Mustafa Çağlar, Kudret Akçay, Esra Serin, Dursun Eşitmez, Mehmet Sıddık Cebe, Navid Kheradmand, Ömer Yazıcı, Dilek Ünal, Evrim Metcalfe
{"title":"Surface dose analysis and dosimetric comparison of Halcyon versus Truebeam in breast cancer radiotherapy: An OSL dosimetry study.","authors":"Mustafa Çağlar, Kudret Akçay, Esra Serin, Dursun Eşitmez, Mehmet Sıddık Cebe, Navid Kheradmand, Ömer Yazıcı, Dilek Ünal, Evrim Metcalfe","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Breast cancer is a neoplastic disease with high prevalence among women. Radiotherapy is one of the principal treatment modalities for this disease, but it poses significant challenges. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the technical and dosimetric performance of conventional C-arm linac systems and a new design, Halcyon, in the context of breast radiotherapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included ten patients who had undergone left breast radiotherapy. Additionally, breast radiotherapy was simulated with an anthropomorphic phantom, and similar planning studies were performed. A total of 40 treatment plans were prepared for ten patients using the field-in-field (FinF) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques on both TrueBeam and Halcyon systems. Subsequently, treatment plans were created for anthropomorphic phantoms using both techniques on both devices. The dosimetric comparisons were conducted on treatment plans with different treatment techniques on both devices. An anthropomorphic phantom was employed to ascertain the surface dose during treatment, with irradiation conducted in the following with the OSL dosimetry method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patient plan comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in planning target volume (PTV) outcomes between techniques and devices. Upon analysis of the organ at risk (OAR), statistically significant differences were identified for FinF in both devices for low-dose regions. Analysis of the OSL results obtained from phantom irradiations revealed that the Halcyon results were higher than those obtained with the TrueBeam for both techniques. Additionally, a comparison of OSL results with the TPS data revealed discrepancies of up to 18% within the field and up to 22% outside the field. Furthermore, Halcyon demonstrated higher Monitor Unit (MU) values for both techniques, while still maintaining shorter treatment times.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Halcyon demonstrated comparable technical and dosimetric outcomes to conventional C-arm linac in breast radiotherapy. Its distinctive design features contribute to the implementation of efficient and secure treatment modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":" ","pages":"e70085"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","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/acm2.70085","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: Breast cancer is a neoplastic disease with high prevalence among women. Radiotherapy is one of the principal treatment modalities for this disease, but it poses significant challenges. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the technical and dosimetric performance of conventional C-arm linac systems and a new design, Halcyon, in the context of breast radiotherapy.
Methods: The study included ten patients who had undergone left breast radiotherapy. Additionally, breast radiotherapy was simulated with an anthropomorphic phantom, and similar planning studies were performed. A total of 40 treatment plans were prepared for ten patients using the field-in-field (FinF) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques on both TrueBeam and Halcyon systems. Subsequently, treatment plans were created for anthropomorphic phantoms using both techniques on both devices. The dosimetric comparisons were conducted on treatment plans with different treatment techniques on both devices. An anthropomorphic phantom was employed to ascertain the surface dose during treatment, with irradiation conducted in the following with the OSL dosimetry method.
Results: Patient plan comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in planning target volume (PTV) outcomes between techniques and devices. Upon analysis of the organ at risk (OAR), statistically significant differences were identified for FinF in both devices for low-dose regions. Analysis of the OSL results obtained from phantom irradiations revealed that the Halcyon results were higher than those obtained with the TrueBeam for both techniques. Additionally, a comparison of OSL results with the TPS data revealed discrepancies of up to 18% within the field and up to 22% outside the field. Furthermore, Halcyon demonstrated higher Monitor Unit (MU) values for both techniques, while still maintaining shorter treatment times.
Conclusion: The Halcyon demonstrated comparable technical and dosimetric outcomes to conventional C-arm linac in breast radiotherapy. Its distinctive design features contribute to the implementation of efficient and secure treatment modalities.
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