Dataset Information

CyberKnife robotic spinal radiosurgery in prone position: dosimetric advantage due to posterior radiation access?

ABSTRACT: CyberKnife spinal radiosurgery suffers from a lack of posterior beams due to workspace limitations. This is remedied by a newly available tracking modality for fiducial-free, respiration-compensated spine tracking in prone patient position. We analyzed the potential dosimetric benefit in a planning study. Fourteen exemplary cases were compared in three scenarios: supine (PTV=CTV), prone (PTV=CTV), and prone position with an additional margin (PTV=CTV+2 mm), to incorporate reduced accuracy of respiration-compensated tracking. Target and spinal cord constraints were chosen according to RTOG 0631 protocol for spinal metastases. Plan quality was scored based on four predefined parameters: dose to cord (D0.1cc and D1cc), high dose (V10Gy), and low dose (V4Gy) volume of healthy tissue. Prescription dose was 16 Gy to the highest isodose line encompassing 90% of the target. Results were related to target size and position. All plans fulfilled RTOG 0631 constraints for coverage and dose to cord. When no additional margin was applied, a majority of eight cases benefitted from prone position, mainly due to a reduction of V4Gy by 23% ± 26%. In the 2 mm prone scenario, the benefit was nullified by an average increase of V10Gy by 43% ± 24%, and an increase of D1cc to cord (four cases). Spinal cord D0.1cc was unchanged (< ± 1 Gy) in all but two cases for both prone scenarios. Conformity (nCI) and number of beams were equivalent in all scenarios, but supine plans used a significantly higher number of monitor units (+16%) than prone. Posterior beam access can reduce dose to healthy tissue in CyberKnife spinal radiosurgery when no additional margin is applied. When a target margin of 2 mm is added, this potential gain is lost. Relative anterior-posterior position and size of the target are selection criteria for prone treatment.

SUBMITTER: Furweger C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5875502 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

CyberKnife robotic spinal radiosurgery in prone position: dosimetric advantage due to posterior radiation access?

Fürweger Christoph C Drexler Christian C Muacevic Alexander A Wowra Berndt B de Klerck Erik C EC Hoogeman Mischa S MS

Journal of applied clinical medical physics 20140708 4

CyberKnife spinal radiosurgery suffers from a lack of posterior beams due to workspace limitations. This is remedied by a newly available tracking modality for fiducial-free, respiration-compensated spine tracking in prone patient position. We analyzed the potential dosimetric benefit in a planning study. Fourteen exemplary cases were compared in three scenarios: supine (PTV=CTV), prone (PTV=CTV), and prone position with an additional margin (PTV=CTV+2 mm), to incorporate reduced accuracy of res ...[more]

PMID: 25207392

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study was performed to examine the quality of planning and treatment modality using a CyberKnife (CK) robotic radiosurgery system with multileaf collimator (MLC)-based plans and IRIS (variable aperture collimator system)-based plans in relation to the dose-response of secondary cancer risk (SCR) in patients with benign intracranial tumors. The study population consisted of 15 patients with benign intracranial lesions after curative treatment using a CyberKnife M6 robotic radiosurgery system. Each patient had a single tumor with a median volume of 6.43 cm3 (range, 0.33-29.72 cm3). The IRIS-based plan quality and MLC-based plan quality were evaluated by comparing the dosimetric indices, taking into account the planning target volume (PTV) coverage, the conformity index (CI), and the dose gradient (R10% and R50%). The dose-response SCR with sarcoma/carcinoma induction was calculated using the concept of the organ equivalent dose (OED). Analyses of sarcoma/carcinoma induction were performed using excess absolute risk (EAR) and various OED models of dose-response type/lifetime attributable risk (LAR). Moreover, analyses were performed using the BEIR VII model. PTV coverage using both IRIS-based plans and MLC-based plans was identical, although the CI values obtained using the MLC-based plans showed greater statistical significance. In comparison with the IRIS-based plans, the MLC-based plans showed better dose falloff for R10% and R50% evaluation. The estimated difference between Schneider's model and BEIR VII in linear-no-threshold (Lnt) cumulative EAR was about twofold. The average values of LAR/EAR for carcinoma, for the IRIS-based plans, were 25% higher than those for the MLC-based plans using four SCR models; for sarcoma, they were 15% better in Schneider's SCR models. MLC-based plans showed slightly better conformity, dose gradients, and SCR reduction. There was a slight increase in SCR with IRIS-based plans in comparison with MLC-based plans. EAR analyses did not show any significant difference between PTV and brainstem analyses, regardless of the tumor volume. Nevertheless, an increase in target volume led to an increase in the probability of SCR. EAR showed statistically significant differences in the soft tissue according to tumor volume (1-10 cc and ≥10 cc).

Project description:PurposeTo compare the dosimetric differences in stereotactic radiosurgery between use of passively scattered protons (PSRS) versus photons (XSRS) for pituitary adenomas.Methods and materialsNine patients with pituitary adenomas were selected among patients receiving single-fraction proton stereotactic radiosurgery (PSRS) between 2016 and 2017. These cases were replanned with XSRS using volumetric-modulated arc therapy with 2.5 mm and 5 mm multileaf collimators (2.5XSRS and 5XSRS, respectively). PSRS was planned with a dedicated single scattering stereotactic proton unit delivered via 3 equally or unequally weighted isocentric fields. XSRS plans were created with optimization to spare organs at risk. Plans were generated using the original total treatment dose delivered in 1 fraction.ResultsPlans were evaluated for target volume dosimetry and estimated clinical toxicity. There was no significant difference in clinical target volume V100%, V95%, V90% or homogeneity index between treatment modalities. PSRS offered lower maximum dose (Dmax) to organs at risk and equivalent uniform dose (EUD) compared with 5XSRS and 2.5XSRS, respectively, for critical structures including optic nerve (right, Dmax 4.18, 5.32, 5.41; EUD 3.35, 4.08, 4.20) and hypothalamus (Dmax 1.71, 3.94, 3.77; EUD 0.94, 2.47, 2.39; P < .05 for PSRS vs 5XSRS and 2.5XSRS). The projected risk of secondary tumors in excess of baseline was lowest for PSRS plans (PSRS 5.28, 5XSRS 12.93, 2.5XSRS 12.66 cases per 10,000 patient-years; P = .008 for PSRS vs 5XSRS, PSRS vs 2.5XSRS, and P = .77 for 5XSRS vs 2.5XSRS).ConclusionsWe demonstrate that neither modality has empirically superior dosimetry and identify potential clinical advantages as well as limitations of each technique. PSRS, 5XSRS and 2.5XSRS demonstrate comparable target volume dosimetry for pituitary adenoma. PSRS compared with XSRS modalities offers modestly decreased maximum dose and EUD to critical proximal structures and decreases risk of radiation-induced secondary tumors by more than half.

Dataset Information

CyberKnife robotic spinal radiosurgery in prone position: dosimetric advantage due to posterior radiation access?

Publications

CyberKnife robotic spinal radiosurgery in prone position: dosimetric advantage due to posterior radiation access?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets