Dosimetric Advantages of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Based Coronal Arc Delivery Technique in Brain Stereotactic Radiosurgery: A Feasibility Study

G. Gill, R. Jakubovic, J. Baker, T. Button, Jenghwa Chang
{"title":"Dosimetric Advantages of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Based Coronal Arc Delivery Technique in Brain Stereotactic Radiosurgery: A Feasibility Study","authors":"G. Gill, R. Jakubovic, J. Baker, T. Button, Jenghwa Chang","doi":"10.4236/IJMPCERO.2019.82008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The feasibility of a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) based coronal arc (cARC) technique for treating a single brain metastasis or lesion proximal to the brainstem or optic chiasm was evaluated. Coplanar (CP) and non-coplanar (NCP) treatment plans to an anthropomorphic head/neck phantom scanned head-first supine were compared to a cARC plan with the phantom rotated vertically. A set of planning target volumes (PTVs) were contoured centrally between the brainstem and optic chiasm (“Ant PTVs”) and posterior to brainstem (“Post PTVs”). Dosimetric indices such as conformity index (C.I.), gradient measure (G.M.), and dose volume histograms (DVHs) were compared for CP, NCP and cARC techniques. The TG101 guidelines for organs-at-risk (OARs), and 95% of PTV receiving at least 100% of the prescription dose (D95 = 100%) were used as plan objectives. Reductions in D50 and D30 to the brainstem of 85.1% ± 3.9% and 87.6% ± 3.2%, respectively were seen for “Post PTVs”, and 51.1% ± 17.8% and 85.6% ± 6.0% respectively for “Ant PTVs” using cARC versus CP (p ≤ 0.01). For chiasm, reductions of D50 and D30 were 61.7% ± 3.2% and 44.2% ± 8.9% for “Ant PTVs”, by 69.3% ± 8.0% and 74.3% ± 8.2% for “Post PTVs” (p ≤ 0.01). Comparing cARC to NCP led to similar dosimetric improvements. The conformity index (C.I.) was measured to be 1.101 ± 0.038, 1.088 ± 0.054, and 1.060 ± 0.040 for cARC, CP and NCP respectively (p ≤ 0.01). The overall GM in cm was 0.581 ± 0.097, 0.708 ± 0.064, and 0.476 ± 0.050 for cARC, CP and NCP respectively (p ≤ 0.01). The mean distance gradient fall-off (in cm) was 0.249 ± 0.038 (cARC), 0.749 ± 0.107 (CP), and 0.621 ± 0.068 (NCP) at the center slice in anterior-posterior direction of the target volume (p ≤ 0.01). The objective of this study is to compare the dosimetric indices of cARC with CP and NCP techniques. In conclusion, cARC can provide improved dosimetry as compared to CP and NCP for lesion proximal to the brainstem or optic chiasm.","PeriodicalId":14028,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/IJMPCERO.2019.82008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The feasibility of a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) based coronal arc (cARC) technique for treating a single brain metastasis or lesion proximal to the brainstem or optic chiasm was evaluated. Coplanar (CP) and non-coplanar (NCP) treatment plans to an anthropomorphic head/neck phantom scanned head-first supine were compared to a cARC plan with the phantom rotated vertically. A set of planning target volumes (PTVs) were contoured centrally between the brainstem and optic chiasm (“Ant PTVs”) and posterior to brainstem (“Post PTVs”). Dosimetric indices such as conformity index (C.I.), gradient measure (G.M.), and dose volume histograms (DVHs) were compared for CP, NCP and cARC techniques. The TG101 guidelines for organs-at-risk (OARs), and 95% of PTV receiving at least 100% of the prescription dose (D95 = 100%) were used as plan objectives. Reductions in D50 and D30 to the brainstem of 85.1% ± 3.9% and 87.6% ± 3.2%, respectively were seen for “Post PTVs”, and 51.1% ± 17.8% and 85.6% ± 6.0% respectively for “Ant PTVs” using cARC versus CP (p ≤ 0.01). For chiasm, reductions of D50 and D30 were 61.7% ± 3.2% and 44.2% ± 8.9% for “Ant PTVs”, by 69.3% ± 8.0% and 74.3% ± 8.2% for “Post PTVs” (p ≤ 0.01). Comparing cARC to NCP led to similar dosimetric improvements. The conformity index (C.I.) was measured to be 1.101 ± 0.038, 1.088 ± 0.054, and 1.060 ± 0.040 for cARC, CP and NCP respectively (p ≤ 0.01). The overall GM in cm was 0.581 ± 0.097, 0.708 ± 0.064, and 0.476 ± 0.050 for cARC, CP and NCP respectively (p ≤ 0.01). The mean distance gradient fall-off (in cm) was 0.249 ± 0.038 (cARC), 0.749 ± 0.107 (CP), and 0.621 ± 0.068 (NCP) at the center slice in anterior-posterior direction of the target volume (p ≤ 0.01). The objective of this study is to compare the dosimetric indices of cARC with CP and NCP techniques. In conclusion, cARC can provide improved dosimetry as compared to CP and NCP for lesion proximal to the brainstem or optic chiasm.
脑立体定向放射外科中基于体积调制电弧治疗的冠状电弧输送技术的剂量学优势:可行性研究
评估了基于体积调制电弧治疗(VMAT)的冠状电弧(cARC)技术治疗单一脑转移或脑干近端病变或视交叉的可行性。采用共面(CP)和非共面(NCP)治疗方案对头先仰卧扫描的拟人化头颈部幻像进行治疗,并与垂直旋转幻像的cARC治疗方案进行比较。在脑干和视交叉之间(“前视交叉”)和脑干后方(“后视交叉”)绘制一组规划靶体积(PTVs)。比较了CP、NCP和cARC技术的一致性指数(C.I.)、梯度测量(G.M.)和剂量体积直方图(DVHs)等剂量学指标。TG101高危器官指南(OARs)和95%接受至少100%处方剂量的PTV (D95 = 100%)被用作计划目标。cARC与CP相比,“后PTVs”组脑干D50和D30分别降低85.1%±3.9%和87.6%±3.2%,“后PTVs”组脑干D50和D30分别降低51.1%±17.8%和85.6%±6.0% (p≤0.01)。对于交叉,“Ant PTVs”组D50和D30分别降低61.7%±3.2%和44.2%±8.9%,“Post PTVs”组D50和D30分别降低69.3%±8.0%和74.3%±8.2% (p≤0.01)。将cARC与NCP进行比较导致了类似的剂量学改善。cARC、CP和NCP的符合性指数分别为1.101±0.038、1.088±0.054和1.060±0.040 (p≤0.01)。cARC、CP和NCP的cm总GM分别为0.581±0.097、0.708±0.064和0.476±0.050 (p≤0.01)。靶容积前后方向中央切片的平均距离梯度下降(单位cm)分别为0.249±0.038 (cARC)、0.749±0.107 (CP)和0.621±0.068 (NCP) (p≤0.01)。本研究的目的是比较cARC与CP和NCP技术的剂量学指标。总之,与CP和NCP相比,cARC可以为脑干近端病变或视交叉提供更好的剂量测定。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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