Plan Quality and Treatment Efficiency for Radiosurgery to Multiple Brain Metastases: Non-Coplanar RapidArc vs. Gamma Knife

What is the optimal isodose line for stereotactic radiotherapy for single brain metastases using HyperArc?

PURPOSE

The study aimed to investigate the optimal isodose line (IDL) in linear accelerator-based stereotactic radiotherapy for single brain metastasis, using HyperArc. We compared the dosimetric parameters for target and normal brain tissue among six plans with different IDLs.

METHODS

This study included 30 patients with single brain metastasis. We retrospectively generated six plans for each tumor with different IDLs (80%, 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%, and 33%) using HyperArc. All treatment plans were normalized to the prescription dose of 35 Gy in five fractions which was covered by 95% of the planning target volume (PTV), defined by adding a 1.0 mm margin to the gross tumor volume (GTV). The dosimetric parameters were compared among the six plans.

RESULTS

For GTV > 0.1 cm3, the ratio of brain-GTV volumes receiving 25 Gy to PTV (V25Gy/PTV) was significantly lower at IDL 40%-70% than at IDL 80% and 33% (p < 0.01, retrospectively). For GTV < 0.1 cm3, V25Gy/PTV decreased continuously as IDL decreased. The values of D99% and D80% for GTV increased with decreasing IDL. An IDL of 50% or less was required to achieve D99% of greater than 43 Gy and D80% of greater than 50 Gy. The mean values of D99% and D80% for IDL 50% were 44.3 and 51.9 Gy.

CONCLUSION

The optimal IDL is 40%-50% for GTV > 0.1 cm3. These lower IDLs could increase D99% and D80% of GTV while lowering V25Gy of normal brain tissue, which may help reduce the risk of radiation necrosis and improve local control.

The effects of distance between the imaging isocenter and brain center on the image quality of cone-beam computed tomography for brain stereotactic irradiation

In linear accelerator-based stereotactic irradiation (STI) for brain metastasis, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image quality is essential for ensuring precise patient setup and tumor localization. However, CBCT images may be degraded by the deviation of the CBCT isocenter from the brain center. This study aims to investigate the effects of the distance from the brain center to the CBCT isocenter (DBI) on the image quality in STI. An anthropomorphic phantom was scanned with varying DBI in right, anterior, superior, and inferior directions. Thirty patients undergoing STI were prospectively recruited. Objective metrics, utilizing regions of interest included contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) at the centrum semiovale, lateral ventricle, and basal ganglia levels, gray and white matter noise at the basal ganglia level, artifact index (AI), and nonuniformity (NU). Two radiation oncologists assessed subjective metrics. In this phantom study, objective measures indicated a degradation in image quality for non-zero DBI. In this patient study, there were significant correlations between the CNR at the centrum semiovale and lateral ventricle levels (rs = - 0.79 and - 0.77, respectively), gray matter noise (rs = 0.52), AI (rs = 0.72), and NU (rs = 0.91) and DBI. However, no significant correlations were observed between the CNR at the basal ganglia level, white matter noise, and subjective metrics and DBI (rs < ± 0.3). Our results demonstrate the effects of DBI on contrast, noise, artifacts in the posterior fossa, and uniformity of CBCT images in STI. Aligning the CBCT isocenter with the brain center can aid in improving image quality.

Dosimetry and treatment efficiency of SBRT using TaiChiB radiotherapy system for two-lung lesions with one overlapping organs at risk

Purpose

This study aims to assess the dosimetry and treatment efficiency of TaiChiB-based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) plans applying to treat two-lung lesions with one overlapping organs at risk.

Methods

For four retrospective patients diagnosed with two-lung lesions each patient, four treatment plans were designed including Plan Edge, TaiChiB linac-based, RGS-based, and a linac-RGS hybrid (Plan TCLinac, Plan TCRGS, and Plan TCHybrid). Dosimetric metrics and beam-on time were employed to evaluate and compare the TaiChiB-based plans against Plan Edge.

Results

For Conformity Index (CI), Plan TCRGS outperformed all other plans with an average CI of 1.06, as opposed to Plan Edge's 1.33. Similarly, for R50 %, Plan TCRGS was superior with an average R50 % of 3.79, better than Plan Edge's 4.28. In terms of D2 cm, Plan TCRGS also led with an average of 48.48%, compared to Plan Edge's 56.25%. For organ at risk (OAR) sparing, Plan TCRGS often displayed the lowest dosimetric values, notably for the spinal cord (Dmax 5.92 Gy) and lungs (D1500cc 1.00 Gy, D1000cc 2.61 Gy, V10 Gy 15.14%). However, its high Dmax values for the heart and great vessels sometimes exceeded safety thresholds. Plan TCHybrid presented a balanced approach, showing doses comparable to or better than Plan Edge without crossing safety limits. In terms of beam-on time, Plan TCLinac emerged as the most efficient treatment option in three out of four cases, followed closely by Plan Edge in one case. Plan TCRGS, despite its dosimetric advantages, was the least efficient, recording notably longer beam-on times, with a peak at 33.28 minutes in Case 2.

Conclusion

For patients with two-lung lesions treated by SBRT whose one lesion overlaps with OARs, the Plan TCHybrid delivered by TaiChiB digital radiotherapy system can be recommended as a clinical option.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery of Multiple Brain Metastases: A Review of Treatment Techniques

The advancement of systemic targeted treatments has led to improvements in the management of metastatic disease, particularly in terms of survival outcomes. However, brain metastases remain less responsive to systemic therapies, underscoring the significance of local interventions for comprehensive disease control. Over the past years, the threshold for treating brain metastases through stereotactic radiosurgery has risen. Yet, as the number of treated metastases increases, treatment complexity and duration also escalate. This trend has made multi-isocenter radiosurgery treatments, such as those with the Gamma Knife, challenging to plan and lengthy for patients. In contrast, single-isocenter approaches employing linear accelerators offer an efficient and expeditious treatment option. This review delves into the literature, comparing different linear-accelerator-based techniques with each other and in relation to dedicated systems, focusing on dosimetric considerations and feasibility.

Planning issues on linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy

This work aims to summarize and evaluate the current planning progress based on the linear accelerator in stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). The specific techniques include 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, dynamic conformal arc therapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). They are all designed to deliver higher doses to the target volume while reducing damage to normal tissues; among them, VMAT shows better prospects for application. This paper reviews and summarizes several issues on the planning of SRT to provide a reference for clinical application.

Single isocenter stereotactic irradiation for multiple brain metastases: current situation and prospects

The prognosis of patients with brain metastases has dramatically improved, and long-term tumor control and reduction of the risk of late toxicities, including neurocognitive dysfunction, are important for patient quality of life. Stereotactic irradiation for multiple brain metastases, rather than whole-brain radiotherapy, can result in high local control rate with low incidence of neurocognitive deterioration and leukoencephalopathy. Recent advances in radiotherapy devices, treatment-planning systems, and image-guided radiotherapy can realize single isocenter stereotactic irradiation for multiple brain metastases (SI-STI-MBM), in which only one isocenter is sufficient to treat multiple brain metastases simultaneously. SI-STI-MBM has expanded the indications for linear accelerator-based stereotactic irradiation and considerably reduced patient burden. This review summarizes the background, methods, clinical outcomes, and specific consideration points of SI-STI-MBM. In addition, the prospects of SI-STI-MBM are addressed.

Rodent Model of Brain Radionecrosis using Clinical LINAC-based Stereotactic Radiosurgery

Purpose

Methods and Materials

Results

Conclusions

Impact of Social Determinants of Health on Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Vestibular Schwannoma

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Linear accelerator (LINAC) and Gamma Knife (GK) are common stereotactic radiation therapies for treating vestibular schwannoma (VS). There is currently limited literature examining specific demographic and socioeconomic factors, which influence the type of stereotactic radiation therapy a patient with VS receives.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective database review.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for cases of VS between 2004 and 2016. Patient demographic characteristics were compared using chi-squared and t-tests between GK and LINAC treated groups. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of stereotactic radiation therapy received.

RESULTS

Of the 6,208 included patients, 5,306 (85.5%) received GK and 902 (14.5%) received LINAC. The mean age of GK patients was significantly lower than that of LINAC patients (58.0 vs. 59.7, P < .001). Individuals treated with GK had greater proportions of private insurance (P < .001) and incomes greater than $63,332 (P = .003). A greater proportion of GK patients were treated in academic centers (P < .001), in high-volume facilities (P < .001), in metropolitan areas (P < .001), and in the Northeastern United States (P < .001). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, region, metropolitan area, facility type, tumor size, and distance traveled by patients independently predict receipt of GK versus LINAC.

CONCLUSION

Differences in patient demographics and other social determinants of health influence choice of GK versus LINAC therapy for VS patients. Future studies focused on addressing barriers to care, which may influence postprocedural quality of life and clinical outcomes associated with these two treatments are necessary to better understand the impact of these social differences.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 2022.

Dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy with TrueBeam LINAC and hypofractionated radiosurgery with gamma knife ICON for large (>10 cm3) skull base meningiomas

BACKGROUND

Multi Fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (MF-SRS) of Linac has an essential role in the treatment of skull base meningiomas (sbMNG). However, Gamma Knife Icon (GK) allows MF-SRS using mask immobilization with onboard image guidance.

OBJECTIVE

This dosimetric study aims to investigate whether equivalent plan quality can be achieved with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) in patients with large sbMNG (>10 cm3) previously treated with GK.

METHODS

Twenty patients with the median target volume of 19.7cm3 are re-planned by using VMAT with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. Plan qualities are compared to tumor coverage, paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), V4 Gy, V10 Gy, V12 Gy, optic chiasm V20 Gy, brainstem V23 Gy, optic nerve V25 Gy volumes, and maximum doses for all. Additionally, beam-on time and approximate planning time are also analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

All plans provide adequate clinical requirements. First, the CI is comparable for the GK and VMAT (0.99±0.01 vs. 1.13±0.20; p = 0.18). Second, VMAT has a significantly higher GI than GK (3.81±0.35 vs. 2.63±0.09; p < 0.001). Third, the PCI is significantly higher in GK than VMAT (0.76±0.05 vs. 0.70±0.07; p < 0.001). The lower GI of the GK also results in significantly lower V4 Gy (156.1±43.8 vs. 207.5±40.1 cm3, p < 0.001) and V10 Gy (26.1±9.0 vs. 28.9±7.7 cm3, p < 0.001) compared to VMAT. Last, the VMAT reduces beam-on time (4.8±0.5 vs. 19±1.1 min.; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although both systems have succeeded in creating effective plans in clinical practice, the GK reveals more effective lower normal brain tissue doses. However, the shorter treatment time with LINAC, excluding the total procedure time, can be considered advantageous over GK.

Outcomes in Patients With 4 to 10 Brain Metastases Treated With Dose-Adapted Single-Isocenter Multitarget Stereotactic Radiosurgery: A Prospective Study

Purpose

To examine the effectiveness and safety of single-isocenter multitarget stereotactic radiosurgery using a volume-adapted dosing strategy in patients with 4 to 10 brain metastases.

Methods and Materials

Adult patients with 4 to 10 brain metastases were eligible for this prospective trial. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were local recurrence, distant brain failure, neurologic death, and rate of adverse events. Exploratory objectives were neurocognition, quality of life, dosimetric data, salvage rate, and radionecrosis. Dose was prescribed in a single fraction per RTOG 90-05 or as 5 Gy × 5 fractions for lesions ≥3 cm diameter, lesions involving critical structures, or single-fraction brain V_12Gy >20 mL.

Results

Forty patients were treated with median age of 61 years, Karnofsky performance status 90, and 6 brain metastases. Twenty-two patients survived longer than expected from the time of protocol SRS, with 1 living patient who has not reached that milestone. Median overall survival was 8.1 months with a 1-year overall survival of 35.7%. The 1-year local recurrence rate was 5% (10 of 204 of evaluable lesions) in 12.5% (4 of 32) of the patients. Distant brain failure was observed in 19 of 32 patients with a 1-year rate of 35.8%. Grade 1-2 headache was the most common complaint, with no grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events. Radionecrosis was observed in only 5 lesions, with a 1-year rate of 1.5%. Rate of neurologic death was 20%. Neurocognition and quality of life did not significantly change 3 months after SRS compared with pretreatment.

Conclusions

These results suggest that volume-adapted dosing single-isocenter multitarget stereotactic radiosurgery is an effective and safe treatment for patients with 4 to 10 brain metastases.

Improving efficiency in the radiation management of multiple brain metastases using a knowledge-based planning solution for single-isocentre volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to develop a single-isocentre volumetric modulated arc therapy (si-VMAT) technique for multiple brain metastases using knowledge-based planning software, comparing it with a multiple-isocentre stereotactic radiosurgery (mi-SRS) planning approach.

METHODS

Twenty-six si-VMAT plans were created and uploaded into RapidPlanTM (RP) to create a si-VMAT model. Ten patients, with 2 to 6 metastases (mets), were planned with a si-VMAT technique utilising RP, and a mi-SRS technique on Brainlab iPlan. Paddick Conformity Index (PCI) was used to compare conformity. The volumes of the brain receiving 15Gy, 12Gy, 10Gy, 7.5Gy and 3Gy were also compared. Retrospective treatment times from the last eight patients treated were averaged for pre-imaging and beam on time to calculate treatment times for both techniques.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in the PCI scores for the mi-SRS plans (M = 0.667, SD = 0.114) and si-VMAT plans (M = 0.728, SD = 0.088), with PCI values suggesting better prescription dose conformity with the si-VMAT technique (P = 0.014). Percentage of total brain volume receiving low-dose wash at four of the five different dose levels was significantly less (P < 0.05) with mi-SRS. Average time to treat a single met with current mi-SRS technique is 25.7 min, with each additional met requiring this same amount of time. The average time to treat 2-3 mets using si-VMAT would be 25.3 min and 4+ metastases 33.5 min.

CONCLUSION

A knowledge-based si-VMAT approach was efficient in planning and treating multi metastases while achieving clinically acceptable dosimetry with respect to dose conformity and low-dose fall off.

Dosimetric Comparison, Treatment Efficiency Estimation, and Biological Evaluation of Popular Stereotactic Radiosurgery Options in Treating Single Small Brain Metastasis

Objectives

This study aimed to show the advantages of each stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatment option for single small brain metastasis among Gamma Knife (GK), Cone-based VMAT (Cone-VMAT), and MLC-based CRT (MLC-CRT) plans.

Materials and Methods

GK, Cone-VMAT, and MLC-CRT SRS plans were retrospectively generated for 11 patients with single small brain metastasis whose volume of gross tumor volume (GTV) ranged from 0.18 to 0.76 cc (median volume 0.60 cc). Dosimetric parameters, treatment efficiency, and biological parameters of the three techniques were compared and evaluated. The metric variation with the planning target volume (PTV) was also studied.

Results

The conformity index (CI) was similar in GK and MLC-CRT plans, higher than Cone-VMAT. Cone-VMAT achieved comparable volume covered by 12 Gy (V12) and gradient index (GI) as GK, lower than MLC-CRT. The heterogeneity index (HI) of GK, Cone-VMAT, and MLC-CRT decreased sequentially. GK gave the lowest volume covered by 3 Gy (V3) and 6 Gy (V6), while MLC-CRT got the highest. The beam-on time and treatment time of GK, Cone-VMAT, and MLC-CRT decreased in turn. Tumor control probability (TCP) of all three SRS plans was greater than 98%, and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of all organs at risk (OARs) was below 0.01%. GK and Cone-VMAT resulted in superior TCP and NTCP of the normal brain tissue than MLC-CRT. The relative value of Cone-VMAT and GK for all metrics hardly changed with the target volume. Except for the unchanged HI and TCP, the other results of MLC-CRT with respect to GK improved as the target volume increased. MLC-CRT could produce higher CI than GK and Cone-VMAT when the target volume increased above 2 and 1.44 cc, respectively.

Conclusion

For single small brain metastases, Cone-VMAT may be used as an alternative to GK-free centers. In addition to the advantage of short treatment time, MLC-CRT showed superiority in CI as the target volume increased. Treatment centers can choose appropriate SRS technique on a case-by-case basis according to institutional conditions and patients’ individual needs.

Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for Intact Brain Metastases in 5 Daily Fractions: Effect of Dose on Treatment Response

PURPOSE

Multileaf collimator (MLC) linear accelerator (Linac)-based hypofractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (HSRT) is increasingly used not only for large brain metastases or those adjacent to critical structures but also for those metastases that would otherwise be considered for single-fraction radiosurgery (SRS). However, data on outcomes in general are limited, and there is a lack of understanding regarding optimal dosing. Our aim was to report mature image-based outcomes for MLC-Linac HSRT with a focus on clinical and dosimetric factors associated with local failure (LF).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 220 patients with 334 brain metastases treated with HSRT were identified. All patients were treated using a 5-fraction daily regimen and were followed with clinical evaluation and volumetric magnetic resonance imaging every 2 to 3 months. Overall survival and progression-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, with LF determined using Fine and Gray's competing risk method. Predictive factors were identified using Cox regression multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 10.8 months. Median size of treated metastasis was 1.9 cm; 60% of metastases were <2 cm in size. The median total dose was 30 Gy in 5 fractions; 36% of the cohort received <30 Gy. The median time to LF and 12-month cumulative incidence of LF was 8.5 months and 23.8%, respectively. Median time to death and 12-month overall survival rates were 11.8 months and 48.2%, respectively. Fifty-two metastases (15.6%) had an adverse radiation effect, of which 32 (9.5%) were symptomatic necrosis. Multivariable analysis identified worse LF in patients who received a total dose of <30 Gy (hazard ratio, 1.62; P = .03), with LF at 6 and 12 months of 13% and 33% for patients treated with <30 Gy versus 5% and 19% for patients treated with >30 Gy. Exploratory analysis demonstrated a dose-response effect observed in all histologic types, including among breast cancer subtypes.

CONCLUSION

Optimal local control is achieved with HSRT of ≥30 Gy in 5 daily fractions, independent of tumor volume and histology, with an acceptable risk of radiation necrosis.

Radiation Necrosis from Stereotactic Radiosurgery-How Do We Mitigate?

OPINION STATEMENT

Intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is an effective and convenient treatment for many brain conditions. Data regarding safety come mostly from retrospective single institutional studies and a small number of prospective studies. Variations in target delineation, treatment delivery, imaging follow-up protocols and dose prescription limit the interpretation of this data. There has been much clinical focus on radiation necrosis (RN) in particular, as it is being increasingly recognized on follow-up imaging. Symptomatic RN may be treated with medical therapy (such as corticosteroids and bevacizumab) with surgical resection being reserved for refractory patients. Nevertheless, RN remains a challenging condition to manage, and therefore upfront patient selection for SRS remains critical to provide complication-free control. Mitigation strategies need to be considered in situations where the baseline risk of RN is expected to be high-such as large target volume or re-irradiation. These may involve reduction in the prescribed dose or hypofractionated stereotactic radiation therapy (HSRT). Recently published guidelines and international meta-analysis report the benefit of HSRT in larger lesions, without compromising control rates. However, careful attention to planning parameters and SRS techniques still need to be adhered, even with HSRT. In cases where the risk is deemed to be high despite mitigation, a combination approach of surgery with or without post-operative radiation should be considered.

Efficient optimization of R50% when planning multiple cranial metastases simultaneously in single isocenter SRS/SRT

Simultaneous optimization of multiple Planning Target Volumes (PTVs) of varying size and location in the cranium is a non-trivial task. The rate of dose falloff around PTV structures is variable and depends on PTV characteristics such as the volume. The metric R50% is one parameter that can be used to quantify dose falloff achieved in a given treatment plan. An important treatment planning question is how to construct optimization conditions that result in the efficient production of acceptable plan outcomes considering metrics such as R50%. Guidance provided in literature suggests generating multiple shell control structures around each PTV. The constraints applied to these shells can vary significantly depending on PTV volume. Additionally, there is no clear guidance on how to prospectively determine objective constraints for the optimization shells to achieve a specified goal of R50%. Based on physical principles and empirical evidence, we provide clear quantitative guidance on how to translate the desired R50% outcome into appropriately sized optimization structures around PTVs via an equation that depends on a desired goal for R50% and the volume of PTV. Optimization schema are also provided that allow the goal R50% to be approached or achieved for all PTVs individually. We demonstrate the application of the methodology using commercially available treatment planning software and radiotherapy treatment equipment.

Effective method to reduce the normal brain dose in single-isocenter hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy for multiple brain metastases

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Island blocking and dose leakage problems will lead to unnecessary irradiation to normal brain tissue (NBT) in hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HSRT) for multiple brain metastases (BM) with single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). The present study aimed at investigating whether reducing the number of metastases irradiated by each arc beam could minimize these two problems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 32 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with multiple BM received HSRT (24-36 Gy/3 fractions) with single-isocenter VMAT, where each arc beam only irradiated partial metastases (pm-VMAT), were enrolled in this retrospective study. Conventional single-isocenter VMAT plans, where each arc beam irradiated whole metastases (wm-VMAT), was regenerated and compared with pm-VMAT plans. Furthermore, the clinical efficacy and toxicities were evaluated.

RESULTS

Pm-VMAT achieved similar target coverage as that with wm-VMAT, with better dose fall-off (P < 0.001) and NBT sparing (P < 0.001). However, pm-VMAT resulted in more monitor units (MU) and longer beam-on time (P < 0.001). The intracranial objective response rate and disease control rate for all patients were 75% and 100%, respectively. The local control rates at 1 year and 2 year were 96.2% and 60.2%, respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 10.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8-13.2) and 18.5 months (95% CI 15.9-20.1), respectively. All treatment-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2, and 3 lesions (2.31%) from 2 patients (6.25%) demonstrated radiation necrosis after HSRT.

CONCLUSION

HSRT with pm-VMAT is effective and has limited toxicities for NSCLC patients with multiple BM. Pm-VMAT could provide better NBT sparing while maintaining target dose coverage.

Dosimetric study between a single isocenter dynamic conformal arc therapy technique and Gamma Knife radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases treatment: impact of target volume geometrical characteristics

Purpose

To compare linac-based mono-isocentric radiosurgery with Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Mets (MBM) SRS and the Gamma Knife using a specific statistical method and to analyze the dosimetric impact of the target volume geometric characteristics. A dose fall-off analysis allowed to evaluate the Gradient Index relevancy for the dose spillage characterization.

Material and methods

Treatments were planned on twenty patients with three to nine brain metastases with MBM 2.0 and GammaPlan 11.0. Ninety-five metastases ranging from 0.02 to 9.61 cc were included. Paddick Index (PI), Gradient Index (GI), dose fall-off, volume of healthy brain receiving more than 12 Gy (V_12Gy) and DVH were used for the plan comparison according to target volume, major axis diameter and Sphericity Index (SI). The multivariate regression approach allowed to analyze the impact of each geometric characteristic keeping all the others unchanged. A parallel study was led to evaluate the impact of the isodose line (IDL) prescription on the MBM plan quality.

Results

For mono-isocentric linac-based radiosurgery, the IDL around 70–75% was the best compromise found. For both techniques, the GI and the dose fall-off decreased with the target volume. In comparison, PI was slightly improved with MBM for targets < 1 cc or SI > 0.78. GI was improved with GP for targets < 2.5 cc. The V_12Gy was higher with MBM for lesions > 0.4 cc or SI < 0.84 and exceeded 10 cc for targets > 5 cc against 6.5 cc with GP. The presence of OAR close to the PTV had no impact on the dose fall off values. The dose fall-off was higher for volumes < 3.8 cc with GP which had the sharpest dose fall-off in the infero-superior direction up to 30%/mm. The mean beam-on time was 94 min with GP against 13 min with MBM.

Conclusions

The dose fall-off and the V_12Gy were more relevant indicators than the GI for the low dose spillage assessment. Both evaluated techniques have comparable plan qualities with a slightly improved selectivity with MBM for smaller lesions but with a healthy tissues sparing slightly favorable to GP at the expense of a considerably longer irradiation time. However, a higher healthy tissue exposure must be considered for large volumes in MBM plans.

The surface area effect: How the intermediate dose spill depends on the PTV surface area in SRS

Purpose

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is rapidly becoming the standard of care for many intracranial targets. The characteristics of the planning target volume (PTV) can affect the intermediate dose spill and thus normal brain volume dose which is correlated with brain toxicity. R50% (volume receiving 50% of prescription dose divided by PTV volume) is a useful metric to quantify the intermediate dose spill. We propose a novel understanding of how the PTV surface area (SA_PTV) affects the intermediate dose spill of SRS treatments.

Methods

Using a phantom model provided by a computed tomography (CT) of the IROC Head Phantom® and Eclipse® Treatment Planning System, we investigate the relationship of R50% and SA_PTV in single‐target SRS treatments. The planning studies are conducted for SRS treatments on a Varian TrueBeam® linear accelerator with high‐definition MLC and a 6 MVFFF beam mode. These data are analyzed to ascertain trends in R50% related to SA_PTV. Since SA_PTV is not available as a structure property in the Eclipse RTPS, we introduce an Eclipse script to extract PTV surface area of arbitrary‐shaped PTVs. We compare a physically reasonable theoretical prediction of R50%, R50%_Analytic, to the R50% achieved in treatment planning studies.

Results

The SRS phantom study indicates good correlation between the plan R50% and SA_PTV. A near‐linear relationship of plan R50% vs SA_PTV is observed as predicted by the R50%_Analytic model. Agreement between plan R50% values and R50%_Analytic predictions is good for all but the very smallest PTV volumes.

Conclusions

We demonstrate dependence of the intermediate dose spill measured by R50% on the SA_PTV. We call that dependence the surface area effect. This dependence is explicit in the R50%_Analytic prediction model. The predicted value of R50%_Analytic for a given PTV could be used for guidance during SRS treatment plan optimization, and plan evaluation for that PTV.

Is there a volume threshold of brain metastases for Linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy?

PURPOSE

To investigate whether there is a volume threshold in target volume of brain metastases below which a small cone size and sharp penumbra in Gamma Knife (GK) may provide improved plan quality when compared to Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).

METHODS

For patients treated on GK SRS for brain metastases in 2018-2019 in our institution, 121 patients with two and three targets were identified. Twenty-six patients with two or three brain metastases (total of 76 lesions) were selected for this study. Two VMAT plans, SmartArc (Pinnacle) and HyperArc (Eclipse), were generated retrospectively for each patient. Plan quality was evaluated based on RTOG conformity index (CI), Paddick gradient index (GI), normal tissue (NT) V12Gy and V4.5Gy. By using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for both VMAT plans (SmartArc and HyperArc) and metrics of RTOG CI and NT V12Gy, we compared GK plans to SmartArc and HyperArc plans separately to determine the threshold volume.

RESULTS

For SmartArc plans, both ROC curve analyses showed a threshold volume of 0.4 cc for both CI and NT V12Gy. For HyperArc plans, the threshold volumes were 0.2 cc for the CI and 0.5 cc for NT V12Gy. GK plans produced improved dose distribution compared to VMAT for targets ≤0.4 cc, but HyperArc was found to have competing results with GK in terms of CI and NT V12Gy. For targets > 0.4 cc, both SmartArc and HyperArc showed better plan quality when compared to the GK plans.

CONCLUSIONS

Target volumes ≤0.4 cc may require a small cone size and sharp penumbra in GK while for target volumes >0.4 cc, VMAT-based SRS can provide improved overall plan quality and faster treatment delivery.

Radiosurgery and stereotactic irradiation of multiple and contiguous brain metastases: A practical proposal of dose prescription methods and a literature review

PURPOSE

In literature, there are no guidelines on how to prescribe dose in the case of radiosurgery (SRS) or stereotactic irradiation of multiple and adjacent BM. Aim of this work is to furnish practical proposals of dosimetric methods for multiple neighboring BM, and to make a literature review about the SRS treatment of multiple BM, comparing radiotherapy techniques on the basis of different dosimetric parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A theoretical proposal of dosimetric approaches to prescribe dose in case of multiple contiguous BM is done. A literature review between 2010 and 2020 was performed on MEDLINE and Cochrane databases according to the PRISMA methodology, with the following keywords dose prescription, radiosurgery, multiple BM. Papers not reporting dosimetric solutions to irradiate multiple BM were excluded.

RESULTS

Only one article in the literature reports a practical modality of dose prescription for multiple adjacent BM. Thus, we proposed other five practical solutions to prescribe radiation dose in case of two or more neighboring BM, describing advantages and drawbacks of each method in terms of different dosimetric parameters. The literature review about dosimetric solutions to irradiate multiple BM led to 56 titles; 14 articles met the chosen criteria and we reported their results in terms of dosimetric indexes and low doses to the normal brain tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

The six dosimetric approaches here described can be used by physicians for multiple contiguous BM, depending on the clinical situation. These methods may be applied in clinical studies to better evaluate their usefulness in practice.

Implementation and validation of an in-house geometry optimization software for SRS VMAT planning of multiple cranial metastases

Purpose

The implementation and evaluation of an in‐house developed geometry optimization (GO) software are described. The GO script provides optimal lesion clustering, isocenter placement, and collimator angle of each arc for cranial multi‐lesion stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning.

Materials and methods

An Eclipse‐plugin program was developed to facilitate automatic plan geometry generation for multiple metastases SRS VMAT plans. A mixed, semi‐supervised exhaustive and k‐means clustering method is used to group lesions and place isocenters. The sum of squared euclidean distance (SSED) and the boundaries of lesions’ projection from beams’ eye view are used as supervised parameters to determine the optimal isocenter numbers. The collimator angle is optimized by minimizing the sum of the MLC opening area from all gantry angles for each arc. In all, 10 clinical cases treated during 2016–2017 were compared to plan quality of GO script generated plans. Paddick gradient index (GI), conformity index (CI), and local brain volume receiving 12 Gy (local V12 Gy) around each lesion were compared.

Result

For four cases, the number of isocenters was reduced in the GO plans. For four other cases, the GO plans had the same number of isocenters as their corresponding clinical plans but with different lesion grouping. The GO plans had significantly lower GI (4.1 ± 1.0 vs 4.4 ± 0.9, P < 0.0001) and local V12 Gy (5.1 ± 4.2 vs 5.5 ± 4.3 in cm³, P < 0.0001), but not significantly different mean normal brain dose or CI. The volume of normal brain receiving ≥6 Gy was significantly lower in the GO plans. The total time to run the GO script for each case was <2 min.

Conclusion

The GO software automates lesion grouping, isocenter placement, and the collimator angles for SRS VMAT planning. When tested on 10 cases, the GO script resulted in improved plan quality and shorter planning time when compared to the clinical SRS VMAT plans.

Retrospective quality metrics review of stereotactic radiosurgery plans treating multiple targets using single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

To characterize key plan quality metrics in multi-target stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans treated using single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in comparison to dynamic conformal arc (DCA) plans treating single target. To investigate the feasibility of quality improvement in VMAT planning based on previous planning knowledge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

97 VMAT plans of multi-target and 156 DCA plans of single-target treated in 2017 at a single institution were reviewed. A total of 605 targets were treated with these SRS plans. The prescription dose was normalized to 20 Gy in all plans for this analysis. Two plan quality metrics, target conformity index (CI) and normal tissue volume receiving more than 12 Gy (V12Gy), were calculated for each target. The distribution of V12Gy per target was plotted as a function of the target volume. For multi-target VMAT plans, the number of targets being treated in the same plan and the distance between targets were calculated to evaluate their impact on V12Gy. VMAT plans that had a large deviation of V12Gy from the average level were re-optimized to determine the possibility of reducing the variation of V12Gy in VMAT planning.

RESULTS

Conformity index of multi-target VMAT plans were lower than that of DCA plans while the mean values of 12 Gy were comparable. The V12Gy for a target in VMAT plan did not show apparent dependence on the total number of targets or the distance between targets. The distribution of V12Gy exhibited a larger variation in VMAT plans compared to DCA plans. Re-optimization of outlier plans reduced V12 Gy by 33.9% and resulted in the V12Gy distribution in VMAT plans more closely resembling that of DCA plans.

CONCLUSION

The benchmark data on key plan quality metrics were established for single-isocenter multi-target SRS planning. It is feasible to use this knowledge to guide VMAT planning and reduce high V12Gy outliers.

High Quality Clinical Stereotactic Radiosurgery Planning and Delivery With Standard Resolution (5 mm) Multileaf Collimation and Multiple Isocenters

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to demonstrate the use of novel planning techniques in producing high-quality stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans using a standard 5 mm multileaf collimator (MLC) and multiple isocenters delivered clinically at a local institution.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Novel planning techniques consisted of offset isocenter, variable asymmetrical jaws, and Digital Imagine and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) edits to reduce leaf tip transmission, all with the aim of maximizing dose conformity. A local institution clinical cohort was planned (1-4 targets), and plan conformity metrics common to SRS were compared against conformity metrics from selected previous publications comparing Gamma Knife to linear accelerator SRS using high-definition MLC (2.5 mm). Additionally, local institution plan conformity metrics for 2 benchmark SRS planning cases (3 and 7 targets) were compared with metrics from other centers treating SRS clinically in England. Pretreatment quality assurance results, both point dose measurement and film analysis, are presented to demonstrate plan deliverability.

RESULTS

Clinical conformity metrics are shown to be comparable to previously published results using either Gamma Knife or linear accelerator with high-definition MLC. Metrics from benchmark planning cases are shown to be comparable and to have better prescription dose conformity than average nationally in England. Pretreatment quality assurance results demonstrate suitable plan deliverability.

CONCLUSIONS

SRS planning using standard 5 mm MLC and multiple isocenters produces high-quality treatment plans for a limited number of targets with a high degree of dose conformity and dose fall off when employing novel planning techniques to compensate for MLC leaf size and multiple isocenters.

Noncoplanar VMAT for Brain Metastases: A Plan Quality and Delivery Efficiency Comparison With Coplanar VMAT, IMRT, and CyberKnife

Purpose:

To compare plan quality and delivery efficiency of noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy with coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and CyberKnife for multiple brain metastases.

Methods:

For 15 patients with multiple brain metastases, noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy, coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and CyberKnife plans with a prescription dose of 30 Gy in 3 fractions were generated. Noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy plans consisted of 4 noncoplanar arcs and 2 full coplanar arcs, respectively. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans consisted of 7 coplanar fields. CyberKnife plans used skull tracking to ensure accurate position. All plans were generated to cover 95% target volume with prescription dose. Gradient index, conformity index, normal brain tissue volume (V_3Gy − V_24Gy), monitor units, and beam on time were evaluated.

Results:

Gradient index was the lowest for CyberKnife (3.49 ± 0.65), followed by noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (4.21 ± 1.38), coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (4.87 ± 1.35), and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (5.36 ± 1.98). Conformity index was the largest for noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (0.87 ± 0.03), followed by coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (0.86 ± 0.04), CyberKnife (0.86 ± 0.07), and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (0.85 ± 0.05). Normal brain tissue volume at high-to-moderate dose spreads (V_24Gy − V_9Gy) was significantly reduced in noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy over that of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy. Normal brain tissue volume for noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy was comparable with noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy at high-dose level (V_24Gy − V_15Gy) and larger than CyberKnife at moderate-to-low dose level (V_12Gy − V_3Gy). Monitor units was highest for CyberKnife (28 733.59 ± 7197.85), followed by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (4128.40 ± 1185.38), noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (3105.20 ± 371.23), and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (2997.27 ± 446.84). Beam on time was longest for CyberKnife (30.25 ± 7.32 minutes), followed by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (2.95 ± 0.85 minutes), noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (2.61 ± 0.07 minutes), and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (2.30 ± 0.23 minutes).

Conclusion:

For brain metastases far away from organs-at-risk, noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy generated more rapid dose falloff and higher conformity compared to intensity-modulated radiation therapy and coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy. Noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy provided a comparable dose falloff with CyberKnife at high-dose level and a slower dose falloff than CyberKnife at moderate-to-low dose level. Noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy plans had less monitor units and shorter beam on time than CyberKnife plans.

Dosimetric impact of rotational errors on the quality of VMAT-SRS for multiple brain metastases: Comparison between single- and two-isocenter treatment planning techniques

Purpose

In the absence of a 6D couch and/or assuming considerable intrafractional patient motion, rotational errors could affect target coverage and OAR‐sparing especially in multiple metastases VMAT‐SRS cranial cases, which often involve the concurrent irradiation of off‐axis targets. This work aims to study the dosimetric impact of rotational errors in such applications, under a comparative perspective between the single‐ and two‐isocenter treatment techniques.

Methods

Ten patients (36 metastases) were included in this study. Challenging cases were only considered, with several targets lying in close proximity to OARs. Two multiarc VMAT plans per patient were prepared, involving one and two isocenters, serving as the reference plans. Different degrees of angular offsets at various orientations were introduced, simulating rotational errors. Resulting dose distributions were evaluated and compared using commonly employed dose‐volume and plan quality indices.

Results

For single‐isocenter plans and 1^⁰ rotations, plan quality indices, such as coverage, conformity index and D_95%, deteriorated significantly (>5%) for distant targets from the isocenter (at> 4–6 cm). Contrarily, for two‐isocenter plans, target distances to nearest isocenter were always shorter (≤4 cm), and, consequently, 1^⁰ errors were well‐tolerated. In the most extreme case considered (2^⁰ around all axes) conformity index deteriorated by on‐average 7.2%/cm of distance to isocenter, if one isocenter is used, and 2.6%/cm, for plans involving two isocenters. The effect is, however, strongly associated with target volume. Regarding OARs, for single‐isocenter plans, significant increase (up to 63%) in D_max and D_0.02cc values was observed for any angle of rotation. Plans that could be considered clinically unacceptable were obtained even for the smallest angle considered, although rarer for the two‐isocenter planning approach.

Conclusion

Limiting the lesion‐to‐isocenter distance to ≤4 cm by introducing additional isocenter(s) appears to partly mitigate severe target underdosage, especially for smaller target sizes. If OAR‐sparing is also a concern, more stringent rotational error tolerances apply.

Interinstitutional Plan Quality Assessment of 2 Linac-Based, Single-Isocenter, Multiple Metastasis Radiosurgery Techniques

Purpose

Interest and application of stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases continue to increase. Various planning systems are available for linear accelerator (linac)–based single-isocenter multiple metastasis radiosurgery. Two of the most advanced systems are BrainLAB Multiple Metastases Elements (MME), a dynamic conformal arc (DCA) approach, and Varian RapidArc (RA), a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) approach. In this work, we systematically compared plan quality between the 2 techniques.

Methods and Materials

Thirty patients with 4 to 10 metastases (217 total; median 7.5; V_min = 0.014 cm³; V_max = 17.73 cm³) were planned with both Varian RA and MME at 2 different institutions with extensive experience in each respective technique. All plans had a single isocenter and used Varian linac equipped with high-definition multileaf collimator. RA plans used 2 to 4 noncoplanar VMAT arcs with 10 MV flattening filter-free beam. MME plans used 4 to 9 noncoplanar DCAs and 6 MV flattening filter-free beam, (minimum planning target volume [PTV_min] = 0.49 cm³; PTV_max = 27.32 cm³; PTV_median = 7.05 cm³). Prescriptions were 14 to 24 Gy in a single fraction. Target coverage goal was 99% of volume receiving prescription dose (D99% ≥ 100%). Plans were evaluated by Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/Paddick conformity index (CI) score, 12 Gy volume (V_12Gy), V_8Gy, V_5Gy, mean brain dose (D_mean), and beam-on time.

Results

Conformity was favorable among RA plans (median: MME CI^RTOG = 1.38; RA CI^RTOG = 1.21; P < .0001). V_12Gy and V_8Gy were lower for RA plans (median: MME V12 = 23.7 cm³; RA V12 = 19.2 cm³; P = .0001; median: MME V_8Gy = 53.6 cm³; RA V_8Gy = 44.1 cm³; P = .024). V_5Gy was lower for MME plans (median: MME V_5Gy = 141.4 cm³; RA V_5Gy = 142.8 cm³; P = .009). Mean brain was lower for MME plans (median: MME D_mean = 2.57 Gy; RA D_mean = 2.76 Gy; P < .0001).

Conclusions

For linac-based multiple metastasis stereotactic radiosurgery, RapidArc VMAT facilitates favorable conformity and V_12Gy/V_8Gy volume compared with the MME DCA plan. MME planning facilitates reduced dose spill at levels ≤V_5Gy.

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

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

Dosimetric effect of rotational setup errors in stereotactic radiosurgery with HyperArc for single and multiple brain metastases

Purpose

In stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with single‐isocentric treatments for brain metastases, rotational setup errors may cause considerable dosimetric effects. We assessed the dosimetric effects on HyperArc plans for single and multiple metastases.

Methods

For 29 patients (1–8 brain metastases), HyperArc plans with a prescription dose of 20–24 Gy for a dose that covers 95% (D_95%) of the planning target volume (PTV) were retrospectively generated (Ref‐plan). Subsequently, the computed tomography (CT) used for the Ref‐plan and cone‐beam CT acquired during treatments (Rot‐CT) were registered. The HyperArc plans involving rotational setup errors (Rot‐plan) were generated by re‐calculating doses based on the Rot‐CT. The dosimetric parameters between the two plans were compared.

Results

The dosimetric parameters [D_99%, D_95%, D_1%, homogeneity index, and conformity index (CI)] for the single‐metastasis cases were comparable (P > 0.05), whereas the D_95% for each PTV of the Rot‐plan decreased 10.8% on average, and the CI of the Rot‐plan was also significantly lower than that of the Ref‐plan (Ref‐plan vs Rot‐plan, 0.93 ± 0.02 vs 0.75 ± 0.14, P < 0.01) for the multiple‐metastases cases. In addition, for the multiple‐metastases cases, the Rot‐plan resulted in significantly higher V_10Gy (P = 0.01), V_12Gy (P = 0.02), V_14Gy (P = 0.02), and V_16Gy (P < 0.01) than those in the Ref‐plan.

Conclusion

The rotational setup errors for multiple brain metastases cases caused non‐negligible underdosage for PTV and significant increases of V_10Gy to V_16Gy in SRS with HyperArc.

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

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

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

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

Effect of collimator angle on HyperArc stereotactic radiosurgery planning for single and multiple brain metastases

We assessed the effect of collimator angle on the dosimetric parameters for targets and organs at risk (OARs) for collimator-optimized HA (CO-HA) and non-CO-HA (nCO-HA) plans. The nCO-HA and CO-HA plans were retrospectively generated for 26 patients (1 to 8 brain metastases). The dosimetric parameters for planning target volume (homogeneity index [HI]; conformity index [CI]; gradient index [GI]) and for OARs were compared. The modulation complexity score for volumetric modulated arc therapy (MCSV) and monitor units (MUs) were calculated. Doses were measured using the electronic portal imaging device and compared with the expected doses. Dosimetric parameters of the HI, CI, and GI for single (n = 12) and multiple (n = 14) metastases cases were comparable (p > 0.05). For multiple metastases cases, the CO-HA plan provided lower V_4Gy, V_12Gy, V_14Gy, V_16Gy for brain tissue compared to the nCO-HA plan (p < 0.05). Doses for OARs (D_0.1cc) (brainstem, chiasm, Hippocampus, lens, optic nerves, and retinas) were comparable (p > 0.05). For multiple metastases cases, the CO-HA plan resulted in less complex multileaf collimator (MLC) patterns (MCSV = 0.19 ± 0.04, p < 0.01), lower MUs (8596 ± 1390 MUs, p < 0.01), and shorter beam-on time (6.2 ± 1.0 min, p < 0.01) compared to the nCO-HA plan (0.16 ± 0.04, 9365 ± 1630, and 6.7 ± 1.2 for MCSV, MUs, and beam-on time, respectively). For both treatment approach, the equivalent gamma passing rate was obtained with the 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria (p > 0.05). The collimator optimization in the HA planning reduced doses to brain tissues and improved the treatment efficacy.

Frame-based radiosurgery of multiple metastases using single-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy technique

Single‐isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique can provide stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) treatment with improved delivery efficiency for treating multiple metastases. Nevertheless, planning is time consuming and verification of frame‐based SRS setup, especially at noncoplanar angles, can be challenging. We report on a single‐isocenter VMAT technique with a special focus on improving treatment workflow and delivery verification to exploit the minimized patient motion of the frame‐based SRS. We developed protocols for preplanning and verification for VMAT and evaluated them for ten patient cases. Preplans based on MRI were used to generate comparable treatment plans using CT taken on the day of treatment after frame placement. Target positioning accuracy was evaluated by stereoscopic in‐room kV imaging. Dosimetric accuracy of the noncoplanar plan delivery was validated using measurement‐guided 3D dose reconstruction as well as film‐based end‐to‐end test with a Rando phantom. Average absolute differences of homogeneity indices, conformity indices, and V12Gy between MR preplans and CT‐based plans were within 5%. In‐room imaging positioning accuracy of 0.4 mm was verified to be independent of the distance to the isocenter. For treatment verification, average local and global passing rates of the 3D gamma (1 mm, 3%) were 86% and 99%, respectively. D99 values were matched within 5% for individual target structures (>0.5 cc). Additional film analysis confirmed dosimetric accuracy for small targets that had large verification errors in the 3D dose reconstruction. Our results suggest that the advantages of frame‐based SRS and noncoplanar single‐isocenter VMAT technique can be combined for efficient and accurate treatment of patients with multiple metastases.

Multi-Institutional Dosimetric Evaluation of Modern Day Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) Treatment Options for Multiple Brain Metastases

Purpose/Objectives: There are several popular treatment options currently available for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of multiple brain metastases: ⁶⁰Co sources and cone collimators around a spherical geometry (GammaKnife), multi-aperture dynamic conformal arcs on a linac (BrainLab Elements™ v1.5), and volumetric arc therapy on a linac (VMAT) calculated with either the conventional optimizer or with the Varian HyperArc™ solution. This study aimed to dosimetrically compare and evaluate the differences among these treatment options in terms of dose conformity to the tumor as well as dose sparing to the surrounding normal tissues. Methods and Materials: Sixteen patients and a total of 112 metastases were analyzed. Five plans were generated per patient: GammaKnife, Elements, HyperArc-VMAT, and two Manual-VMAT plans to evaluate different treatment planning styles. Manual-VMAT plans were generated by different institutions according to their own clinical planning standards. The following dosimetric parameters were extracted: RTOG and Paddick conformity indices, gradient index, total volume of brain receiving 12Gy, 6Gy, and 3Gy, and maximum doses to surrounding organs. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was applied to evaluate statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). Results: For targets ≤ 1 cm, GammaKnife, HyperArc-VMAT and both Manual-VMAT plans achieved comparable conformity indices, all superior to Elements. However, GammaKnife resulted in the lowest gradient indices at these target sizes. HyperArc-VMAT performed similarly to GammaKnife for V_12Gy parameters. For targets ≥ 1 cm, HyperArc-VMAT and Manual-VMAT plans resulted in superior conformity vs. GammaKnife and Elements. All SRS plans achieved clinically acceptable organs-at-risk dose constraints. Beam-on times were significantly longer for GammaKnife. Manual-VMAT_A and Elements resulted in shorter delivery times relative to Manual-VMAT_B and HyperArc-VMAT. Conclusion: The study revealed that Manual-VMAT and HyperArc-VMAT are capable of achieving similar low dose brain spillage and conformity as GammaKnife, while significantly minimizing beam-on time. For targets smaller than 1 cm in diameter, GammaKnife still resulted in superior gradient indices. The quality of the two sets of Manual-VMAT plans varied greatly based on planner and optimization constraint settings, whereas HyperArc-VMAT performed dosimetrically superior to the two Manual-VMAT plans.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Multiple Brain Metastases From Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Brain metastases (BM) pose a significant problem in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC). Local and systemic therapies including stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are rapidly evolving, necessitating reassessments of outcomes for modern patient management.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The mRCC patients with BM treated with SRS were reviewed. Patient demographics, clinical history, and SRS treatment parameters were identified.

RESULTS

Among 268 patients with mRCC treated between 2006 and 2015, 38 patients were identified with BM. A total of 243 BM were treated with SRS with 1 to 26 BMs treated per SRS session (median, 2 BMs). The median (range) BM size was 0.6 (0.2-3.1) cm and median (range) SRS treatment dose was 18 (12-24) Gy. Treated BM local control rates at 1 and 2 years were 91.8% (95% confidence interval, 85.7-95.4) and 86.1% (95% confidence interval, 77.1-91.7), respectively. BM control declined for larger tumors. Survival after 1-year was 57.5% (95% CI 40.2-71.4) for all patients. Survival was not statistically different between patients with < 5 BM versus ≥ 5 BM. Survival was prognostic based on International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database (IMDC) risk groups in patients with < 5 BM. Two patients experienced grade 3 radiation necrosis requiring surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

SRS is effective in controlling BM in patients with mRCC. Over half of treated patients survive past a year, and no differences in survival were noted in patients with > 5 metastases. Prognostic risk categories based on systemic disease (IMDC) are predictive of survival in this BM population, with limited rates of symptomatic radiation necrosis.

Dosimetric comparison between dual-isocentric dynamic conformal arc therapy and mono-isocentric volumetric-modulated arc therapy for two large brain metastases

Mono-isocentric volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) can be used to treat multiple brain metastases. It remains unknown whether mono-isocentric VMAT can improve the dose distribution compared with dual-isocentric dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT), especially for two brain metastases. We compared the dose distribution between dual-isocentric DCAT and mono-isocentric VMAT for two large brain metastases, and analyzed the relationship between the distance between the two targets and the difference in dose distribution. A total of 19 patients, each with two large brain metastases, were enrolled. The dose prescribed for each planning target volume (PTV) was 28 Gy in five fractions (D99.8 = 100%). We created new indices derived from conformity indices suggested by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG; mRTOG-CI) and Paddick et al. (mIP-CI), using the dosimetric parameters of the sum of the two PTVs. The median PTV was 5.05 cm3 (range, 2.10-28.47). VMAT significantly improved mRTOG-CI and mIP-CI compared with DCAT. In all cases, VMAT was able to improve mRTOG-CI and mIP-CI compared with DCAT. Whereas the normal brain volume receiving 5 Gy was similar between the two modalities, the normal brain receiving 10, 12, 15, 20, 25 and 28 Gy (V10-V28) was significantly smaller in VMAT. The mean beam-on times were 213.3 s and 121.9 s in DCAT and VMAT, respectively (P < 0.001). Mono-isocentric VMAT improved the target conformity and reduced the beam-on time and V10-V28 of the normal brain for not only two close metastases but also two distant metastases. Mono-isocentric VMAT seems to be a promising treatment technique for two large brain metastases.

GammaKnife versus VMAT radiosurgery plan quality for many brain metastases

The purpose of this work was to compare dose distributions between two radiosurgery modalities, single‐isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and GammaKnife Perfexion (GK), in the treatment of a large number (≥7) of brain metastases. Twelve patients with 103 brain metastases were analyzed. The median number of targets per patient was 8 (range: 7–14). GK plans were compared to noncoplanar VMAT plans using both 6‐MV flattening filter‐free (FFF) and 10‐MV FFF modes. Parameters analyzed included radiation therapy oncology group conformity index (CI), 12, 6, and 3 Gy isodose volumes (V12 Gy, V6 Gy, V3 Gy), mean and maximum hippocampal dose, and maximum skin dose. There were statistically significant differences in CI (2.5 ± 1.6 vs 1.6 ± 0.8 and 1.7 ± 0.9, P < 0.001, P < 0.001), V12 Gy (2.8 ± 6.1 cc vs 3.0 ± 5.2 cc and 3.1 ± 5.4 cc, P = 0.003, P < 0.001), and V3 Gy (323.0 ± 294.8 cc vs, 880.1 ± 369.1 cc and 937.9 ±  vs 361.9 cc, P = 0.005, P = 0.001) between GK versus both 6‐MV FFF and 10‐MV FFF. No significant differences existed for maximum hippocampal or skin doses. In conclusion, highly optimized VMAT produced improved conformity at the expense of a higher V12 Gy and V3 Gy volume when compared with highly optimized GK.

The Expanding Role of Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become increasingly important in the management of brain metastases due to improving systemic disease control and rising incidence. Initial trials demonstrated SRS with whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) improved local control rates compared with WBRT alone. Concerns with WBRT associated neurocognitive toxicity have contributed to a greater use of SRS alone, including for patients with multiple metastases and following surgical resection. Molecular information, targeted agents, and immunotherapy have also altered the landscape for the management of brain metastases. This review summarises current and emerging data on the role of SRS in the management of brain metastases.

In silico assessment of the dosimetric quality of a novel, automated radiation treatment planning strategy for linac-based radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases and a comparison with robotic methods

Background

To appraise the dosimetric features and the quality of the treatment plan for radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases optimized with a novel automated engine and to compare with plans optimized for robotic-based delivery.

Methods

A set of 15 patients with multiple brain metastases was selected for this in silico study. The technique under investigation is the recently introduced HyperArc. For all patients, three treatment plans were computed and compared: i: a HyperArc; ii: a standard VMAT; iii) a CyberKnife. Dosimetric features were computed for the clinical target volumes as well as for the healthy brain tissue and the organs at risk.

Results

The data showed that the best dose homogeneity was achieved with the VMAT technique. HyperArc allowed to minimize the volume of brain receiving 4Gy (as well as for the mean dose and the volume receiving 12Gy, although not statistically significant). The smallest dose on 1 cm³ volume for all organs at risk is for CK techniques, and the biggest for VMAT (p < 0.05). The Radiation Planning Index coefficient indicates that, there are no significant differences among the techniques investigated, suggesting an equivalence among these.

Conclusion

At treatment planning level, the study demonstrates that the use of HyperArc technique can significantly improve the sparing of the healthy brain while maintaining a full coverage of the target volumes.

Linac-based VMAT radiosurgery for multiple brain lesions: comparison between a conventional multi-isocenter approach and a new dedicated mono-isocenter technique

Background

Linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRS/FSRT) of multiple brain lesions using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is typically performed by a multiple-isocenter approach, i.e. one isocenter per lesion, which is time-demanding for the need of independent setup verifications of each isocenter. Here, we present our initial experience with a new dedicated mono-isocenter technique with multiple non-coplanar arcs (HyperArc™, Varian Inc.) in terms of a plan comparison with a multiple-isocenter VMAT approach.

Methods

From August 2017 to October 2017, 20 patients with multiple brain metastases (mean 5, range 2–10) have been treated by HyperArc in 1–3 fractions. The prescribed doses (Dp) were 18–25 Gy in single-fraction, and 21–27 Gy in three-fractions. Planning Target Volume (PTV), defined by a 2 mm isotropic margin from each lesion, had mean dimension of 9.6 cm³ (range 0.5–27.9 cm³). Mono-isocenter HyperArc VMAT plans (HA) with 5 non-coplanar 180°-arcs (couch at 0°, ±45°, ±90°) were generated and compared to multiple-isocenter VMAT plans (RA) with 2 coplanar 360°-arcs per isocenter. A dose normalization of 100%Dp at 98%PTV was adopted, while D_2%(PTV) < 150%D_p was accepted. All plans had to respect the constraints on maximum dose to the brainstem (D_0.5cm3 < 18 Gy) as well as to the optical nerves/chiasm, eyes and lenses (D_0.5cm3 < 15 Gy). HA and RA plans were compared in terms of dose-volume metrics, by Paddick conformity (CI) and gradient (GI) index and by V₁₂ and mean dose to the brain-minus-PTV, and in terms of MU and overall treatment time (OTT) per fraction. OTT was measured for HA treatments, whereas for RA plans OTT was estimated by assuming 3 min. For initial patient setup plus 5 min. For each CBCT-guided setup correction per isocenter.

Results

Significant variations in favour of HA plans were computed for both target dose indexes, CI (p < .01) and GI (p < .01). The lower GI in HA plans was the likely cause of the significant reduction in V₁₂ to the brain-minus-PTV (p = .023). Although at low doses, below 2–5 Gy, the sparing of the brain-minus-PTV was in favour of RA plans, no significant difference in terms of mean doses to the brain-minus-PTV was observed between the two groups (p = .31). Finally, both MU (p < .01) and OTT (p < .01) were significantly reduced by HyperArc plans.

Conclusions

For linac-based SRS/FSRT of multiple brain lesions, HyperArc plans assured a higher CI and a lower GI than standard multiple-isocenter VMAT plans. This is consistent with the computed reduction in V₁₂ to the brain-minus-PTV. Finally, HyperArc treatments were completed within a typical 20 min. time slot, with a significant time reduction with respect to the expected duration of multiple-isocenters VMAT.

Institutional experience with SRS VMAT planning for multiple cranial metastases

Background and Purpose

This study summarizes the cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) procedure at our institution.

Materials and Methods

Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans were generated for 40 patients with 188 lesions (range 2–8, median 5) in Eclipse and treated on a TrueBeam STx. Limitations of the custom beam model outside the central 2.5 mm leaves necessitated more than one isocenter pending the spatial distribution of lesions. Two to nine arcs were used per isocenter. Conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI) and target dose heterogeneity index (HI) were determined for each lesion. Dose to critical structures and treatment times are reported.

Results

Lesion size ranged 0.05–17.74 cm³ (median 0.77 cm³), and total tumor volume per case ranged 1.09–26.95 cm³ (median 7.11 cm³). For each lesion, HI ranged 1.2–1.5 (median 1.3), CI ranged 1.0–2.9 (median 1.2), and GI ranged 2.5–8.4 (median 4.4). By correlating GI to PTV volume a predicted GI = 4/PTV^0.2 was determined and implemented in a script in Eclipse and used for plan evaluation. Brain volume receiving 7 Gy (V_7 Gy) ranged 10–136 cm³ (median 42 cm³). Total treatment time ranged 24–138 min (median 61 min).

Conclusions

Volumetric modulated arc therapy provide plans with steep dose gradients around the targets and low dose to critical structures, and VMAT treatment is delivered in a shorter time than conventional methods using one isocenter per lesion. To further improve VMAT planning for multiple cranial metastases, better tools to shorten planning time are needed. The most significant improvement would come from better dose modeling in Eclipse, possibly by allowing for customizing the dynamic leaf gap (DLG) for a special SRS model and not limit to one DLG per energy per treatment machine and thereby remove the limitation on the Y‐jaw and allow planning with a single isocenter.

HyperArc VMAT planning for single and multiple brain metastases stereotactic radiosurgery: a new treatment planning approach

Purpose

The HyperArc VMAT (HA-VMAT) planning approach was newly developed to fulfill the demands of dose delivery for brain metastases stereotactic radiosurgery. We compared the dosimetric parameters of the HA-VMAT plan with those of the conventional VMAT (C-VMAT).

Material and methods

For 23 patients (1–4 brain metastases), C-VMAT and HA-VMAT plans with a prescription dose of 20–24 Gy were retrospectively generated, and dosimetric parameters for PTV (homogeneity index, HI; conformity index, CI; gradient index, GI) and brain tissue (V_2Gy-V_16Gy) were evaluated. Subsequently, the physical characteristics (modulation complexity score for VMAT, MCSV; Monitor unit, MU) of both treatment approaches were compared.

Results

HA-VMAT provided higher HI (1.41 ± 0.07 vs. 1.24 ± 0.07, p < 0.01), CI (0.93 ± 0.02 vs. 0.90 ± 0.05, p = 0.01) and lower GI (3.06 ± 0.42 vs. 3.91 ± 0.55, p < 0.01) values. Moderate-to-low dose spreads (V_4Gy-V_16Gy) were significantly reduced (p < 0.01) in the HA-VMAT plan over that of C-VMAT. HA-VMAT plans resulted in more complex MLC patterns (lower MCSV, p < 0.01) and higher MU (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

HA-VMAT plans provided significantly higher conformity and rapid dose falloff with respect to the C-VMAT plans.

Stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: Results of multicenter benchmark planning studies

PURPOSE

Stereotactic radiosurgery is indicated for treatment of multiple brain metastases. Various treatment platforms are available, but most comparisons are limited to single-center studies. As part of a national commissioning program, benchmark planning cases were completed by 21 clinical centers, providing a unique dataset of current practice across a large number of providers and equipment platforms.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Two brain metastases cases were provided, with images and structures predrawn, involving 3 and 7 lesions. Centers produced plans according to their local practice, which were reviewed centrally using metrics for target coverage, selectivity, gradient fall-off, and normal tissue sparing.

RESULTS

Fifty plans were submitted, using 24 treatment platforms. Eleven plans were revised following feedback, including 2 centers that acquired a new platform; 1 other center accepted a restriction of service. All centers prioritized coverage, with the prescription isodose covering ≥95% of 233 of 235 target volumes. Selectivity was much more variable, especially for smaller lesions, and when combined with poor gradient indices resulted in large volumes of normal tissue being irradiated. Tomotherapy submissions were outliers for either selectivity or gradient index, but other platforms could produce plans with relatively low gradient indices for larger lesion volumes. There was more variation among Varian and Elekta LINAC plans than for Gamma Knife and CyberKnife, and larger differences for smaller targets, both inter- and intratreatment platform. Doses to normal brain and brainstem were highest when margins were applied, but improvements were possible by replanning alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Multicenter benchmarking exercises have highlighted some variation in clinical practice and priorities, with a few outliers. Most platforms are able to achieve comparable plans, except for the smallest volumes and when larger planning margins are used. The data will be used to advance standardization and quality improvement of national services and can provide useful guidance for centers worldwide.

Dosimetric feasibility of the hybrid Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-linac System (MRL) for brain metastases: The impact of the magnetic field

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the suitability of treating patients with single brain metastases using stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with the MRL and to characterize the dosimetric impact at tissue-air interfaces resulting primarily from the electron return effect (ERE).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

24 patients treated for intact single brain metastases were analyzed. Three radiotherapy plans with the same prescribed dose were generated for each case: (1) noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), (2) coplanar step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) on the MRL in the absence (MRLB=0), and (3) in the presence of the transverse magnetic field (MRLB=1.5). The plans were evaluated using cumulative dose-volume histograms and by calculation of Paddick conformity index (CI), V100%, V12Gy minus gross tumor volume (V12Gy - GTV), and V2Gy. At tissue-air boundaries, the dosimetric impact of the magnetic field was quantified using a 5 mm rim of tissue.

RESULTS

All plans met the target coverage and organs-at-risk planning objectives. Differences between all investigated dosimetric parameters significantly favored the VMAT plans as compared to the MRLB=0 and MRLB=1.5 plans, except for V2Gy. The mean V12Gy - GTV and V2Gy marginally favored the MRLB=0 plans compared to the MRLB=1.5 plans (mean difference: 0.45 cm³, p = 0.0019 and 16.46 cm³, p < 0.0001, respectively). The presence of the magnetic field resulted in a statistically significant but small increase in mean dose and D_2cc in the skin (0.08 Gy, p < 0.0001 and 0.6 Gy, p < 0.0001, respectively) and around air cavities (0.07 Gy, p = 0.0092 and 0.3 Gy, p = 0.0004, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to generate stereotactic radiation plans that satisfy clinical requirements using the MRL in the setting of single brain metastases. The dosimetric impact of the magnetic field including the ERE at tissue-air boundaries is minor and does not negatively impact target conformity or dose gradient.

Can clinically relevant dose errors in patient anatomy be detected by gamma passing rate or modulation complexity score in volumetric-modulated arc therapy for intracranial tumors?

We investigated whether methods conventionally used to evaluate patient-specific QA in volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for intracranial tumors detect clinically relevant dosimetric errors. VMAT plans with coplanar arcs were designed for 37 intracranial tumors. Dosimetric accuracy was validated by using a 3D array detector. Dose deviations between the measured and planned doses were evaluated by gamma analysis. In addition, modulation complexity score for VMAT (MCSv) for each plan was calculated. Three-dimensional dose distributions in patient anatomy were reconstructed using 3DVH software, and clinical deviations in dosimetric parameters between the 3DVH doses and planned doses were calculated. The gamma passing rate (GPR)/MCSv and the clinical dose deviation were evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Significant correlation (P < 0.05) between the clinical dose deviation and GPR was observed with both the 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria in clinical target volume (D99), brain (D2), brainstem (D2) and chiasm (D2), albeit that the correlations were not 'strong' (0.38 < |r| < 0.54). The maximum dose deviations of brainstem were up to 4.9 Gy and 2.9 Gy for Dmax and D%, respectively in the case of high GPR (98.2% with 3%/3 mm criteria). Regarding MCSv, none of the evaluated organs showed a significant correlation with clinical dose deviation, and correlations were 'weak' or absent (0.01 < |r| < 0.21). The use of high GPR and MCSv values does not always detect dosimetric errors in a patient. Therefore, in-depth analysis with the DVH for patient-specific QA is considered to be preferable for guaranteeing safe dose delivery.

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

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