Stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple small brain metastases using gamma knife versus single-isocenter VMAT: Normal brain dose based on lesion number and size.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Abram Abdou, Timoteo Almeida, Elizabeth Bossart, Irene Monterroso, Eric A Mellon
{"title":"Stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple small brain metastases using gamma knife versus single-isocenter VMAT: Normal brain dose based on lesion number and size.","authors":"Abram Abdou, Timoteo Almeida, Elizabeth Bossart, Irene Monterroso, Eric A Mellon","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The study evaluates rapid linear accelerator (Linac) single isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with Hyperarc for large target numbers. We compared to Gamma Knife (GK), which suffers from long treatment times and investigated causes of differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Linac SRS and GK treatment plans for patients receiving 18 Gy to the gross tumor volume (GTV) were evaluated for mean brain dose and volume of brain receiving 12 Gy or more (V12 Gy) as toxicity correlates. Further investigations included patient-based and simulations of 1-33 brain metastases to compare the ability of Linac SRS and GK to separate adjacent and distant lesions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For three patients (33, 33, and 18 metastases), GK reduced mean brain dose (2.89 Gy, 2.38 Gy, 2.79 Gy) compared to 2.5 mm microMLCs (4.36 Gy, 4.75 Gy, 4.26 Gy, p = 0.027) and 5 mm MLCs (4.71 Gy, 5.22 Gy, 4.60 Gy, p = 0.024). GK also improved V12 Gy (13.29 cc, 11.62 cc, 33.79 cc) compared to microMLC (25.31 cc, 30.91 cc, 54.71 cc, p = 0.019) and MLC (31.69 cc, 33.68 cc, 54.71 cc). This must be balanced with GK treatment times (5-11 h). GK achieved 50% prescription line separation at smaller distances (1.8-7.6 mm) than microMLC (7.7-10.2 mm) or MLC (8.8-12.2 mm) for 0.5-1.0 cm targets (4-8 mm collimator single shot). For 1.5 cm targets (16 mm shot) results were mixed (GK 5.4-17 mm, microMLC 9.5-11.2 mm, MLC 9.5-11.3 mm). A 7.7 cm simulation cube was then incrementally filled with 0.5 cm or 1.0 cm equidistant targets. GK plan mean brain dose increased 0.04 Gy/target (1.08 Gy mean/27 targets) compared to 0.14 Gy/target for microMLC (3.78 Gy mean/27 targets) for 0.5 cm targets, with differences diminishing for 1.0 cm targets (GK 0.15 Gy/target, microMLC 0.17 Gy/target).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For numerous small metastases GK improves dosimetry but has exceedingly long treatment times. GK improves dose separation for adjacent lesions < 1.0 cm and conformity for small (∼0.5 cm) targets. GK and Linac differences are small for individual targets but compound over many targets. V12 Gy limits in the NCIC CE.7 trial protocol mandate dose modifications for Linac SRS but not GK.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":" ","pages":"e70065"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70065","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The study evaluates rapid linear accelerator (Linac) single isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with Hyperarc for large target numbers. We compared to Gamma Knife (GK), which suffers from long treatment times and investigated causes of differences.

Methods: Linac SRS and GK treatment plans for patients receiving 18 Gy to the gross tumor volume (GTV) were evaluated for mean brain dose and volume of brain receiving 12 Gy or more (V12 Gy) as toxicity correlates. Further investigations included patient-based and simulations of 1-33 brain metastases to compare the ability of Linac SRS and GK to separate adjacent and distant lesions.

Results: For three patients (33, 33, and 18 metastases), GK reduced mean brain dose (2.89 Gy, 2.38 Gy, 2.79 Gy) compared to 2.5 mm microMLCs (4.36 Gy, 4.75 Gy, 4.26 Gy, p = 0.027) and 5 mm MLCs (4.71 Gy, 5.22 Gy, 4.60 Gy, p = 0.024). GK also improved V12 Gy (13.29 cc, 11.62 cc, 33.79 cc) compared to microMLC (25.31 cc, 30.91 cc, 54.71 cc, p = 0.019) and MLC (31.69 cc, 33.68 cc, 54.71 cc). This must be balanced with GK treatment times (5-11 h). GK achieved 50% prescription line separation at smaller distances (1.8-7.6 mm) than microMLC (7.7-10.2 mm) or MLC (8.8-12.2 mm) for 0.5-1.0 cm targets (4-8 mm collimator single shot). For 1.5 cm targets (16 mm shot) results were mixed (GK 5.4-17 mm, microMLC 9.5-11.2 mm, MLC 9.5-11.3 mm). A 7.7 cm simulation cube was then incrementally filled with 0.5 cm or 1.0 cm equidistant targets. GK plan mean brain dose increased 0.04 Gy/target (1.08 Gy mean/27 targets) compared to 0.14 Gy/target for microMLC (3.78 Gy mean/27 targets) for 0.5 cm targets, with differences diminishing for 1.0 cm targets (GK 0.15 Gy/target, microMLC 0.17 Gy/target).

Conclusions: For numerous small metastases GK improves dosimetry but has exceedingly long treatment times. GK improves dose separation for adjacent lesions < 1.0 cm and conformity for small (∼0.5 cm) targets. GK and Linac differences are small for individual targets but compound over many targets. V12 Gy limits in the NCIC CE.7 trial protocol mandate dose modifications for Linac SRS but not GK.

立体定向放射治疗多发小脑转移瘤伽玛刀与单等中心VMAT:基于病灶数量和大小的正常脑剂量
目的:评价超弧快速直线加速器(Linac)单等中心立体定向放射手术(SRS)对大靶数的治疗效果。我们比较了伽玛刀(GK),后者的治疗时间较长,并调查了差异的原因。方法:以平均脑剂量和12 Gy及以上脑体积(V12 Gy)为毒性相关性,评价18 Gy患者的Linac SRS和GK治疗方案。进一步的研究包括基于患者和模拟1-33脑转移,以比较Linac SRS和GK分离邻近和远处病变的能力。结果:与2.5 mm微MLCs (4.36 Gy, 4.75 Gy, 4.26 Gy, p = 0.027)和5 mm MLCs (4.71 Gy, 5.22 Gy, 4.60 Gy, p = 0.024)相比,GK降低了3例患者(33、33和18例转移)的平均脑剂量(2.89 Gy, 2.38 Gy, 2.79 Gy)。与微型MLC (25.31 cc, 30.91 cc, 54.71 cc, p = 0.019)和MLC (31.69 cc, 33.68 cc, 54.71 cc)相比,GK也提高了V12 Gy (13.29 cc, 11.62 cc, 33.79 cc)。这必须与GK处理时间(5-11小时)相平衡。GK在更小的距离(1.8-7.6毫米)下比microMLC(7.7-10.2毫米)或MLC(8.8-12.2毫米)在0.5-1.0厘米目标(4-8毫米准直器单次射击)下实现50%的处方线分离。对于1.5 cm目标(16 mm射击),结果混合(GK 5.4-17 mm, microMLC 9.5-11.2 mm, MLC 9.5-11.3 mm)。然后在一个7.7 cm的模拟立方体中逐渐填充0.5 cm或1.0 cm等距目标。GK计划平均脑剂量增加0.04 Gy/靶(平均1.08 Gy/ 27个靶),而0.5 cm靶的微mlc计划平均脑剂量增加0.14 Gy/靶(平均3.78 Gy/ 27个靶),1.0 cm靶的差异减小(GK计划0.15 Gy/靶,微mlc计划0.17 Gy/靶)。结论:对于许多小转移瘤,GK改善了剂量学,但治疗时间过长。GK改善了相邻病变的剂量分离
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
19.00%
发文量
331
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission. JACMP will publish: -Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500. -Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed. -Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references. -Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents. -Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews. -Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics. -Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信