Dataset Information

A comprehensive investigation of the accuracy and reproducibility of a multitarget single isocenter VMAT radiosurgery technique.

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Thomas A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3862601 | biostudies-other | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeInterest 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 materialsThirty patients with 4 to 10 metastases (217 total; median 7.5; Vmin = 0.014 cm3; Vmax = 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 [PTVmin] = 0.49 cm3; PTVmax = 27.32 cm3; PTVmedian = 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 (V12Gy), V8Gy, V5Gy, mean brain dose (Dmean), and beam-on time.ResultsConformity was favorable among RA plans (median: MME CIRTOG = 1.38; RA CIRTOG = 1.21; P < .0001). V12Gy and V8Gy were lower for RA plans (median: MME V12 = 23.7 cm3; RA V12 = 19.2 cm3; P = .0001; median: MME V8Gy = 53.6 cm3; RA V8Gy = 44.1 cm3; P = .024). V5Gy was lower for MME plans (median: MME V5Gy = 141.4 cm3; RA V5Gy = 142.8 cm3; P = .009). Mean brain was lower for MME plans (median: MME Dmean = 2.57 Gy; RA Dmean = 2.76 Gy; P < .0001).ConclusionsFor linac-based multiple metastasis stereotactic radiosurgery, RapidArc VMAT facilitates favorable conformity and V12Gy/V8Gy volume compared with the MME DCA plan. MME planning facilitates reduced dose spill at levels ≤V5Gy.

Project description:The aim of this study is to provide a practical approach to the planning technique and evaluation of plan quality for the multi-lesion, single-isocenter stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) of the lung. Eleven patients with two or more lung lesions underwent single-isocenter volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) radiosurgery or IMRS. All plans were normalized to the target maximum dose. For each plan, all targets were treated to the same dose. Plan conformity and dose gradient were maximized with dose-control tuning structures surrounding targets. For comparison, multi-isocenter plans were retrospectively created for four patients. Conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), and gradient distance (GD) were calculated for each plan. V5, V10, and V20 of the lung and organs at risk (OARs) were collected. Treatment time and total monitor units (MUs) were also recorded. One patient had four lesions and the remainder had two lesions. Six patients received VMAT and five patients received intensity-modulated radiosurgery (IMRS). For those treated with VMAT, two patients received 3-arc VMAT and four received 2-arc VMAT. For those treated with IMRS, two patients were treated with 10 and 11 beams, respectively, and the rest received 12 beams. Prescription doses ranged from 30 to 54?Gy in three to five fractions. The median prescribed isodose line was 84% (range: 80-86%). The median maximum dose was 57.1?Gy (range: 35.7-65.1?Gy). The mean combined PTV was 49.57?cm(3) (range: 14.90-87.38?cm(3)). For single-isocenter plans, the median CI was 1.15 (range: 0.97-1.53). The median HI was 1.19 (range: 1.16-1.28). The median GI was 4.60 (range: 4.16-7.37). The median maximum radiation dose (Dmax) to total lung was 55.6?Gy (range: 35.7-62.0?Gy). The median mean radiation dose to the lung (Dmean) was 4.2?Gy (range: 1.1-9.3?Gy). The median lung V5 was 18.7% (range: 3.8-41.3%). There was no significant difference in CI, HI, GI, GD, V5, V10, and V20 (lung, heart, trachea, esophagus, and spinal cord) between single-isocenter and multi-isocenter plans. This multi-lesion, single-isocenter lung SABR planning technique demonstrated excellent plan quality and clinical efficiency and is recommended for radiosurgical treatment of two or more lung targets for well-suited patients.

Project description:PurposeIn 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.MethodsAll VMAT and CAVMAT plans were recalculated with DLG values of 0.4, 0.8, and 1.2 mm. DLG effect on V6Gy [cc], V12Gy [cc], and V16Gy [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.ResultsVMAT'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, V6Gy [cc], V12Gy [cc], and V16Gy [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.ConclusionsCAVMAT 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 V6Gy [cc], V12Gy [cc], and V16Gy [cc]. The superior dose agreement and reduced sensitivity of CAVMAT to DLG uncertainties indicate promise as a robust alternative to VMAT for SIMT SRS.

Dataset Information

A comprehensive investigation of the accuracy and reproducibility of a multitarget single isocenter VMAT radiosurgery technique.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets