Dataset Information

Single isocenter SRS using CAVMAT offers improved robustness to commissioning and treatment delivery uncertainty compared to VMAT.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

In this study, we evaluate and compare single isocenter multiple target VMAT (SIMT) and Conformal Arc Informed VMAT (CAVMAT) radiosurgery's sensitivity to uncertainties in dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) and treatment delivery. CAVMAT is a novel planning technique that uses multiple target conformal arcs as the starting point for limited inverse VMAT optimization.

Methods

All VMAT and CAVMAT plans were recalculated with DLG values of 0.4, 0.8, and 1.2 mm. DLG effect on V_6Gy [cc], V_12Gy [cc], and V_16Gy [cc], and target dose was evaluated. Plans were delivered to a Delta⁴ (ScandiDos, Madison, WI) phantom and gamma analysis performed with varying criteria. Log file analysis was performed to evaluate MLC positional error. Sixteen targets were delivered to a SRS MapCHECK (Sun Nuclear Corp., Melbourne, FL) to evaluate VMAT and CAVMAT's dose difference (DD) as a function of DLG.

Results

VMAT's average maximum and minimum target dose sensitivity to DLG was 9.08 ±3.50%/mm and 9.50 ± 3.30%/mm, compared to 3.20 ± 1.60%/mm and 4.72 ± 1.60%/mm for CAVMAT. For VMAT, V_6Gy [cc], V_12Gy [cc], and V_16Gy [cc] sensitivity was 35.83 ± 9.50%/mm, 34.12 ± 6.60%/mm, and 39.23 ± 8.40%/mm. In comparison, CAVMAT's sensitivity was 23.19 ± 4.50%/mm, 22.45 ± 4.40%/mm, and 24.88 ± 4.90%/mm, respectively. Upon delivery to the Delta⁴ , CAVMAT offered superior dose agreement compared to VMAT. For a 1%/1 mm gamma analysis, VMAT and CAVMAT had a passing rate of 94.53 ± 4.40% and 99.28 ± 1.70%, respectively. CAVMAT was more robust to DLG variation, with the SRS MapCHECK plans yielding an absolute average DD sensitivity of 2.99 ± 1.30%/mm compared to 5.07 ± 1.10%/mm for VMAT. Log files demonstrated minimal differences in MLC positional error for both techniques.

Conclusions

CAVMAT remains robust to delivery uncertainties while offering a target dose sensitivity to DLG less than half that of VMAT, and 65% of that of VMAT for V_6Gy [cc], V_12Gy [cc], and V_16Gy [cc]. The superior dose agreement and reduced sensitivity of CAVMAT to DLG uncertainties indicate promise as a robust alternative to VMAT for SIMT SRS.

SUBMITTER: Cullom ET

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8292691 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Recent trends in stereotactic radiosurgery use multifocal volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans to simultaneously treat several distinct targets. Conventional verification often involves low resolution measurements in a single plane, a cylinder, or intersecting planes of diodes or ion chambers. This work presents an investigation into the consistency and reproducibility of this new treatment technique using a comprehensive commissioned high-resolution 3D dosimetry system (PRESAGE(®)∕Optical-CT).A complex VMAT plan consisting of a single isocenter but five separate targets was created in Eclipse for a head phantom containing a cylindrical PRESAGE(®) dosimetry insert of 11 cm diameter and height. The plan contained five VMAT arcs delivering target doses from 12 to 20 Gy. The treatment was delivered to four dosimeters positioned in the head phantom and repeated four times, yielding four separate 3D dosimetry verifications. Each delivery was completely independent and was given after image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) positioning using Brainlab ExacTrac and cone beam computed tomography. A final delivery was given to a modified insert containing a pin-point ion chamber enabling calibration of PRESAGE(®) 3D data to dose. Dosimetric data were read out in an optical-CT scanner. Consistency and reproducibility of the treatment technique (including IGRT setup) was investigated by comparing the dose distributions in the four inserts, and with the predicted treatment planning system distribution.Dose distributions from the four dosimeters were registered and analyzed to determine the mean and standard deviation at all points throughout the dosimeters. A dose standard deviation of <3% was found from dosimeter to dosimeter. Global 3D gamma maps show that the predicted and measured dose matched well [3D gamma passing rate was 98.0% (3%, 2 mm)].The deliveries of the irradiation were found to be consistent and matched the treatment plan, demonstrating high accuracy and reproducibility of both the treatment machine and the IGRT procedure. The complexity of the treatment (multiple arcs) and dosimetry (multiple strong gradients) pose a substantial challenge for comprehensive verification. 3D dosimetry can be uniquely effective in this scenario.