Circumferential or sectored beam arrangements for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of primary lung tumors: Effect on target and normal-structure dose-volume metrics

To compare 2 beam arrangements, sectored (beam entry over ipsilateral hemithorax) vs circumferential (beam entry over both ipsilateral and contralateral lungs), for static-gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery techniques with respect to target and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose-volume metrics, as well as treatment delivery efficiency. Data from 60 consecutive patients treated using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for primary non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) formed the basis of this study. Four treatment plans were generated per data set: IMRT/VMAT plans using sectored (-s) and circumferential (-c) configurations. The prescribed dose (PD) was 60 Gy in 5 fractions to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV) (maximum PTV dose ~ 150% PD) for a 6-MV photon beam. Plan conformality, R₅₀ (ratio of volume circumscribed by the 50% isodose line and the PTV), and D_2 cm (D_max at a distance ≥2 cm beyond the PTV) were evaluated. For lungs, mean doses (mean lung dose [MLD]) and percent V₃₀/V₂₀/V₁₀/V₅ Gy were assessed. Spinal cord and esophagus D_max and D₅/D₅₀ were computed. Chest wall (CW) D_max and absolute V₃₀/V₂₀/V₁₀/V_5 Gy were reported. Sectored SBRT planning resulted in significant decrease in contralateral MLD and V₁₀/V_5 Gy, as well as contralateral CW D_max and V₁₀/V_5 Gy (all p < 0.001). Nominal reductions of D_max and D₅/D₅₀ for the spinal cord with sectored planning did not reach statistical significance for static-gantry IMRT, although VMAT metrics did show a statistically significant decrease (all p < 0.001). The respective measures for esophageal doses were significantly lower with sectored planning (p < 0.001). Despite comparable dose conformality, irrespective of planning configuration, R₅₀ significantly improved with IMRT-s/VMAT-c (p < 0.001/p = 0.008), whereas D_2 cm significantly improved with VMAT-c (p < 0.001). Plan delivery efficiency improved with sectored technique (p < 0.001); mean monitor unit (MU)/cGy of PD decreased from 5.8 ± 1.9 vs 5.3 ± 1.7 (IMRT) and 2.7 ± 0.4 vs 2.4 ± 0.3 (VMAT). The sectored configuration achieves unambiguous dosimetric advantages over circumferential arrangement in terms of esophageal, contralateral CW, and contralateral lung sparing, in addition to being more efficient at delivery.     

Dosimetric comparison of different multileaf collimator leaves in treatment planning of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical cancer

To study the effect of multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf widths (standard MLC [sMLC] width of 10 mm and micro-MLC [mMLC] width of 4 mm) on intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for cervical cancer. Between January 2010 and August 2010, a retrospective analysis was conducted on 12 patients with cervical cancer. The treatment plans for all patients were generated with the same machine setup parameters and optimization methods in a treatment planning system (TPS) based on 2 commercial Elekta MLC devices. The dose distribution for the planning tumor volume (PTV), the dose sparing for organs at risk (OARs), the monitor units (MUs), and the number of IMRT segments were evaluated. For the delivery efficiency, the MUs were significantly higher in the sMLC-IMRT plan than in the mMLC-IMRT plan (802 ± 56.9 vs 702 ± 56.7; p < 0.05). The number of segments in the plans were 58.75 ± 1.8 and 59 ± 1.04 (p > 0.05). For the planning quality, the conformity index (CI) between the 2 paired IMRT plans with the mMLC and the sMLC did not differ significantly (average: 0.817 ± 0.024 vs 0.810 ± 0.028; p > 0.05). The differences of the homogeneity index (HI) between the 2 paired plans were statistically significant (average: 1.122 ± 0.010 vs 1.132 ± 0.014; p < 0.01). For OARs, the rectum, bladder, small intestine, and bony pelvis were evaluated in terms of V₁₀, V₂₀, V₃₀, and V₄₀, percentage of contoured OAR volumes receiving 10, 20, 30, and 40 Gy, respectively, and the mean dose (D_mean) received. The IMRT plans with the mMLC protected the OARs better than the plans with the sMLC. There were significant differences (p < 0.05) in evaluated parameters between the 2 paired IMRT plans, except for V₃₀ and V₄₀ of the rectum and V₁₀, V₂₀, V₄₀, and D_mean of the bladder. IMRT plans with the mMLC showed advantages over the plans with the sMLC in dose homogeneity for targets, dose sparing of OARs, and fewer MUs in cervical cancer.     

Interstitial brachytherapy vs. intensity-modulated radiation therapy for patients with cervical carcinoma not suitable for intracavitary radiation therapy

PurposeInterstitial brachytherapy (IBT) is the standard alternative treatment for patients with cervical carcinoma not suitable for intracavitary radiotherapy. There is an emerging belief that intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has the potential to replace IBT. We aimed to compare the dosimetry achieved by IBT and IMRT in such patients.Methods and MaterialsThe CT imaging data, previously used for IBT planning of 12 patients with cervical carcinoma, were transferred to IMRT planning system to generate parallel IMRT plans. Prescribed dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was 20 Gy delivered in 2-weekly high-dose-rate fractions of 10 Gy each with IBT (biologically equivalent dose [BED₁₀] 40 Gy) and 33 Gy/13 fractions/2.5 wk with IMRT (BED₁₀ 41 Gy). For comparison, dose–volume parameters for target and organs at risk were recorded and expressed in terms of BED₁₀ and BED₃, respectively.ResultsFor PTV, the mean D₉₅ (dose received by 95% of PTV) was better with IBT (57.16 Gy vs. 41.47 Gy, p = 0.003). The mean conformity index was 0.94 and 0.90 with IBT and IMRT, respectively (p = 0.034). IBT delivered significantly reduced doses to 1.0 cc (D_max), 5.0 cc (D_{5 cc}), 50% (D₅₀), and 75% (D₇₅) of bladder volume as compared with IMRT. The mean rectal D_max was significantly better with IBT as compared with IMRT (54.64 Gy vs. 62.63 Gy, p = 0.02).ConclusionsIBT provides superior PTV coverage and organs at risk sparing to IMRT. Thus, IBT remains the standard treatment for patients with cervical carcinoma unsuitable for intracavitary radiotherapy.     

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy in postprostatectomy radiotherapy patients: A planning comparison study

The purpose of this study was to compare postprostatectomy planning for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with both single arc (SA) and double arcs (DA) against dynamic sliding window intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Ten cases were planned with IMRT, SA VMAT, and DA VMAT. All cases were planned to achieve a minimum dose of 68 Gy to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV) and goals to limit rectal volume >40 Gy to 35% and >65 Gy to 17%, and bladder volumes >40 Gy to 50% and >65 Gy to 25%. Plans were averaged across the 10 patients and compared for mean dose, conformity, homogeneity, rectal and bladder doses, and monitor units. The mean dose to the clinical target volume and PTV was significantly higher (p<0.05) for SA compared with DA or IMRT. The homogeneity index was not significantly different: SA = 0.09; DA = 0.08; and IMRT = 0.07. The rectal V40 was lowest for the DA plan. The rectal V20 was significantly lower (p<0.05) for both the VMAT plans compared with IMRT. There were no significant differences for bladder V40 or rectal and bladder V65. The IMRT plans required 1400 MU compared with 745 for DA and 708 for SA. This study shows that for equivalent dose coverage, SA and DA VMAT plans result in higher mean doses to the clinical target volume and PTV. This greater dose heterogeneity is balanced by improved low-range rectal doses and halving of the monitor units.     

Dosimetric comparison of 3D conformal,IMRT, and V-MAT techniques for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI)

The purpose is to dosimetrically compare the following 3 delivery techniques: 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (V-MAT) in the treatment of accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). Overall, 16 patients with T1/2N0 breast cancer were treated with 3D-CRT (multiple, noncoplanar photon fields) on the RTOG 0413 partial-breast trial. These cases were subsequently replanned using static gantry IMRT and V-MAT technology to understand dosimetric differences among these 3 techniques. Several dosimetric parameters were used in plan quality evaluation, including dose conformity index (CI) and dose-volume histogram analysis of normal tissue coverage. Quality assurance studies including gamma analysis were performed to compare the measured and calculated dose distributions. The IMRT and V-MAT plans gave more conformal target dose distributions than the 3D-CRT plans (p < 0.05 in CI). The volume of ipsilateral breast receiving 5 and 10 Gy was significantly less using the V-MAT technique than with either 3D-CRT or IMRT (p < 0.05). The maximum lung dose and the ipsilateral lung volume receiving 10 (V₁₀) or 20 Gy (V₂₀) were significantly less with both V-MAT and IMRT (p < 0.05). The IMRT technique was superior to 3D-CRT and V-MAT of low dose distributions in ipsilateral lung (p < 0.05 in V₅ and D₅). The total mean monitor units (MUs) for V-MAT (621.0 ± 111.9) were 12.2% less than those for 3D-CRT (707.3 ± 130.9) and 46.5% less than those for IMRT (1161.4 ± 315.6) (p < 0.05). The average machine delivery time was 1.5 ± 0.2 minutes for the V-MAT plans, 7.0 ± 1.6 minutes for the 3D-CRT plans, and 11.5 ± 1.9 minutes for the IMRT plans, demonstrating much less delivery time for V-MAT. Based on this preliminary study, V-MAT and IMRT techniques offer improved dose conformity as compared with 3D-CRT techniques without increasing dose to the ipsilateral lung. In terms of MU and delivery time, V-MAT is significantly more efficient for APBI than for conventional 3D-CRT and static-beam IMRT.     

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy for pancreatic malignancies: Dosimetric comparison with sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) is an iteration of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), both of which deliver highly conformal dose distributions. Studies have shown the superiority of VMAT and IMRT in comparison with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in planning target volume (PTV) coverage and organs-at-risk (OARs) sparing. This is the first study examining the benefits of VMAT in pancreatic cancer for doses more than 55.8 Gy. A planning study comparing 3D-CRT, IMRT, and VMAT was performed in 20 patients with pancreatic cancer. Treatments were planned for a 25-fraction delivery of 45 Gy to a large field followed by a reduced-volume 8-fraction external beam boost to 59.4 Gy in total. OARs and PTV doses, conformality index (CI) deviations from 1.0, monitor units (MUs) delivered, and isodose volumes were compared. IMRT and VMAT CI deviations from 1.0 for the large-field and the boost plans were equivalent (large field: 0.032 and 0.046, respectively; boost: 0.042 and 0.037, respectively; p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Both IMRT and VMAT CI deviations from 1.0 were statistically superior to 3D-CRT (large field: 0.217, boost: 0.177; p < 0.05 for all comparisons). VMAT showed reduction of the mean dose to the boost PTV (VMAT: 61.4 Gy, IMRT: 62.4 Gy, and 3D-CRT: 62.3 Gy; p < 0.05). The mean number of MUs per fraction was significantly lower for VMAT for both the large-field and the boost plans. VMAT delivery time was less than 3 minutes compared with 8 minutes for IMRT. Although no statistically significant dose reduction to the OARs was identified when comparing VMAT with IMRT, VMAT showed a reduction in the volumes of the 100% isodose line for the large-field plans. Dose escalation to 59.4 Gy in pancreatic cancer is dosimetrically feasible with shorter treatment times, fewer MUs delivered, and comparable CIs for VMAT when compared with IMRT.     

Advantages and limitations of navigation-based multicriteria optimization (MCO) for localized prostate cancer IMRT planning

Efficacy of inverse planning is becoming increasingly important for advanced radiotherapy techniques. This study’s aims were to validate multicriteria optimization (MCO) in RayStation (v2.4, RaySearch Laboratories, Sweden) against standard intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) optimization in Oncentra (v4.1, Nucletron BV, the Netherlands) and characterize dose differences due to conversion of navigated MCO plans into deliverable multileaf collimator apertures. Step-and-shoot IMRT plans were created for 10 patients with localized prostate cancer using both standard optimization and MCO. Acceptable standard IMRT plans with minimal average rectal dose were chosen for comparison with deliverable MCO plans. The trade-off was, for the MCO plans, managed through a user interface that permits continuous navigation between fluence-based plans. Navigated MCO plans were made deliverable at incremental steps along a trajectory between maximal target homogeneity and maximal rectal sparing. Dosimetric differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans were also quantified. MCO plans, chosen as acceptable under navigated and deliverable conditions resulted in similar rectal sparing compared with standard optimization (33.7 ± 1.8 Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2 Gy, p = 0.117). The dose differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans increased as higher priority was placed on rectal avoidance. If the best possible deliverable MCO was chosen, a significant reduction in rectal dose was observed in comparison with standard optimization (30.6 ± 1.4 Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2 Gy, p = 0.047). Improvements were, however, to some extent, at the expense of less conformal dose distributions, which resulted in significantly higher doses to the bladder for 2 of the 3 tolerance levels. In conclusion, similar IMRT plans can be created for patients with prostate cancer using MCO compared with standard optimization. Limitations exist within MCO regarding conversion of navigated plans to deliverable apertures, particularly for plans that emphasize avoidance of critical structures. Minimizing these differences would result in better quality treatments for patients with prostate cancer who were treated with radiotherapy using MCO plans.     

Evaluating proton stereotactic body radiotherapy to reduce chest wall dose in the treatment of lung cancer

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) can produce excellent local control of several types of solid tumor; however, toxicity to nearby critical structures is a concern. We found previously that in SBRT for lung cancer, the chest wall (CW) volume receiving 20, 30, or 40 Gy (V₂₀, V₃₀, or V₄₀) was linked with the development of neuropathy. Here we sought to determine whether the dosimetric advantages of protons could produce lower CW doses than traditional photon-based SBRT. We searched an institutional database to identify patients treated with photon SBRT for lung cancer with tumors within < 2.5 cm of the CW. We found 260 cases; of these, chronic grade ≥ 2 CW pain was identified in 23 patients. We then selected 10 representative patients from this group and generated proton SBRT treatment plans, using the identical dose of 50 Gy in 4 fractions, and assessed potential differences in CW dose between the 2 plans. The proton SBRT plans reduced the CW doses at all dose levels measured. The median CW V₂₀ was 364.0 cm³ and 160.0 cm³ (p < 0.0001), V₃₀ was 144.6 cm³ vs 77.0 cm³ (p = 0.0012), V₃₅ was 93.9 cm³ vs 57.9 cm³ (p = 0.005), V₄₀ was 66.5 cm³ vs 45.4 cm³ (p = 0.0112), and mean lung dose was 5.9 Gy vs 3.8 Gy (p = 0.0001) for photons and protons, respectively. Coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) was comparable between the 2 sets of plans (96.4% for photons and 97% for protons). From a dosimetric standpoint, proton SBRT can achieve the same coverage of the PTV while significantly reducing the dose to the CW and lung relative to photon SBRT and therefore may be beneficial for the treatment of lesions closer to critical structures.     

Stereotactic body radiation therapy planning with duodenal sparing using volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A dosimetric analysis

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) achieves excellent local control for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but may increase late duodenal toxicity. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivers intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with a rotating gantry rather than multiple fixed beams. This study dosimetrically evaluates the feasibility of implementing duodenal constraints for SBRT using VMAT vs IMRT. Non–duodenal sparing (NS) and duodenal-sparing (DS) VMAT and IMRT plans delivering 25 Gy in 1 fraction were generated for 15 patients with LAPC. DS plans were constrained to duodenal D_max of<30 Gy at any point. VMAT used 1 360° coplanar arc with 4° spacing between control points, whereas IMRT used 9 coplanar beams with fixed gantry positions at 40° angles. Dosimetric parameters for target volumes and organs at risk were compared for DS planning vs NS planning and VMAT vs IMRT using paired-sample Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Both DS VMAT and DS IMRT achieved significantly reduced duodenal D_mean, D_max, D_1cc, D_4%, and V_20 Gy compared with NS plans (all p≤0.002). DS constraints compromised target coverage for IMRT as demonstrated by reduced V_95% (p = 0.01) and D_mean (p = 0.02), but not for VMAT. DS constraints resulted in increased dose to right kidney, spinal cord, stomach, and liver for VMAT. Direct comparison of DS VMAT and DS IMRT revealed that VMAT was superior in sparing the left kidney (p<0.001) and the spinal cord (p<0.001), whereas IMRT was superior in sparing the stomach (p = 0.05) and the liver (p = 0.003). DS VMAT required 21% fewer monitor units (p<0.001) and delivered treatment 2.4 minutes faster (p<0.001) than DS IMRT. Implementing DS constraints during SBRT planning for LAPC can significantly reduce duodenal point or volumetric dose parameters for both VMAT and IMRT. The primary consequence of implementing DS constraints for VMAT is increased dose to other organs at risk, whereas for IMRT it is compromised target coverage. These findings suggest clinical situations where each technique may be most useful if DS constraints are to be employed.     

An in silico comparative dosimetric study of postmastectomy locoregional irradiation using intensity-modulated vs 3-dimensional conventional radiotherapy

An in silico dosimetric evaluation of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) vs 3-dimensional conventional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) treatment plans in postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) to the chest wall and regional lymphatics was conducted. Twenty-five consecutive patients with breast cancer referred for locoregional PMRT, stages T_2-4 with N_1-3, were planned to receive 50?Gy in 25 fractions with IMRT. Additionally, a 3D-CRT plan was generated using identical contours for the clinical target volumes (CTV), planning target volumes (PTV), and organs at risk (OAR). Treatment plans were assessed using dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters of D₉₈, D₉₅, D₅₀, D₂, and homogeneity index for individual CTVs and PTVs. OARs evaluated were ipsilateral and contralateral lungs, heart, spinal cord, and opposite breast. Most DVH parameters pertaining to CTVs and PTVs significantly favored IMRT. V₂₀ for ipsilateral and contralateral lungs, D₃₃ of heart and maximum dose to spinal cord favored IMRT (all p?<?0.001). The mean dose to the opposite breast was significantly lesser with 3D-CRT (5.8?±?1.8?Gy vs 2.0?±?1.0?Gy, p?<?0.001). Thus, except for the mean dose to the opposite breast, the compliance to DVH constraints applied to PTV and OARs were significantly better with IMRT. At a median follow-up of 76 months (7-91), none had locoregional failure or pulmonary or cardiac morbidity. For PMRT, requiring comprehensive irradiation to both chest wall and regional lymphatics, IMRT offers superior dosimetric advantages over 3D-CRT. This was also corroborated by long-term outcomes in these patients treated with IMRT.     

乳腺癌术后放疗3种治疗计划的剂量学研究

目的 评估螺旋断层调强放疗(helical tomotherapy,HT)、常规直线加速器逆向调强放疗(IMRT)和三维适形放疗(3D- CRT)3种治疗计划对乳腺癌术后胸壁照射的剂量影响和正常组织受照剂量体积对比。方法 选择10例早期乳腺癌改良根治术后患者CT定位图像,由同一医生勾画PTV,统一处方剂量50 Gy/ 25次。每例图像分别做HT、IMRT和3D- CRT 3种治疗计划,并对心脏、健侧肺和患侧肺受照射剂量体积、靶区适形度指数、剂量均匀指数和处方剂量所覆盖的靶体积等物理参数进行比较。结果 95%和100%的处方剂量覆盖的PTV体积在HT、IMRT和3D- CRT组分别为99.13%和95.87%、97.80%和94.05%、96.37%和87.29%。HT、IMRT 和3D-CRT组的适形指数和靶区均匀指数分别为0.80±0.10和1.09±0.03、0.65±0.07和1.14±0.02、0.40±0.08和1.17±0.04。心脏V₅~V₂₀以3D- CRT组最少,其次是HT组。患侧肺V₅接受的照射剂量体积以3D- CRT组最小,与HT和IMRT两组相比差异均有统计学意义。健侧肺V₅和V₁₀以3D- CRT组最少。结论 乳腺癌术后胸壁照射的靶区适形度和剂量均匀指数HT组最好;心脏、健侧肺和患侧肺低剂量区最小的依次是3D-CRT、HT和IMRT组。     

Superior liver sparing by combined coplanar/noncoplanar volumetric-modulated arc therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A planning and feasibility study

Compared with step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT) and tomotherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) allows additional arc configurations in treatment planning and noncoplanar (NC) delivery. This study was first to compare VMAT planning with sIMRT planning, and the second to evaluate the toxicity of coplanar (C)/NC-VMAT treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Fifteen patients with HCC (7 with left-lobe and 8 with right-lobe tumors) were planned with C-VMAT, C/NC-VMAT, and sIMRT. The median total dose was 49 Gy (range: 40 to 56 Gy), whereas the median fractional dose was 3.5 Gy (range: 3 to 8 Gy). Different doses/fractionations were converted to normalized doses of 2 Gy per fraction using an α/β ratio of 2.5. The mean liver dose, volume fraction receiving more than 10 Gy (V10), 20 Gy (V20), 30 Gy (V30), effective volume (V_eff), and equivalent uniform dose (EUD) were compared. C/NC-VMAT in 6 patients was evaluated for delivery accuracy and treatment-related toxicity. Compared with sIMRT, both C-VMAT (p = 0.001) and C/NC-VMAT (p = 0.03) had significantly improved target conformity index. Compared with C-VMAT and sIMRT, C/NC-VMAT for treating left-lobe tumors provided significantly better liver sparing as evidenced by differences in mean liver dose (p = 0.03 and p = 0.007), V10 (p = 0.003 and p = 0.009), V20 (p = 0.006 and p = 0.01), V30 (p = 0.02 and p = 0.002), V_eff (p = 0.006 and p = 0.001), and EUD (p = 0.04 and p = 0.003), respectively. For right-lobe tumors, there was no difference in liver sparing between C/NC-VMAT, C-VMAT, and sIMRT. In all patients, dose to more than 95% of target points met the 3%/3 mm criteria. All 6 patients tolerated C/NC-VMAT and none of them had treatment-related ≥ grade 2 toxicity. The C/NC-VMAT can be used clinically for HCC and provides significantly better liver sparing in patients with left-lobe tumors.     

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy in a whole-ventricular irradiation: A planning comparison study

This study evaluated the dosimetric difference between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (cIMRT) in whole-ventricular irradiation. Computed tomography simulation data for 13 patients were acquired to create plans for VMAT and cIMRT. In both plans, the same median dose (100% = 24 Gy) was prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV), which comprised a tumor bed and whole ventricles. During optimization, doses to the normal brain and body were reduced, provided that the dose constraints of the target coverage were satisfied. The dose-volume indices of the PTV, normal brain, and body as well as monitor units were compared between the 2 techniques by using paired t-tests. The results showed no significant difference in the homogeneity index (0.064 vs 0.065; p = 0.824) of the PTV and conformation number (0.78 vs 0.77; p = 0.065) between the 2 techniques. In the normal brain and body, the dose-volume indices showed no significant difference between the 2 techniques, except for an increase in the volume receiving a low dose in VMAT; the absolute volume of the normal brain and body receiving 1 Gy of radiation significantly increased in VMAT by 1.6% and 8.3%, respectively, compared with that in cIMRT (1044 vs 1028 mL for the normal brain and 3079.2 vs 2823.3 mL for the body; p<0.001). The number of monitor units to deliver a 2.0-Gy fraction was significantly reduced in VMAT compared with that in cIMRT (354 vs 873, respectively; p<0.001). In conclusion, VMAT delivers IMRT to complex target volumes such as whole ventricles with fewer monitor units, while maintaining target coverage and conformal isodose distribution comparable to cIMRT; however, in addition to those characteristics, the fact that the volume of the normal brain and body receiving a low dose would increase in VMAT should be considered.     

A comparative dosimetric analysis of virtual stereotactic body radiotherapy to high-dose-rate monotherapy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer

PurposeStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is being used with increasing frequency as definitive treatment of early stage prostate cancer. Much of the justification for its adoption was derived from earlier clinical results using high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy. We determine whether HDR's dosimetry can be achieved by virtual SBRT.Methods and MaterialsPatients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer on a prospective trial evaluating the efficacy of HDR monotherapy treated to dose of 9.5 Gy × 4 fractions were used for this study. A total of 5 patients were used in this analysis. Virtual SBRT plans were developed to reproduce the planning target volume (PTV) HDR dose distributions. Both normal tissue– and PTV-prioritized plans were generated.ResultsFrom the normal tissue–prioritized plan, HDR and virtual SBRT achieved similar PTV V₁₀₀ (93.8% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.20) and V₁₅₀ (40.3% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.69) coverage. However, the PTV V₂₀₀ was not attainable with SBRT (15.2% vs. 0.0%, p < 0.001). The rectal D_max was significantly lower with HDR (94.2% vs. 99.42%, p = 0.05). The rectal D_{2 cc} was also lower (60.8% vs. 71.1%, p = 0.07). Difference in D_{1 cc} urethral dose was not significantly different (87.7% vs. 75.2%, p = 0.33). Comparing the PTV-prioritized plans, the rectal D_max (94.2% vs. 111.1%, p = 0.05) and mean dose (27.1% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.03) were significantly higher using SBRT, and the rectal D_{2 cc} was higher using SBRT (60.8% vs. 81.8%, p = 0.07).ConclusionsHDR achieves significantly higher intraprostatic doses while achieving a lower maximum rectal dose compared with our virtual SBRT treatment planning. Future studies should compare clinical outcomes and toxicity between these modalities.     

Dosimetric comparison of multichannel with one single-channel vaginal cylinder for vaginal cancer treatments with high-dose-rate brachytherapy

PurposeTo compare the three-dimensional (3D) image (CT/MR)-based planning with a multichannel vaginal cylinder (MVC) to a single-channel vaginal cylinder (SVC) for the treatment of vaginal cancer.Methods and MaterialsA total of 20 consecutive patients were treated with 3D CT/MR image-based high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy using an MVC. All patients received external beam radiation therapy before HDR brachytherapy. A brachytherapy dose of 20–25 Gy of more than five fractions was delivered to clinical target volume (CTV). Retrospectively, treatment plans for all patients were generated using the central channel only to mimic an SVC applicator. The SVC plans were optimized to match CTV coverage with MVC plans. Dose homogeneity index as well as bladder, rectum, sigmoid, and urethral doses were compared.ResultsThe mean D₉₀ for CTV was 74.2 Gy (range: 48.8–84.1 Gy). The mean (±standard deviation) of dose homogeneity index for MVC vs. SVC was 0.49 (±0.19) and 0.52 (±0.23), respectively (p = 0.09). Mean bladder 0.1, 1, and 2 cc doses for MVC vs. SVC were 69 vs. 71.2 Gy (p = 0.35), 61.4 vs. 63.8 Gy (p = 0.1), and 59.5 vs. 60.9 Gy (p = 0.31), respectively. Similarly, mean rectum 0.1, 1, and 2 cc doses for MVC vs. SVC were 67.2 vs. 75.4 Gy (p = 0.005), 60.0 vs. 65.6 Gy (p = 0.008), and 57.3 vs. 62.0 Gy (p = 0.015), respectively, and mean sigmoid doses were 56.3 vs. 60.5 Gy (p = 0.10), 50.9 vs. 53.1 Gy (p = 0.09), and 49.1 vs. 50.7 Gy (p = 0.10), respectively.ConclusionThe 3D CT-/MR-based plan with MVC may provide better dose distribution in the management of certain clinical situations of vaginal cancer requiring intracavitary brachytherapy, especially in minimizing potential late rectal complications.