainties of gantry‐, table‐, collimator angle, MLC, and intrafraction motion. Additionally, the robustness of the IMRT, VMAT, and DTRT plan against patient setup uncertainties are compared. The robustness tool is validated by Delta4 measurements for scenarios including all uncertainty types available.

Results

The robustness tool performs simultaneous calculation of uncertainty scenarios, and the GUI enables their fast evaluation. For all evaluated plans and uncertainties, the planning target volume (PTV) margin prevented major clinical target volume (CTV) coverage deterioration (maximum observed standard deviation of D98%CTV was 1.3 Gy). OARs close to the PTV experienced larger dosimetric deviations (maximum observed standard deviation of D2%chiasma was 14.5 Gy). Robustness comparison by RI evaluation against patient setup uncertainties revealed better dosimetric robustness of the VMAT and DTRT plans as compared to the IMRT plan. Delta4 validation measurements agreed with calculations by >96% gamma‐passing rate (3% global/2 mm).

Conclusions

The robustness tool was successfully implemented. Calculation and evaluation of uncertainty scenarios with the robustness tool were demonstrated on a brain case. Effects of patient and machine‐specific uncertainties and the combination thereof on the dose distribution are evaluated in a user‐friendly GUI to quantitatively assess and compare treatment plans and their robustness.

A hybrid column generation and simulated annealing algorithm for direct aperture optimization

The purpose of this work was to develop a hybrid column generation (CG) and simulated annealing (SA) algorithm for direct aperture optimization (H-DAO) and to show its effectiveness in generating high quality treatment plans for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and mixed photon-electron beam radiotherapy (MBRT). The H-DAO overcomes limitations of the CG-DAO with two features improving aperture selection (branch-feature) and enabling aperture shape changes during optimization (SA-feature). The H-DAO algorithm iteratively adds apertures to the plan. At each iteration, a branch is created for each field provided. First, each branch determines the most promising aperture of its assigned field and adds it to a copy of the current apertures. Afterwards, the apertures of each branch undergo an MU-weight optimization followed by an SA-based simultaneous shape and MU-weight optimization and a second MU-weight optimization. The next H-DAO iteration continues the branch with the lowest objective function value. IMRT and MBRT treatment plans for an academic, a brain and a head and neck case generated using the CG-DAO and H-DAO were compared. For every investigated case and both IMRT and MBRT, the H-DAO leads to a faster convergence of the objective function value with number of apertures compared to the CG-DAO. In particular, the H-DAO needs about half the apertures to reach the same objective function value as the CG-DAO. The average aperture areas are 27% smaller for H-DAO than for CG-DAO leading to a slightly larger discrepancy between optimized and final dose. However, a dosimetric benefit remains. The H-DAO was successfully developed and applied to IMRT and MBRT. The faster convergence with number of apertures of the H-DAO compared to the CG-DAO allows to select a better compromise between plan quality and number of apertures.

Plan quality in radiotherapy treatment planning - Review of the factors and challenges

A high-quality treatment plan aims to best achieve the clinical prescription, balancing high target dose to maximise tumour control against sufficiently low organ-at-risk dose for acceptably low toxicity. Treatment planning (TP) includes multiple steps from simulation/imaging and segmentation to technical plan production and reporting. Consistent quality across this process requires close collaboration and communication between clinical and technical experts, to clearly understand clinical requirements and priorities and also practical uncertainties, limitations and compromises. TP quality depends on many aspects, starting from commissioning and quality management of the treatment planning system (TPS), including its measured input data and detailed understanding of TPS models and limitations. It requires rigorous quality assurance of the whole planning process and it links to plan deliverability, assessable by measurement-based verification. This review highlights some factors influencing plan quality, for consideration for optimal plan construction and hence optimal outcomes for each patient. It also indicates some challenges, sources of difference and current developments. The topics considered include: the evolution of TP techniques; dose prescription issues; tools and methods to evaluate plan quality; and some aspects of practical TP. The understanding of what constitutes a high-quality treatment plan continues to evolve with new techniques, delivery methods and related evidence-based science. This review summarises the current position, noting developments in the concept and the need for further robust tools to help achieve it.

Multi-Planar VMAT Plans for High-Grade Glioma and Glioblastoma Targeting the Hypothalamic-Pituitary Axis Sparing

Background: This study aimed to identify the better arc configuration of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for high-grade glioma and glioblastoma, focusing on a dose reduction to the hypothalamic–pituitary axis through an analysis of dose-volumetric parameters, as well as a correlation analysis between the planned target volume (PTV) to organs at risk (OAR) distance and the radiation dose. Method: Twenty-four patients with 9 high-grade glioma and 15 glioblastomas were included in this study. Identical CT, MRI and structure sets of each patient were used for coplanar VMAT (CO-VMAT), dual planar VMAT (DP-VMAT) and multi-planar VMAT (MP-VMAT) planning. The dose constraints adhered to the RTOG0825 and RTOG9006 protocols. The dose-volumetric parameters of each plan were collected for statistical analysis. Correlation analyses were performed between radiation dose and PTV-OARs distance. Results: The DP-VMAT and MP-VMAT achieved a significant dose reduction to most nearby OARs when compared to CO-VMAT, without compromising the dose to PTV, plan homogeneity and conformity. For centrally located OARs, including the hypothalamus, pituitary, brain stem and optic chiasm, the dose reductions ranged from 2.65 Gy to 3.91 Gy (p < 0.001) in DP-VMAT and from 2.57 Gy to 4 Gy (p < 0.001) in MP-VMAT. Similar dose reduction effects were achieved for contralaterally located OARs, including the hippocampus, optic nerve, lens and retina, ranging from 1.06 Gy to 4.37 Gy in DP-VMAT and from 0.54 Gy to 3.39 Gy in MP-VMAT. For ipsilaterally located OARs, DP-VMAT achieved a significant dose reduction of 1.75 Gy to D_max for the optic nerve. In the correlation analysis, DP-VMAT and MP-VMAT showed significant dose reductions to centrally located OARs when the PTV-OAR distance was less than 4 cm. In particular, DP-VMAT offered better sparing to the optic chiasm when it was located less than 2 cm from the PTV than that of MP-VMAT and CO-VMAT. DP-VMAT and MP-VMAT also showed better sparing to the contralateral hippocampus and retina when they were located 3–8 cm from the PTV. Conclusion: The proposed DP-VMAT and MP-VMAT demonstrated significant dose reductions to centrally located and contralateral OARs and maintained the high plan qualities to PTV with good homogeneity and conformity when compared to CO-VMAT for high-grade glioma and glioblastoma. The benefit in choosing DP-VMAT and MP-VMAT over CO-VMAT was substantial when the PTV was located near the hypothalamus, pituitary, optic chiasm, contralateral hippocampus and contralateral retina.

Patient-Specific Collision Zones for 4π Trajectory Optimized Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

The 4π methodology determines optimized non-coplanar sub arcs for stereotactic radiation therapy which minimize dose to organs-at-risk. Every combination of treatment angle is examined, but some angles are not appropriate as a collision would occur between the gantry and the couch or the gantry and the patient. Those combinations of couch and gantry angles are referred to as collision zones. A major barrier to applying 4π to stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is the unknown shape of the collision zones, which are significant as patients take up a large volume within the 4π sphere. This study presents a system which determines patient-specific collision zones, without additional clinical steps, to enable safe and deliverable non-coplanar treatment trajectories for SBRT patients.

METHODS

To augment patient's computed tomography (CT) scan, full body scans of patients in treatment position were acquired using an optical scanner. A library of a priori scans (N = 25) was created. Based on the patients treatment position and their body dimensions, a library scan is selected and registered to the CT scan of the patient. Next, a model of the couch and immobilization equipment is added to the patient model. This results in a patient model that is then aligned with a model of the treatment linac in a "virtual treatment room", where both components can be rotated to test for collisions. To test the collision detection algorithm, an end-to-end test was performed using a cranial phantom. The registration algorithm was tested by comparing the registered patient collision zones to those generated by using the patient's matching scan.

RESULTS

The collision detection algorithm was found to have a 97.80% accuracy, a 99.99% sensitivity and a 99.99% negative predictive value (NPV). Analysis of the registration algorithm determined that a 6 cm buffer was required to achieve a 99.65% mean sensitivity, where a sensitivity of unity is considered to be a requirement for safe treatment delivery. With a 6 cm buffer the mean accuracy was 86.70% and the mean NPV was 99.33%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our method of determining patient-specific collision zones can be accomplished with minimal user intervention based on an a priori library of body surface scans, thus enabling the safe application of 4π SBRT.

The role of beam density and arrangement in non-coplanar IMRT exemplified by the irradiation of brain tumors - Parallels to computed tomographic imaging

PURPOSE

Parallels between the fields of non-coplanar IMRT and non-coplanar computed tomographic reconstruction are highlighted exemplified by the identification of qualified beam configurations for the irradiation of brain tumors.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Four types of beam configurations, i.e. a pure coplanar, a quasi-isotropic and two transitional arrangements, served to systematically examine the impact of parameters such as the sampling rate and the degree of accessibility on plan quality. The resulting set of treatment techniques was compared by means of a Pinnacle³ based retrospective planning study on 18 brain tumor cases.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A consistent ranking of IMRT beam constellations according to plan quality was established, which directly reflects the necessities of high-quality CT imaging. Once a sufficient dense beam sampling is secured (given by compliance to Nyquist's theorem), the quasi-isotropic (QIso) irradiation produced best treatment plans, followed by a coplanar irradiation complemented by a single orthogonal non-coplanar beam (CoPl+1). Beams evenly distributed in two orthogonal planes (2-Pl), although using larger portions of the 4π space, proved to be less favorable as the beam sequence becomes less dense. The most unfavorable technique is the pure coplanar technique (CoPl). Generally, techniques with large interbeam distance, i.e. the 2-Pl technique and, to a lesser extent, QIso, are particularly sensitive to a beam number reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Rules established for high quality non-coplanar tomographic imaging are also relevant for non-coplanar IMRT. In this regard, the degree of coverage of 4π space is less important than a sufficient dense sampling.

Non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy for locoregional radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer including internal mammary nodes

Background

Non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (ncVMAT) is proposed to reduce toxicity in heart and lungs for locoregional radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer, including internal mammary nodes (IMN).

Patients and methods

This retrospective study included 10 patients with left-sided breast cancer who underwent locoregional radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery. For each patient, the ncVMAT plan was designed with four partial arcs comprising two coplanar arcs and two non-coplanar arcs, with a couch rotating to 90°. The prescribed dose was normalized to cover 95% of planning target volume (PTV), with 50 Gy delivered in 25 fractions. For each ncVMAT plan, dosimetric parameters were compared with the coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (coV-MAT) plan.

Results

T here were improvements in conformity index, homogeneity index and V₅₅ of total target volume (PTVall) comparing ncVMAT to coVMAT (p < 0.001). Among the organs at risk, the average V₃₀, V₂₀, V₁₀, V₅, and mean dose (D_mean) of the heart decreased significantly (p < 0.001). Furthermore, ncVMAT significantly reduced the mean V₂₀, V₁₀, V₅, and D_mean of left lung and the mean V₁₀ and V₅ and D_mean of contralateral lung (p < 0.001). An improved sparing of the left anterior descending coronary artery and right breast were also observed with ncVMAT (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Compared to coVMAT, ncVMAT provides improved conformity and homogeneity of whole P TV, better dose sparing of the heart, bilateral lungs, left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD), and right breast for locoregional radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer with IMN, potentially reducing the risk of normal tissue damage.

Modified VMAT Plans for Locally Advanced Centrally Located Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

Objectives: This study aimed to find the optimal radiotherapy VMAT plans, that achieved high conformity and homogeneity to the planned target volume (PTV), and minimize the dose to nearby organs at risk including the non-PTV lung, heart and oesophagus for patients with centrally located non-small Cell Lung Cancer. Methods: A total of 18 patients who were treated for stage III centrally located non-small Cell Lung Cancer were selected retrospectively for this study. Identical CT datasets, 4D CT and structure dataset were used for radiotherapy planning based on single-planar VMAT (SP-VMAT), dual-planar VMAT (DP-VMAT) and Hybrid VMAT (H-VMAT). For SP-VMAT, one full arc and two half arcs were created on single-plane with couch at 0°. For DP-VMAT, one full arc was created with couch at 0°, and two half arcs with couch rotation of 330° or 30°. For H-VMAT, anterior-posterior opposing fixed beam and two half arcs were planned at couch at 0°. Dose constraints were adhered to the RTOG0617. Dose volumetric parameters were collected for statistical analysis. Results: There were no significant differences for the PTV, HI, CI between the SP-VMAT, DP-VMAT and H-VMAT. For the non-PTV lungs, Dmean, V20, V10, V5, D1500 and D1000 were significantly lower (2.05 Gy, 6.47%, 15.89%, 11.66% 4.17 Gy and 5.47 Gy respectively) in H-VMAT than that of SP-VMAT (all p < 0.001). For the oesophagus, Dmax, Dmean, V30 and V18.8 of H-VMAT were 0.08 Gy, 1.73 Gy, 5.54% and 7.17% lower than that of the SP-VMAT plan. For the heart, Dmean, V34, V28, V20 and V10 of DP-VMAT were lower than that of SP-VMAT by 1.45 Gy, 0.65%, 1.74%, 4.8% and 7.11% respectively. Conclusion: The proposed H-VMAT showed more favourable plan quality than the SP-VMAT for centrally located stage III NSCLC, in particular for non-PTV lungs and the oesophagus. It will benefit patients, especially those who planned for immunotherapy (Durvalumab) after standard chemo-irradiation. The proposed DP-VMAT plan showed significant dose reduction to the heart when compared to the H-VMAT plan.

Treatment planning comparison between dynamic wave arc and volumetric modulated arc therapies for prostate-cancer treatment

The aim of this study was to compare the quality of dynamic wave arc (DWA) and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (co-VMAT) plans for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The planning target volume (PTV)-rectum, a section of the PTV comprising the PTV minus that of the rectum, received 78 Gy in 39 fractions as the mean dose to the PTV-rectum. The DWA and co-VMAT plans were generated for each patient using the RayStation treatment planning system for the Vero4DRT system. The PTV-rectum dose (D_95%: the percent dose irradiating 95% of the volume), homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), as well as doses to the bladder wall, rectum wall (V_10-70 Gy: the percent volume receiving 10-70 Gy), and bilateral femoral heads of the DWA and co-VMAT plans were compared. The output monitor unit (MU) and delivery time obtained for each set of plans were also investigated. In terms of target coverage, the DWA plans provided an average D_95% of 75.5 Gy, which was comparable to the co-VMAT-plan D_95% of 75.2 Gy (p < 0.05). The HI was significantly better with the DWA. As for the DWA plans, the bladder-wall volume receiving 10, 20, 30, and 40 Gy (V_{10-40 Gy}) was significantly smaller than that of the co-VMAT plans, and the volume of the rectal wall receiving 10 Gy (V_10Gy) was significantly larger than that of the co-VMAT plans. The DWA plans yielded a reduced dose to the bilateral femoral heads compared with the co-VMAT plans (p < 0.05). The values of the CI and MU, and the delivery time exhibited no significant differences between the DWA and co-VMAT plans. The DWA plan is a feasible treatment option for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Fully automated noncoplanar radiation therapy treatment planning

PURPOSE

To perform fully automated noncoplanar (NC) treatment planning, we propose a method called NC-POPS to produce NC plans using the Pareto optimal projection search (POPS) algorithm.

METHODS

NC radiation therapy treatment planning has the potential to improve dosimetric quality as compared to traditional coplanar techniques. Likewise, automated treatment planning algorithms can reduce a planner's active treatment planning time and remove inter-planner variability. Our NC-POPS algorithm extends the original POPS algorithm to the NC setting with potential applications to both intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The proposed algorithm consists of two main parts: (1) NC beam angle optimization (BAO) and (2) fully automated inverse planning using the POPS algorithm.

RESULTS

We evaluate the performance of NC-POPS by comparing between various NC and coplanar configurations. To evaluate plan quality, we compute the homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), and dose-volume histogram statistics for various organs-at-risk (OARs). As compared to the evaluated coplanar baseline methods, the proposed NC-POPS method achieves significantly better OAR sparing, comparable or better dose conformity, and similar dose homogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our proposed NC-POPS algorithm provides a modular approach for fully automated treatment planning of NC IMRT cases with the potential to substantially improve treatment planning workflow and plan quality.

Smirnov A, Verma A, Woods K. Compact X-Band Electron Linac for Radiotherapy and Security Applications

RadiaBeam has developed a 6 MeV accelerator that is compact and light enough to be placed on a robotic arm or light truck. The main drivers of size and weight in conventional accelerators are the power source and the shielding. Small dimensions are enabled by operation at 9.3 GHz frequency (X-band), which allows reducing the size and weight of all accelerator components. Thanks to the robust design of the accelerating structure, the accelerator can be used as a source for novel cargo inspection and radiotherapy techniques. In this paper, we present the linac design and its components, as well the results of the experimental demonstration of beam acceleration.

Non-coplanar VMAT plans for postoperative primary brain tumour to reduce dose to hippocampus, temporal lobe and cochlea: a planning study

Objectives:

This study aimed to compare radiotherapy plan quality of coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (CO-VMAT) and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) for post-operative primary brain tumour.

Methods:

A total of 16 patients who were treated for primary brain tumours were retrospectively selected for this study. For each patient, identical CT sets with structures were used for both CO-VMAT and NC-VMAT planning. For CO-VMAT, one full arc and two coplanar half arcs were used. For NC-VMAT, one full coplanar and two non-coplanar half arcs with couch rotation of 315° or 45° were used. Dose constraints were adhered to the RTOG 0614, RTOG 0933 and TMH protocol. Dose volumetric parameters were collected for statistical analysis.

Results:

.

NC-VMAT achieved significant dose reduction in contralateral hippocampus, both temporal lobes and cochleae, and other OARs while the plan qualities remained the same. In particular, NC-VMAT decreased contralateral hippocampus mean dose by 1.67Gy. Similarly, the NC-VMAT decreased temporal lobe mean dose by 6.29Gy and 2.8Gy for ipsilateral and contralateral side respectively. Furthermore, it decreased cochlea mean dose by 5.34Gy and 0.97Gy for ipsilateral and contralateral side respectively. Overall, there was a reduction of 5.4% of normal brain tissue volume receiving low dose irradiation.

Conclusion:

The proposed NC-VMAT showed more favourable plan quality than the CO-VMAT for primary brain tumours, in particular to hippocampus, temporal lobes, cochleae and OARs located to the contralateral side of tumours.

Advances in knowledge:

For primary brain tumours radiotherapy, NC-VMAT can reduce doses to the hippocampus, both temporal lobes, and cochleae, as well as OARs located to the contralateral side of tumours.

Evaluation of the correlation between dosimetric, geometric, and technical parameters of radiosurgery planning for multiple brain metastases

Purpose

To evaluate the correlation between dosimetric, geometric, and technical parameters for radiosurgery planning of multiple brain metastasis treatments treated with a linear accelerator with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique.

Materials and methods

Data were collected retrospectively from 55 patients who underwent radiosurgery in a single institution from August 2017 to February 2020. Patients presented 4–21 brain metastases were treated with a single fraction with doses between 18 and 20 Gy. Dosimetric variables were collected including V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy, V12Gy, V14Gy, conformity index (CI), heterogeneity index (HI), maximum dose (Dmax), and the CI_R50. Geometric variables including the number of lesions, target volumes, the smallest target volume, the largest target volume, and the distance between the isocenter and the most distant lesion (DIL) and technical variables such as the numbers of total arcs, noncoplanar arcs, and isocenters were collected for analysis.

Results

The number of lesions had a moderate positive correlation with V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy, V12Gy, V14Gy, HI, Dmax, and with the number of total arcs. The target volumes had a positive medium–high correlation with V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy, V12Gy, V14Gy, and moderate positive correlation with HI, Dmax, number of arcs and noncoplanar arcs. The CI and CI_R50 had a negative correlation with all volumes related to the target: the target volumes, the smallest, and the largest lesion. A positive correlation was observed between the distance of the isocenter and the most DIL with V5Gy, V8Gy, V10Gy, V12Gy, V14Gy, HI, Dmax, and the number of isocenters.

Conclusion

It was found that the number of lesions and the target volumes are good predictors of dosimetric indexes of plan evaluation and that the distance between the isocenter and the most DIL harms them.

Noncoplanar Versus Coplanar Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Protection of the Lip and Buccal Mucosa

Objective:

In this study, by comparing coplanar and noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning in treating tongue cancer, the significance of noncoplanar fields in the protection of the lip and buccal mucosa was determined, and a reasonable solution was selected.

Methods:

Forty-eight tongue cancer patients treated from June 2019 to February 2021 were selected and randomly divided into a coplanar field group and a noncoplanar field group. The mucosal dose limit changed from 15 Gy to 45 Gy for comparison of the two treatment plans. The evaluation indicators (conformal index (CI); homogeneity index (HI); D5, D50, and D98 of the target volume; and the dose of normal tissues) were calculated under different mucosal dose limits. The clinical observation of the lip and buccal mucosa of 48 cases was monitored and graded carefully according to NCI-CTCAE V4.0. Statistical analyses were performed.

Results:

The differences in CI, HI, D98, D50 and D5 between the two groups in the target volume tended to decrease when the mucosal dose limit was less than 30 Gy, with a significant difference (P < 0.05). When the limit exceeded 30 Gy, significant differences in other indicators except CI (P < 0.05) were still noted. In normal tissue, differences in doses between the two groups existed when the mucosal limit was less than 20 Gy, with a significant difference (P < 0.05). When the limit exceeded 20 Gy, no significant difference was noted. Patients in the noncoplanar group showed significantly better results than those in the other group in terms of the radiation-related toxicity of the lip and cheek membrane(P < 0.001).

Conclusions:

Compared with coplanar field radiotherapy, noncoplanar field radiotherapy can effectively reduce the exposure dose to the lip and buccal mucosa. The application of noncoplanar treatment plans exhibits good clinical significance and deserves to be promoted.

Verification of the delivered patient radiation dose for non-coplanar beam therapy

PURPOSE

There is an increased interest in using non-coplanar beams for radiotherapy, including SBRT and SRS. This approach can significantly reduce doses to organs-at-risk, however, it requires stringent quality assurance, especially when a dynamic treatment couch is used. In this work, new functionality that allows using non-coplanar beam arrangements in addition to conventional coplanar beams was added and validated to the previously developed in vivo dose verification system.

METHODS

The existing program code was modified to manage the additional treatment couch parameters: angle and positions. Ten non-coplanar test plans that use a static couch were created in the treatment planning system. Also, two plans that use a dynamic treatment couch were created and delivered using Varian Developer mode, since the treatment planning system does not support a dynamic couch. All non-coplanar test trajectories were delivered on a simple geometric phantom, using an Edge linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems) with the megavoltage imager deployed and acquiring megavoltage transmission images that were used to calculate the delivered 3D dose distributions in the phantom with the updated dose calculation algorithm. The reconstructed dose distributions were compared using the 3D chi-comparison test with 2%/2mm tolerances to the corresponding reference dose distributions obtained from the treatment planning system.

RESULTS

The chi-comparison test resulted in at least a 97.0% pass rate over the entire 3D volume for all tested trajectories. For static gantry, static couch non-coplanar fields, and non-coplanar arcs using dynamic couch the pass rates observed were at least 98%, while for the static couch, non-transverse coplanar arc fields, pass rates were at least 97%.

CONCLUSIONS

A model-based 3D dose calculation algorithm has been extended and validated for a variety of non-coplanar beam trajectories of different complexities. This system can potentially be applied for quality assurance of treatment delivery systems that use complex, non-coplanar beam arrangements.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer using the non-coplanar radiation of Cyberknife and Varian linac

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the planned dose of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for treating early peripheral non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using the non-coplanar radiation from Cyberknife and Varian linac. Moreover, this study investigates whether Cyberknife and Varian linac are qualified for non-coplanar radiation SBRT for treating early peripheral NSCLC, and which one is better for protecting organs at risk (OARs).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed based on the Cyberknife radiation treatment plans (RTPs) and Varian Eclipse RTPs of 10 patients diagnosed with early peripheral NSCLC. The dose distributions in the target and OARs were compared between the RTPs of Cyberknife and Varian Eclipse using Mim medical imaging software.

RESULTS

For PTV, no significant difference in D98 and D95 between the Cyberknife and Eclipse was observed (t = -0.35, -1.67, P > 0.05). The homogeneity indexes (HIs) of Cyberknife plans are higher (t = 71.86, P < 0.05) than those of Eclipse plans. The V10, V15, V20, V25, V30 and Dmean of the lung with NSCLC and the V20 of the whole lung for Cyberknife were less than those for Eclipse (t = -4.73, -5.62, -7.75, -6.38, -6.89, -3.14, -7.09, respectively, P < 0.05). Cyberknife plans have smaller spinal cord Dmax, trachea Dmax, heart Dmax, chest wall Dmax (t = -2.49, -2.57, -3.71, -3.56, respectively, P < 0.05) and esophagus Dmax (t = -1.95, P > 0.05) than Varian Eclipse plans.

CONCLUSION

To fulfill SBRT by non-coplanar radiation, Cyberknife is recommended for the institutions equipped with Cyberknife, while Varian linac can be applied for the institutions that have not adopted Cyberknife in clinical radiotherapy yet.

Assessment of single isocenter linear accelerator radiosurgery for metastases and base of skull lesions

BACKGROUND

Newer technology for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) should be assessed for different multi-leaf collimators (MLC).

OBJECTIVE

Assess plan quality of an automated, frameless, linear accelerator based (linac) planning and delivery system (HyperArc) for SRS using both standard MLC (SMLC) and high definition MLC (HDMLC) compared to a cobalt-60 based SRS system (Gamma Knife, GK).

METHODS

We re-planned twenty GK Perfexion-treated SRS patients (27 lesions) for HyperArc using SMLC and HDMLC. We assessed plan quality using the following metrics: gradient index (GI), Paddick and RTOG conformity indices (CI_Paddick, CI_RTOG), volume receiving half of prescription isodose (PIV_half) and maximum dose to 0.03 cc for brainstem, optic chiasm and optic nerves, and V12Gy for brain-GTV.

RESULTS

Linac plans had better conformity with HDMLC being most conformal. GK exhibited better GI. PIV_half demonstrated no statistically significant difference between HDMLC and GK, and SMLC was nominally worse than GK. Mean PIV_half was generally 0.85 cc larger for SMLC than HDMLC. For TV > 1.0 cc, the relative differences in CI_RTOG, GI, and PIV_half for SMLC vs. HDMLC were less than 21%. For TV less than < 1.0 cc, there were more obvious relative differences for SMLC vs. HDMLC in CI_RTOG (mean 146%, max 700%), GI (mean 49%, max 162%), and PIV_half (mean 77%, max 522%). Organ at risk doses were met in all plans.

CONCLUSIONS

New linac-based plans positively compare to GK plans overall. HDMLC should be strongly considered for treatment of lesions < 1.0 cc given the significant improvements in conformity and PIV_half over SMLC.

The gimbaled-head radiotherapy system: Rise and downfall of a dedicated system for dynamic tumor tracking with real-time monitoring and dynamic WaveArc

A gimbaled-head radiotherapy device was developed by industry-academic collaborations, with a concept of robust structures whilst maintaining high flexibilities, and its clinical application started in 2008. The unique structures with multi-image guidance functions initiated 2 new treatment modalities. One is dynamic tumor tracking radiotherapy with real time monitoring (DTTRM), which enables 4-D radiotherapy without prolongation of radiotherapy treatment time. This treatment has become clinically feasible for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung cancers and liver tumors, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for pancreatic cancers. The second one is Dynamic WaveArc therapy (DWA), the non-coplanar versatility of the SBRT system by combining the gantry-ring synchronized rotation with dynamic multileaf collimator optimization. DWA opens the possibility to create patient-individualized treatment plans, allowing additional flexibility in organ at risk sparing while preserving dosimetric robust delivery. The clinical usefulness of the DWA has been preliminary shown for those tumors in the prostate, breast and skull base. Prospective clinical trials are under way with a support of the national funding of Japan for DTTRM and DWA, respectively. Marketing of the system was terminated in 2016 due to a commercial decision. However, lessons can be learned from the development process of this device that might be useful for those who have interests in new technologies and clinical applications in radiation oncology. This review article aims to summarize the developments and achievements of a gimbaled-head radiotherapy device with a focus on DTTRM and DWA.

Comparison of conventional and advanced radiotherapy techniques for left-sided breast cancer after breast conserving surgery

Whole breast radiotherapy (WBRT) after breast conserving surgery is the standard treatment to prevent recurrence and metastasis of early stage breast cancer. This study aims to compare seven WBRT techniques including conventional tangential, field-in-field (FIF), hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), IMRT, standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (STD-VMAT), noncoplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT), and multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT). Fifteen patients who were previously diagnosed with left-sided early stage breast cancer and treated in our clinic were selected for this study. WBRT plans were created for these patients and were evaluated based on target coverage and normal tissue toxicities. All techniques produced clinically acceptable WBRT plans. STD-VMAT delivered the lowest mean dose (1.1 ± 0.3 Gy) and the lowest maximum dose (7.3 ± 4.9 Gy) to contralateral breast, and the second lowest lifetime attributable risk (LAR) (4.1 ± 1.4%) of secondary contralateral breast cancer. MA-VMAT delivered the lowest mean dose to lungs (4.9 ± 0.9 Gy) and heart (5.5 ± 1.2 Gy), exhibited the lowest LAR (1.7 ± 0.3%) of secondary lung cancer, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) (1.2 ± 0.2%) of pneumonitis, risk of coronary events (RCE) (10.3 ± 2.7%), and LAR (3.9 ± 1.3%) of secondary contralateral breast cancer. NC-VMAT plans provided the most conformal target coverage, the lowest maximum lung dose (46.2 ± 4.1 Gy) and heart dose (41.1 ± 5.4 Gy), and the second lowest LAR (1.8 ± 0.4%) of secondary lung cancer and RCE (10.5 ± 2.8%). MA-VMAT and NC-VMAT could be the preferred techniques for early stage breast cancer patients after breast conserving surgery.

Technological quality requirements for stereotactic radiotherapy : Expert review group consensus from the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy

This review details and discusses the technological quality requirements to ensure the desired quality for stereotactic radiotherapy using photon external beam radiotherapy as defined by the DEGRO Working Group Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy and the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy. The covered aspects of this review are 1) imaging for target volume definition, 2) patient positioning and target volume localization, 3) motion management, 4) collimation of the irradiation and beam directions, 5) dose calculation, 6) treatment unit accuracy, and 7) dedicated quality assurance measures. For each part, an expert review for current state-of-the-art techniques and their particular technological quality requirement to reach the necessary accuracy for stereotactic radiotherapy divided into intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery in one single fraction (SRS), intracranial fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT), and extracranial stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is presented. All recommendations and suggestions for all mentioned aspects of stereotactic radiotherapy are formulated and related uncertainties and potential sources of error discussed. Additionally, further research and development needs in terms of insufficient data and unsolved problems for stereotactic radiotherapy are identified, which will serve as a basis for the future assignments of the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy. The review was group peer-reviewed, and consensus was obtained through multiple working group meetings.

Simultaneous trajectory generation and volumetric modulated arc therapy optimization

PURPOSE

Trajectory-based treatment planning involves the combination of a gantry-couch trajectory with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plan optimization. This work presents the implementation of an optimization methodology that generates a trajectory simultaneous with treatment plan optimization (simTr-VMAT).

METHODS

The optimization algorithm is based on the column generation approach, in which a treatment plan is iteratively constructed through the solution of a subproblem called the "pricing problem." The property of the pricing problem to rank candidate apertures based on their associated price is leveraged to select an optimal aperture while simultaneously determining the trajectory path. A progressively increasing gantry-couch grid resolution is used to provide an initial coarse sampling of the angular solution space while maintaining fine control point spacing with the final treatment plan. The trajectory optimization was applied and compared to coplanar VMAT treatment plans for a lung patient, a glioblastoma patient, and a prostate patient. Algorithm validation was performed through the generation of 5000 random trajectories and optimization using column generation VMAT for each patient case, representing the solution space for the trajectory optimization problem. The simTr-VMAT trajectories were compared against these random trajectories based on a quality metric that prefers trajectories with few control points and low objective function value over long, inefficient trajectories.

RESULTS

For the lung patient, the simTr-VMAT plan resulted in a decrease of the mean dose of 1.5 and 1.0 Gy to the heart and ipsilateral lung, respectively. For the glioblastoma patient, the simTr-VMAT plan resulted in improved planning target volume coverage with a decrease in mean dose to the eyes, lens, nose, and contralateral temporal lobe between 2 and 7 Gy. The prostate patient showed no clinically relevant dosimetric improvement. The simTr-VMAT treatment plans ranked at the 99.6, 96.3, and 99.4 percentiles compared to the distribution of randomly generated trajectories for the lung, glioblastoma, and prostate patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The simTr-VMAT optimization methodology resulted in treatment plans with equivalent or improved dosimetric outcomes compared to coplanar VMAT treatment plans, with the trajectories resulting from the optimization ranking among the optimal trajectories for each patient case.

Dosimetric accuracy of delivering SBRT using dynamic arcs on Cyberknife

PURPOSE

Several studies have demonstrated potential improvements in treatment time through the use of dynamic arcs for delivery of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) on Cyberknife. However, the delivery system has a finite accuracy, so that potential exists for dosimetric uncertainties. This study estimates the expected dosimetric accuracy of dynamic delivery of SBRT, based on realistic estimates of the uncertainties in delivery parameters.

METHODS

Five SBRT patient cases (prostate A - conventional, prostate B - brachytherapy-type, lung, liver, partial left breast) were retrospectively studied. Treatment plans were produced for a fixed arc trajectory using fluence optimization, segmentation, and direct aperture optimization. Dose rate uncertainty was modeled as a smoothly varying random fluctuation of ± 1.0%, ±2.0% or ± 5.0% over a time period of 10, 30 or 60 s. Multileaf collimator uncertainty was modeled as a lag in position of each leaf up to 0.25 or 0.5 mm. Robot pointing error was modeled as a shift of the target location, with the direction of the shift chosen as a random angle with respect to the multileaf collimator and with a random magnitude in the range 0.0-1.0 mm at the delivery nodes and with an additional random magnitude of 0.5-1.0 mm in between the delivery nodes. The impact of the errors was investigated using dose-volume histograms.

RESULTS

Uncertainty in dose rate has the effect of varying the total monitor units delivered, which in turn produces a variation in mean dose to the planning target volume. The random sampling of dose rate error produces a distribution of mean doses with a standard deviation proportional to the magnitude of the dose rate uncertainty. A lag in multileaf collimator position of 0.25 or 0.5 mm produces a small impact on the delivered dose. In general, an increase in the PTV mean dose of around 1% is observed. An error in robot pointing of the order of 1 mm produces a small increase in dose inhomogeneity to the planning target volume, sometimes accompanied by an increase in mean dose by around 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon the limited data available on the dose rate stability and geometric accuracy of the Cyberknife system, this study estimates that dynamic arc delivery can be accomplished with sufficient accuracy for clinical application. Dose rate variation produces a change in dose to the planning target volume according to the perturbation of total monitor units delivered, while multileaf collimator lag and robot pointing error typically increase the mean dose to the planning target volume by up to 1%.

Trajectory-based VMAT for cranial targets with delivery at shortened SAD

INTRODUCTION

Trajectory-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (tr-VMAT) treatment plans enable the option for noncoplanar delivery yielding steeper dose gradients and increased sparing of critical structures compared to conventional treatment plans. The addition of translational couch motion to shorten the effective source-to-axis distance (SAD) may result in improved delivery precision and an increased effective dose rate. In this work, tr-VMAT treatment plans using a noncoplanar "baseball stitch" trajectory were implemented, applied to patients presented with cranial targets, and compared to the clinical treatment plans.

METHODS

A treatment planning workflow was implemented: (a) beamlet doses were calculated for control points defined along a baseball stitch trajectory using a collapsed-cone convolution-superposition algorithm; (b) VMAT treatment plans were optimized using the column generation approach; (c) a final dose distribution was calculated in Varian Eclipse using the analytical anisotropic algorithm by importing the optimized treatment plan parameters. Tr-VMAT plans were optimized for ten patients presented with cranial targets at both standard and shortened SAD, and compared to the clinical treatment plans through isodose distributions, dose-volume histograms, and dosimetric indices. The control point specifications of the optimized tr-VMAT plans were used to estimate the delivery time.

RESULTS

The optimized tr-VMAT plans with both shortened and standard SAD delivery yielded a comparable plan quality to the clinical treatment plans. A statistically significant benefit was observed for dose gradient index and monitor unit efficiency for shortened SAD tr-VMAT plans, while improved target volume conformity was observed for the clinical treatment plan (P ≤ 0.05). A clear dosimetric benefit was not demonstrated between tr-VMAT delivery at shortened SAD compared to standard SAD, but shortened SAD delivery yielded a fraction size-dependent reduction in the estimated delivery time.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of "baseball stitch" tr-VMAT treatment plans to patients presented with cranial targets demonstrated comparable plan quality to clinical treatment plans. The delivery at shortened SAD produced a fraction size-dependent decrease in estimated delivery time.

Performance of a 6D Treatment Chair for Patient Positioning in an Upright Posture for Fixed Ion Beam Lines

Purpose: To evaluate the mechanical accuracy and the robustness of position alignment under x-ray-based image guidance of a treatment chair with six degrees of freedom (6DTC) which was developed for patient treatment in an upright posture at fixed horizontal beam lines in particle (proton, carbon ion, or others) radiotherapy facilities. Method and Material: The positional accuracy including translational and axial rotational accuracy of the 6DTC was evaluated by using a Vicon Motion Capture System (VMCS). Stability of the chair rotation isocenter was determined by a CCD camera with an in-house developed software. The tests were carried out to examine two key motion components of the 6DTC: a floor/rail-mount 360°-rotating platform and a 6-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) platform. The measurement results were compared to that of a commercial clinical robot couch. The accuracy of position alignment, simulating the actual clinical protocol, through an Image-guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) system was studied at the pre-treatment position and beam specific treatment position. Results: The translational accuracy was 0.12 mm (SD 0.07 mm) for the 6DOF platform. The rotational accuracy was 0.04° (SD 0.03°) and 0.02° (SD 0.02°) for the 6DOF platform and the 360° -rotating platform, respectively. The displacement between the chair rotation center and the room isocenter center was no more than 0.18 mm in all three rotational axes. Combined with an x-ray-based IGRT system, the treatment alignment test with a rigid phantom yielded a total positional accuracy of 0.23 mm (SD 0.17 mm) and 0.14° (SD 0.14°) at treatment position. Conclusions: On the basis of the rigid phantom study, the 6DTC showed comparable accuracy to the robot treatment couch. Combining with the IGRT, the 6DTC can provide position alignment with submillimeter accuracy for rigid phantom in upright posture.

Many-isocenter optimization for robotic radiotherapy

Despite significant dosimetric gains, clinical implementation of the 4π non-coplanar radiotherapy on the widely available C-arm gantry system is hindered by limited clearance, and the need to perform complex coordinated gantry and couch motion. A robotic radiotherapy platform would be conducive to such treatment but a new conflict between field size and MLC modulation resolution needs to be managed for versatile applications. This study investigates the dosimetry and delivery efficiency of purposefully creating many isocenters to achieve simultaneously high MLC modulation resolution and large tumor coverage. An integrated optimization framework was proposed for simultaneous beam orientation optimization (BOO), isocenter selection, and fluence map optimization (FMO). The framework includes a least-square dose fidelity objective, a total variation term for regularizing the fluence smoothness, and a group sparsity term for beam selection. A minimal number of isocenters were identified for efficient target coverage. Colliding beams excluded, high-resolution small-field 4π intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment plans with 50 cm source-to-isocenter distance (SID-50) on 10 Head and Neck (H&N) cancer patients were compared with low-resolution large-field plans with 100 cm SID (SID-100). With the same or better target coverage, the average reduction of [Dmean, Dmax] of 20-beam SID-50 plans from 20-beam SID-100 plans were [2.09 Gy, 1.19 Gy] for organs at risk (OARs) overall, [3.05 Gy, 0.04 Gy] for parotid gland, [3.62 Gy, 5.19 Gy] for larynx, and [3.27 Gy, 1.10 Gy] for mandible. R50 and integral dose were reduced by 5.3% and 9.6%, respectively. Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed significant difference (p   <  0.05) in planning target volume (PTV) homogeneity, PTV Dmax, R50, Integral dose, and OAR Dmean and Dmax. The estimated delivery time of 20-beam [SID-50, SID-100] plans were [19, 18] min and [14, 9] min, assuming 5 fractions and 30 fractions, respectively. With clinically acceptable delivery efficiency, many-isocenter optimization is dosimetrically desirable for treating large targets with high modulation resolution on the robotic platform.