Comparing TomoHelical and TomoDirect in postmastectomy hypofractionated radiotherapy after immediate breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) with TomoHelical™ (TH) or TomoDirect™ (TD) allows a uniform target coverage. In this study, we compare treatment plans using TD and TH in the setting of hypofractionated PMRT and immediate breast reconstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The TD-treatment plans of breast cancer patients treated between May 2016 and August 2019 were retrospectively selected. All the TD plans were re-planned on TH with the same prescription dose (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) and according to our dose/volume constraints. Data about the 2 treatment plans were compared with a focus on PTV coverage and all the organs at risk (OARs) constraints.

RESULTS

Fifty patients for a total number of 100 treatment plans (50 with TD and 50 re-planned with TH) were analyzed. All the median value in the TD PTV CHEST WALL plans fulfilled the predefined planning objectives, even though TH emerged as best for target coverage with statistically significant difference for V90%. TD provided the lowest V95% for the PTV SVC, but the median value was near to the recommended value of 90% (89.8 % vs 98.6% for TD and TH, respectively). Overall, TD reached the best OARs sparing. The main statistically significant differences with TH were for contralateral breast, ipsilateral and contralateral lung. All the other dose values for TH were higher than TD, but they fulfilled the recommended/acceptable predefined planning objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of PMRT, TD compared to TH reached an acceptable target volume coverage, with an optimal sparing of OARs.

Dosimetric comparison of TomoDirect, helical tomotherapy, and volumetric modulated arc therapy for postmastectomy treatment

Purpose

To compare dose to the targets and organs at risk (OARs) in different situations for postmastectomy patients who require radiation to the chest wall with or without regional nodal irradiation when using three treatment techniques.

Methods and materials

Thirty postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) patients previously treated by helical tomotherapy (HT) at our institution were identified for the study. The treatment targets were classified in three situations which consisted of, the chest wall (CW) only, the chest wall plus supraclavicular lymph nodes (CW + SPC), and the chest wall plus supraclavicular and whole axillary lymph nodes irradiation (CW + SPC+AXLN). The volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans and Tomodirect (TD) plans were created for each patient and compared with HT treatment plans which had been treated. The target coverage, dose homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), and dose to OARs were analyzed. The quality scores were used to evaluate the appropriate technique for each situation from multiparameter results.

Results

The HT and VMAT plans showed the advantage of target coverage and OARs sparing for the chest wall with regional nodal irradiation with the higher plan quality scores when compared with TD plans. However, TD plans demonstrated superiority to contralateral breast sparing for the chest wall without regional nodal situation reaching the highest of planned quality scores. HT plans showed better HI, CI, and target coverage (P < 0.01) than TD and VMAT plans for all patient situations. Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans generated better contralateral breast and heart sparing at a lower dose than HT.

Conclusion

The arc‐based techniques, HT and VMAT plans, provided an advantage for complex targets in terms of target coverage and OARs sparing. However, the static beam TD plan was superior for contralateral organ sparing meanwhile achieving good target coverage for the chest wall without regional node situations.

Clinical Evaluation of Onrad, A New Low-cost Version of TomoTherapy that Uses Only Static Beams

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the clinical feasibility of a new low-cost TomoTherapy system (Onrad^TM) and compared it with low-cost linear accelerator models (linacs).

METHODS

Various aspects of treatment and cost were compared between Onrad and linacs for 3-dimensional radiotherapy (3DCRT). Dosimetric comparisons of 10 patients each with breast, stage III lung, prostate, head and neck, and cervical cancers were carried out (total 100 plans).

RESULTS

Onrad had advantages in terms of availability of long treatment fields and a smaller mechanical footprint. For breast cancers and lung cancers, target dose homogeneity in Onrad plans was better than that in 3DCRT. In the prostate plans, Onrad plans provided superior D95, conformity and homogeneity. The rectum doses of Onrad plans were lower than those with 3DCRT. Onrad plans provided superior homogeneity and D95 in head and neck cancer. The mean dose and V10-40 Gy of the parotid glands was lower using Onrad. In the cervical cancer plans, target doses were similar with both systems. Normal tissue doses were equal.

CONCLUSIONS

Onrad is useful in the clinical setting. Onrad can achieve favorable or comparable dose distributions compared with those of 3DCRT in actual clinical treatment of breast, lung, prostate, head and neck, and cervical cancers.

Feasibility of hybrid TomoHelical- and TomoDirect-based volumetric gradient matching technique for total body irradiation

BACKGROUND

Tomotherapy-based total body irradiation (TBI) is performed using the head-first position (HFP) and feet-first position (FFP) due to treatment length exceeding the 135 cm limit. To reduce the dosimetric variation at the match lines, we propose and verify a volumetric gradient matching technique (VGMT) by combining TomoHelical (TH) and TomoDirect (TD) modes.

METHODS

Two planning CT image sets were acquired with HFP and FFP using 15 × 55 × 18 cm3 of solid water phantom. Planning target volume (PTV) was divided into upper, lower, and gradient volumes. The junction comprised 2-cm thick five and seven gradient volumes (5-GVs and 7-GVs) to create a dose distribution with a gentle slope. TH-IMRT and TD-IMRT plans were generated with 5-GVs and 7-GVs. The setup error in the calculated dose was assessed by shifting dose distribution of the FFP plan by 5, 10, 15, and 20 mm in the longitudinal direction and comparing it with the original. Doses for 95% (D95) and 5% of the PTV (D5) were calculated for all simulated setup error plans. Absolute dose measurements were performed using an ionization chamber in the junction.

RESULTS

The TH&TD plan produced a linear gradient in junction volume, comparable to that of the TH&TH plan. D5 of the PTV was 110% of the prescribed dose when the FFP plan was shifted 0.7 cm and 1.2 cm in the superior direction for 5-GVs and 7-GVs. D95 of the PTV decreased to < 90% of the prescribed dose when the FF plan was shifted 1.1 cm and 1.3 cm in the inferior direction for 5-GVs and 7-GVs. The absolute measured dose showed a good correlation with the calculated dose in the gradient junction volume. The average percent difference (±SD) in all measured points was - 0.7 ± 1.6%, and the average dose variations between depths was - 0.18 ± 1.07%.

CONCLUSION

VGMT can create a linear dose gradient across the junction area in both TH&TH and TH&TD and can minimize the dose sensitivity to longitudinal setup errors in tomotherapy-based TBI.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy using TomoDirect for postoperative radiation of left-sided breast cancer including lymph node area: comparison with TomoHelical and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) delivers an excellent dose distribution compared with conventional three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) for postoperative radiation including the lymph nodes in breast cancer patients. The TomoTherapy system, developed exclusively for IMRT, has two treatment modes: TomoDirect (TD) with a fixed gantry angle for beam delivery, and TomoHelical (TH) with rotational beam delivery. We compared the characteristics of TD with TH and 3D-CRT plans in the breast cancer patients. Ten consecutive women with left breast cancer received postoperative radiation therapy using TD including the chest wall/residual breast tissue and level II-III axial and supraclavicular lymph node area. Fifty percent of the planning target volume (PTV) was covered with at least 50 Gy in 25 fractions. TD, TH and 3D-CRT plans were created for each patient, with the same dosimetric constraints. TD and TH showed better dose distribution to the PTV than 3D-CRT. TD and 3D-CRT markedly suppressed low-dose spread to the lung compared with TH. Total lung V5 and V10 were significantly lower, while V20 was significantly higher in the TD and 3D-CRT plans. The mean total lung, heart and contralateral breast doses were significantly lower using TD compared with the other plans. Compared with 3D-CRT and TH, TD can provide better target dose distribution with optimal normal-organ sparing for postoperative radiation therapy including the chest wall/residual breast tissue and lymph node area in breast cancer patients. TD is thus a useful treatment modality in these patients.

Clinical implementation of low-dose total body irradiation using topotherapy technique

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The topotherapy technique was recently suggested as a robust alternative to helical radiation delivery for total body irradiation (TBI). It allows to deliver a discrete number of beams with fixed gantry. A Topotherapy-based low-dose TBI technique was optimized and clinically implemented.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TBI delivery was split in two parts: the first treating from the head to half thigh and the second the remaining legs. An in-silico investigation aimed to optimize plan parameters was first carried out on four patients. For the upper plan, field width and pitch were fixed to 5 cm and 0.5: the combined impact of five modulation factor (MF) values and different field configurations (6/8/12 fields) was investigated. For the lower plan, two anterior/posterior beams (field width: 5 cm; pitch: 0.5; MF:1.5) were used. After assessing the optimal technique, set-up/quality assurance/image-guidance procedures were defined and the technique clinically implemented: 23 patients were treated up to now.

RESULTS

The best compromise between treatment time and planning target volume (PTV) coverage/homogeneity was found for MF = 1.5 and 8 fields. All clinical plans were automatically optimized using an "ad-hoc" plan template: excellent PTV coverage (PTV95%>98.5%) and homogeneity (median SD:4%) were found with a median beam-on time of 17/9 min for the upper/lower plan. All patients were successfully treated and transplanted.

CONCLUSIONS

TBI delivered with the topotherapy approach robustly guarantees adequate coverage and dose homogeneity. Semi-automatic clinical plans can be quickly generated and efficiently delivered.

Dose evaluation indices for total body irradiation using TomoDirect with different numbers of ports: A comparison with the TomoHelical method

TomoDirect has been reported to have some advantages over TomoHelical in delivering total body irradiation (TBI). This study aimed to investigate the relationships between the number of ports and the dose evaluation indices in low‐dose TBI in TomoDirect mode using 2–12 ports and to compare these data with those for the TomoHelical mode in a simulation study. Thirteen patients underwent low‐dose TBI in TomoHelical mode from June 2015 to June 2016. We used the same computed tomography data sets for these patients to create new treatment plans for upper‐body parts using TomoDirect mode with 2–12 beam angles as well as TomoHelical mode. The prescription was 4 Gy in two equal fractions. For the TomoDirect data, we generated plans with 2–12 ports with approximately equally spaced angles; the modulation factor, field width, and pitch were 2.0, 5.0 cm, and 0.500, respectively. For the TomoHelical plans, the modulation factor, field width, and pitch were 2.0, 5.0 cm, and 0.397, respectively. D2, D98, D50, and the homogeneity index (HI) were evaluated to compare TomoDirect plans having 2–12 ports with the TomoHelical plan. Using TomoDirect plans, D2 with four ports or fewer, D98 with 10 ports or fewer, D50 with four ports or fewer and HI with five ports or fewer showed statistically significantly worse results than the TomoHelical plan. With the TomoDirect plans, D2 with seven ports or more, D50 with eight ports or more, and HI with eight ports or more showed statistically significant improvement compared with the TomoHelical plan. All of the dose evaluation indices of the TomoDirect plans showed a tendency to improve as the number of ports increased. TomoDirect plans showed statistically significant improvement of D2, D50, and HI compared with the TomoHelical plan. Therefore, we conclude that TomoDirect can provide better dose distribution in low‐dose TBI with TomoTherapy.

Dosimetric comparison of TomoDirect, helical tomotherapy, VMAT, and ff-IMRT for upper thoracic esophageal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The new TomoDirect (TD) modality offers a nonrotational option with discrete beam angles. We aim to compare dosimetric parameters of TD, helical tomotherapy (HT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (ff-IMRT) for upper thoracic esophageal carcinoma (EC).

METHODS

Twenty patients with cT2-4N0-1M0 upper thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) were enrolled. Four plans were generated using the same dose objectives for each patient: TD, HT, VMAT with a single arc, and ff-IMRT with 5 fields (5F). The prescribed doses were used to deliver 50.4 Gy/28F to the planning target volume (PTV50.4) and then provided a 9 Gy/5F boost to PTV59.4. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics, dose uniformity, and dose homogeneity were analyzed to compare treatment plans.

RESULTS

For PTV59.4, the D₂, D₉₈, D_mean, and V_100% values in HT were significantly lower than other plans (all p < 0.05), and those in TD were significantly lower than VMAT and ff-IMRT (all p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the D₂ and D_mean values between VMAT and ff-IMRT techniques (p > 0.05). The homogeneity index (HI) differed significantly for the 4 techniques of TD, HT, VMAT, and ff-IMRT (0.03 ± 0.01, 0.02 ± 0.01, 0.06 ± 0.02, and 0.05 ± 0.01, respectively; p  < 0.001). The HI for TD was similar to HT (p = 0.166), and had statistically significant improvement compared to VMAT (p < 0.001) and ff-IMRT (p = 0.003). In comparison with the 4 conformity indices (CIs), there was no significant difference (p > 0.05). For PTV50.4, the D₂ and D_mean values in HT were significantly lower than other plans (all p < 0.05), and those in TD were significantly lower than VMAT and ff-IMRT (all p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the D₂ and D_mean values between VMAT and ff-IMRT techniques (p > 0.05). No D₉₈ and V_100% parameters differed significantly among the 4 treatment types (p > 0.05). HT plans were provided for statistically significant improvement in HI (0.03 ± 0.01) compared to TD plans (0.05 ± 0.01, p = 0.003), VMAT (0.08 ± 0.03, p < 0.001), ff-IMRT (0.08 ± 0.01, p < 0.001). The HI revealed that TD was superior to VMAT and ff-IMRT (p < 0.05). The CI differed significantly for the 4 techniques of TD, HT, VMAT, and ff-IMRT (0.59 ± 0.10, 0.69 ± 0.11, 0.64 ± 0.09, and 0.64 ± 0.11, respectively; p = 0.035). The best CI was yielded by HT. We found no significant difference for the V₅, V₁₀, V₁₅, V₃₀, and the mean lung dose (MLD) among the 4 techniques (all p > 0.05). However, the V₂₀ differed significantly among TD, HT, VMAT, and ff-IMRT (21.50 ± 7.20%, 19.50 ± 5.55%, 17.65 ± 5.45%, and 16.35 ± 5.70%, respectively; p = 0.047). Average V₂₀ for the lungs was significantly improved by the TD plans compared to VMAT (p = 0.047), and ff-IMRT (p = 0.008). The V₅ value of the lung in TD was 49.30 ± 13.01%, lower than other plans, but there was no significant difference (p > 0.05). The D₁ of the spinal cord showed no significant difference among the 4 techniques (p = 0.056).

CONCLUSIONS

All techniques are able to provide a homogeneous and highly conformal dose distribution. The TD technique is a good option for treating upper thoracic EC involvement. It could achieve optimal low dose to the lungs and spinal cord with acceptable PTV coverage. HT is a good option as it could achieve quality dose conformality and uniformity, while TD generated superior conformality.

Treatment outcome for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer using TomoDirect plan and its characteristics compared to the TomoHelical plan

Introduction

TomoDirect (TD) is an intensity‐modulated radiotherapy system that uses a fixed gantry angle instead of the rotational beam delivery used in the TomoHelical (TH) system. This study was performed (1) to evaluate the treatment outcome of the TD plan for locally advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and (2) to compare the characteristics of TD plans with those of TH plans.

Methods

Twenty‐one patients with NSCLC were treated using the TD system. The prescribed dose was 40 Gy/20 Fx for the initial planning target volume (PTV), which included the gross tumour volume (GTV) and lymph node regions. A boost plan of 20 Gy/10 Fx was then applied, focusing on the GTV. For the planning study, matched TH plans of 40 Gy for the initial PTV were created for each patient, to meet the same dosimetric constraints specified in the TD plans.

Results

The 2‐year overall survival, progression‐free survival and local control rates were 47%, 45% and 74% respectively. Grade 2 treatment‐related pneumonitis occurred in three (14%) patients. The planning study comparing TD and TH showed that dose distribution to GTV and PTV were not significantly different. The lung V5 Gy was lower in the TD plans than TH plans (46.4 ± 5.4 vs. 52.3 ± 8.5), while the V20 Gy was higher (26.2 ± 4 vs. 24 ± 4.3). The TD plans had a significantly shorter treatment time than TH plans (4.5 ± 1.3 min vs. 9.8 ± 1.5 min).

Conclusions

TD is a clinically acceptable treatment option for NSCSL. The quality of the TD and TH plans are comparable.

Static beam tomotherapy as an optimisation method in whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT)

INTRODUCTION

TomoTherapy (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA) has recently introduced a static form of tomotherapy: TomoDirect™ (TD). This study aimed to evaluate TD against a contemporary intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) alternative through comparison of target and organ at risk (OAR) doses in breast cancer cases. A secondary objective was to evaluate planning efficiency by measuring optimisation times.

METHODS

Treatment plans of 27 whole-breast radiation therapy (WBRT) patients optimised with a tangential hybrid IMRT technique were replanned using TD. Parameters included a dynamic field width of 2.5 cm, a pitch of 0.251 and a modulation factor of 2.000; 50 Gy in 25 fractions was prescribed and planning time recorded. The planning metrics used in analysis were ICRU based, with the mean PTV minimum (D99 ) used as the point of comparison.

RESULTS

Both modalities met ICRU50 target heterogeneity objectives (TD D99 = 48.0 Gy vs. IMRT = 48.1 Gy, P = 0.26; TD D1 = 53.5 Gy vs. IMRT = 53.0 Gy, P = 0.02; Homogeneity index TD = 0.11 vs. IMRT = 0.10, P = 0.03), with TD plans generating higher median doses (TD D50 = 51.1 Gy vs. IMRT = 50.9 Gy, P = 0.03). No significant difference was found in prescription dose coverage (TD V50 = 85.5% vs. IMRT = 82.0%, P = 0.09). TD plans produced a statistically significant reduction in V5 ipsilateral lung doses (TD V5 = 23.2% vs. IMRT = 27.2%, P = 0.04), while other queried OARs remained comparable (TD ipsilateral lung V20 = 13.2% vs. IMRT = 14.6%, P = 0.30; TD heart V5 = 2.7% vs. IMRT = 2.8%, P = 0.47; TD heart V10 = 1.7% vs. IMRT = 1.8%, P = 0.44). TD reduced planning time considerably (TD = 9.8 m vs. IMRT = 27.6 m, P < 0.01), saving an average planning time of 17.8 min per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

TD represents a suitable WBRT treatment approach both in terms of plan quality metrics and planning efficiency.

Evaluation of the Flash effect in breast irradiation using TomoDirect: an investigational study

Flash is a specified function in TomoDirect that enables beam expansion by opening additional leaves to the target. This study assessed the theoretical dose distribution resulting from Flash in breast irradiation using TomoDirect. A cylindrical phantom that enabled dose distribution of the breast was used for verifying the effect of planning target volume (PTV) contouring and Flash. A total of 18 Gy in 10 fractions were prescribed to the PTV. Five PTVs were then created by Contracting this contour by 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 mm, giving PTV-x. Flash ±x is defined by opening x (number) of the leaves. The Flash effect in the air was compared with each set-up error of 5, 10 and 15 mm, respectively. The minimum PTV dose from PTV-1 to PTV-3 increased from 13.88 Gy to 15.86 Gy. In contrast, Dmin in PTV-4 and PTV-5 was 17.80 Gy in 98.88% of the prescription dose. Without Flash, when 5-, 10- and 15-mm set-up errors applied in the PTV, relative doses of 87.88, 23.73 and 7.94% were observed, respectively. However, in Flash 3, which was equal to the usual air margin of 1.875 cm, a relative dose of 104.24% ± 0.30% was observed, irrespective of set-up errors (5 mm to 15 mm). Flash opening is useful for countervailing set-up errors in breast cancer patients who receive breast irradiation with TomoDirect.

Setup Error and Effectiveness of Weekly Image-Guided Radiation Therapy of TomoDirect for Early Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

This study investigated setup error and effectiveness of weekly image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) of TomoDirect for early breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and fifty-one breasts of 147 consecutive patients who underwent breast conserving surgery followed by whole breast irradiation using TomoDirect in 2012 and 2013 were evaluated. All patients received weekly IGRT. The weekly setup errors from simulation to each treatment in reference to chest wall and surgical clips were measured. Random, systemic, and 3-dimensional setup errors were assessed. Extensive setup error was defined as 5 mm above the margin in any directions.

RESULTS

All mean errors were within 3 mm of all directions. The mean angle of gantry shifts was 0.6°. The mean value of absolute 3-dimensional setup error was 4.67 mm. In multivariate analysis, breast size (odds ratio, 2.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 7.90) was a significant factor for extensive error. The largest significant deviation of setup error was observed in the first week of radiotherapy (p < 0.001) and the deviations gradually decreased with time. The deviation of setup error was 5.68 mm in the first week and within 5 mm after the second week.

CONCLUSION

In this study, there was a significant association between breast size and significant setup error in breast cancer patients who received TomoDirect. The largest deviation occurred in the first week of treatment. Therefore, patients with large breasts should be closely observed on every fraction and fastidious attention is required in the first fraction of IGRT.

A detailed evaluation of TomoDirect 3DCRT planning for whole-breast radiation therapy

The goal of this work was to develop planning strategies for whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT) using TomoDirect three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (TD-3DCRT) and to compare TD-3DCRT with conventional 3DCRT and TD intensity-modulated radiation therapy (TD-IMRT) to evaluate differences in WBRT plan quality. Computed tomography (CT) images of 10 women were used to generate 150 WBRT plans, varying in target structures, field width (FW), pitch, and number of beams. Effects on target and external maximum doses (EMD), organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, and treatment time were assessed for each parameter to establish an optimal planning technique. Using this technique, TD-3DCRT plans were generated and compared with TD-IMRT and standard 3DCRT plans. FW 5.0cm with pitch = 0.250cm significantly decreased EMD without increasing lung V20Gy. Increasing number of beams from 2 to 6 and using an additional breast planning structure decreased EMD though increased lung V20Gy. Changes in pitch had minimal effect on plan metrics. TD-3DCRT plans were subsequently generated using FW 5.0cm, pitch = 0.250cm, and 2 beams, with additional beams or planning structures added to decrease EMD when necessary. TD-3DCRT and TD-IMRT significantly decreased target maximum dose compared to standard 3DCRT. FW 5.0cm with 2 to 6 beams or novel planning structures or both allow for TD-3DCRT WBRT plans with excellent target coverage and OAR doses. TD-3DCRT plans are comparable to plans generated using TD-IMRT and provide an alternative to conventional 3DCRT for WBRT.