skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for adult craniospinal irradiation—A comparison with traditional techniques

Abstract

Craniospinal irradiation (CSI) poses a challenging planning process because of the complex target volume. Traditional 3D conformal CSI does not spare any critical organs, resulting in toxicity in patients. Here the dosimetric advantages of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are compared with classic conformal planning in adults for both cranial and spine fields to develop a clinically feasible technique that is both effective and efficient. Ten adult patients treated with CSI were retrospectively identified. For the cranial fields, 5-field IMRT and dual 356° VMAT arcs were compared with opposed lateral 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) fields. For the spine fields, traditional posterior-anterior (PA) PA fields were compared with isocentric 5-field IMRT plans and single 200° VMAT arcs. Two adult patients have been treated using this IMRT technique to date and extensive quality assurance, especially for the junction regions, was performed. For the cranial fields, the IMRT technique had the highest planned target volume (PTV) maximum and was the least efficient, whereas the VMAT technique provided the greatest parotid sparing with better efficiency. 3D-CRT provided the most efficient delivery but with the highest parotid dose. For the spine fields, VMAT provided the best PTV coverage but had themore » highest mean dose to all organs at risk (OAR). 3D-CRT had the highest PTV and OAR maximum doses but was the most efficient. IMRT provides the greatest OAR sparing but the longest delivery time. For those patients with unresectable disease that can benefit from a higher, definitive dose, 3D-CRT–opposed laterals are the most clinically feasible technique for cranial fields and for spine fields. Although inefficient, the IMRT technique is the most clinically feasible because of the increased mean OAR dose with the VMAT technique. Quality assurance of the beams, especially the junction regions, is essential.« less

Authors:
 [1]; ; ; ;  [1];  [2]; ;  [1]
  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Jefferson Medical College and Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA (United States)
  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22262790
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Dosimetry; Journal Volume: 38; Journal Issue: 1; Other Information: Copyright (c) 2013 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ADULTS; CRITICAL ORGANS; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIATION THERAPY; HEAD; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIATION DOSES; VERTEBRAE

Citation Formats

Studenski, Matthew T., E-mail: matthew.studenski@jeffersonhospital.org, Shen, Xinglei, Yu, Yan, Xiao, Ying, Shi, Wenyin, Biswas, Tithi, Werner-Wasik, Maria, and Harrison, Amy S.. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for adult craniospinal irradiation—A comparison with traditional techniques. United States: N. p., 2013. Web. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.006.
Studenski, Matthew T., E-mail: matthew.studenski@jeffersonhospital.org, Shen, Xinglei, Yu, Yan, Xiao, Ying, Shi, Wenyin, Biswas, Tithi, Werner-Wasik, Maria, & Harrison, Amy S.. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for adult craniospinal irradiation—A comparison with traditional techniques. United States. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.006.
Studenski, Matthew T., E-mail: matthew.studenski@jeffersonhospital.org, Shen, Xinglei, Yu, Yan, Xiao, Ying, Shi, Wenyin, Biswas, Tithi, Werner-Wasik, Maria, and Harrison, Amy S.. 2013. "Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for adult craniospinal irradiation—A comparison with traditional techniques". United States. doi:10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.006.
@article{osti_22262790,
title = {Intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for adult craniospinal irradiation—A comparison with traditional techniques},
author = {Studenski, Matthew T., E-mail: matthew.studenski@jeffersonhospital.org and Shen, Xinglei and Yu, Yan and Xiao, Ying and Shi, Wenyin and Biswas, Tithi and Werner-Wasik, Maria and Harrison, Amy S.},
abstractNote = {Craniospinal irradiation (CSI) poses a challenging planning process because of the complex target volume. Traditional 3D conformal CSI does not spare any critical organs, resulting in toxicity in patients. Here the dosimetric advantages of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are compared with classic conformal planning in adults for both cranial and spine fields to develop a clinically feasible technique that is both effective and efficient. Ten adult patients treated with CSI were retrospectively identified. For the cranial fields, 5-field IMRT and dual 356° VMAT arcs were compared with opposed lateral 3D conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) fields. For the spine fields, traditional posterior-anterior (PA) PA fields were compared with isocentric 5-field IMRT plans and single 200° VMAT arcs. Two adult patients have been treated using this IMRT technique to date and extensive quality assurance, especially for the junction regions, was performed. For the cranial fields, the IMRT technique had the highest planned target volume (PTV) maximum and was the least efficient, whereas the VMAT technique provided the greatest parotid sparing with better efficiency. 3D-CRT provided the most efficient delivery but with the highest parotid dose. For the spine fields, VMAT provided the best PTV coverage but had the highest mean dose to all organs at risk (OAR). 3D-CRT had the highest PTV and OAR maximum doses but was the most efficient. IMRT provides the greatest OAR sparing but the longest delivery time. For those patients with unresectable disease that can benefit from a higher, definitive dose, 3D-CRT–opposed laterals are the most clinically feasible technique for cranial fields and for spine fields. Although inefficient, the IMRT technique is the most clinically feasible because of the increased mean OAR dose with the VMAT technique. Quality assurance of the beams, especially the junction regions, is essential.},
doi = {10.1016/J.MEDDOS.2012.05.006},
journal = {Medical Dosimetry},
number = 1,
volume = 38,
place = {United States},
year = 2013,
month = 4
}
  • When standard conformal x-ray technique for craniospinal irradiation is used, it is a challenge to achieve satisfactory dose coverage of the target including the area of the cribriform plate, while sparing organs at risk. We present a new intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), noncoplanar technique, for delivering irradiation to the cranial part and compare it with 3 other techniques and previously published results. A total of 13 patients who had previously received craniospinal irradiation with standard conformal x-ray technique were reviewed. New treatment plans were generated for each patient using the noncoplanar IMRT-based technique, a coplanar IMRT-based technique, and a coplanarmore » volumetric-modulated arch therapy (VMAT) technique. Dosimetry data for all patients were compared with the corresponding data from the conventional treatment plans. The new noncoplanar IMRT technique substantially reduced the mean dose to organs at risk compared with the standard radiation technique. The 2 other coplanar techniques also reduced the mean dose to some of the critical organs. However, this reduction was not as substantial as the reduction obtained by the noncoplanar technique. Furthermore, compared with the standard technique, the IMRT techniques reduced the total calculated radiation dose that was delivered to the normal tissue, whereas the VMAT technique increased this dose. Additionally, the coverage of the target was significantly improved by the noncoplanar IMRT technique. Compared with the standard technique, the coplanar IMRT and the VMAT technique did not improve the coverage of the target significantly. All the new planning techniques increased the number of monitor units (MU) used—the noncoplanar IMRT technique by 99%, the coplanar IMRT technique by 122%, and the VMAT technique by 26%—causing concern for leak radiation. The noncoplanar IMRT technique covered the target better and decreased doses to organs at risk compared with the other techniques. All the new techniques increased the number of MU compared with the standard technique.« less
  • Purpose: To study the dosimetric impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (h-IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT) for whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with multiple brain metastases. Methods: Ten patients with multiple brain metastases were included in this analysis. The prescribed dose was 45 Gy to the whole brain (PTVWBRT) and 55 Gy to individual brain metastases (PTVboost) delivered simultaneously in 25 fractions. Three treatment techniques were designed: the 7 equal spaced fields IMRT plan, hybrid IMRT plan and VMAT with two 358°arcs. In hybrid IMRT plan, two fields(90°and 270°) were planned to themore » whole brain. This was used as a base dose plan. Then 5 fields IMRT plan was optimized based on the two fields plan. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk and total MU in three techniques were compared. Results: For the target dose, conformity and homogeneity in PTV, no statistically differences were observed in the three techniques. For the maximum dose in bilateral lens and the mean dose in bilateral eyes, IMRT and h-IMRT plans showed the highest and lowest value respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in the dose of optic nerve and brainstem. For the monitor units, IMRT and VMAT plans showed the highest and lowest value respectively. Conclusion: For WBRT with simultaneous integrated boost in patients with multiple brain metastases, hybrid IMRT could reduce the doses to lens and eyes. It is feasible for patients with brain metastases.« less
  • To compare the dosimetric performance of 3 different treatment techniques: hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy (hybrid-VMAT), pure-VMAT, and fixed-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (F-IMRT) for whole-breast irradiation of left-sided early breast cancer. The hybrid-VMAT treatment technique and 2 other treatment techniques—pure-VMAT and F-IMRT—were compared retrospectively in 10 patients with left-sided early breast cancer. The treatment plans of these patients were replanned using the same contours based on the original computed tomography (CT) data sets. Dosimetric parameters were calculated to evaluate plan quality. Total monitor units (MUs) and delivery time were also recorded and evaluated. The hybrid-VMAT plan generated the best results inmore » dose coverage of the target and the dose uniformity inside the target (p < 0.0001 for conformal index [CI]; p = 0.0002 for homogeneity index [HI] of planning target volume [PTV]{sub 50.4} {sub Gy} and p < 0.0001 for HI of PTV{sub 62} {sub Gy}). Volumes of ipsilateral lung irradiated to doses of 20 Gy (V{sub 20} {sub Gy}) and 5 Gy (V{sub 5} {sub Gy}) by the hybrid-VMAT plan were significantly less than those of the F-IMRT and the pure-VMAT plans. The volume of ipsilateral lung irradiated to a dose of 5 Gy was significantly less using the hybrid-VMAT plan than that using the F-IMRT or the pure-VMAT plan. The total mean MUs for the hybrid-VMAT plan were significantly less than those for the F-IMRT or the pure-VMAT plan. The mean machine delivery time was 3.23 ± 0.29 minutes for the hybrid-VMAT plans, which is longer than that for the pure-VMAT plans but shorter than that for the F-IMRT plans. The hybrid-VMAT plan is feasible for whole-breast irradiation of left-sided early breast cancer.« less
  • Purpose: To compare the treatment plan quality and dose gradient near the hippocampus between VMAT (RapidArc) and IMRT delivery techniques for whole brain radiation therapy. Methods: Fifteen patients were evaluated in this retrospective study. All treatments were planned on Varian Eclipse TPS, using 3-Arc VMAT and 9-Field IMRT, following NRG Oncology protocol NRG-CC001 guidelines evaluated by a single radiation oncologist. Prescribed doses in all plans were 30 Gy delivered over 10 fractions normalized to a minimum of 100% of the dose covering 95% of the target volume. Identical contour sets and dose-volume constraints following protocol guidelines were also applied inmore » all plans. A paired t-test analysis was used to compare VMAT and IMRT plans. Results: NRG-CC001 protocol dose-volume constraints were met for all VMAT and IMRT plans. For the planning target volume (PTV), the average values for D2% and D98% were 6% lower and 4% higher in VMAT than in IMRT, respectively. The average mean and maximum hippocampus doses in Gy for VMAT vs IMRT plans were (11.85±0.81 vs. 12.24±0.56, p=0.10) and (16.27±0.78 vs. 16.59±0.71, p=0.24), respectively. In VMAT, the average mean and maximum chiasm doses were 3% and 1% higher than in IMRT plans, respectively. For the left optic nerve, the average mean and maximum doses were 10% and 5% higher in VMAT than in IMRT plans, respectively. These values were 12% and 3% for the right optic nerve. The average percentage of dose gradient around the hippocampus in the 0–5mm and 5–10mm abutted regions for VMAT vs. IMRT were (4.42%±2.22% /mm vs. 3.95%±2.61% /mm, p=0.43) and (4.54%±1.50% /mm vs. 4.39%±1.28% /mm, p=0.73), respectively. Conclusion: VMAT plans can achieve higher hippocampus sparing with a faster dose fall-off than IMRT plans. Though statistically insignificant, VMAT offers better PTV coverage with slightly higher doses to OARs.« less
  • Purpose: To perform a comparison of two pelvic lymph node volume delineation strategies used in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for high risk prostate cancer and to determine the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods and Materials: Eighteen consecutive patients accrued to an ongoing clinical trial were identified according to either the nodal contouring strategy as described based on lymphotropic nanoparticle-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging technology (9 patients) or the current Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) consensus guidelines (9 patients). Radiation consisted of 45 Gy to prostate, seminal vesicles, and lymph nodes, with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate alone,more » to a total dose of 67.5 Gy delivered in 25 fractions. Prospective acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities were compared at baseline, during radiotherapy, and 3 months after radiotherapy. Each patient was retrospectively replanned using the opposite method of nodal contouring, and plans were normalized for dosimetric comparison. VMAT plans were also generated according to the RTOG method for comparison. Results: RTOG plans resulted in a significantly lower rate of genitourinary frequency 3 months after treatment. The dosimetric comparison showed that the RTOG plans resulted in both favorable planning target volume (PTV) coverage and lower organs at risk (OARs) and integral (ID) doses. VMAT required two to three arcs to achieve adequate treatment plans, we did not observe consistent dosimetric benefits to either the PTV or the OARs, and a higher ID was observed. However, treatment times were significantly shorter with VMAT. Conclusion: The RTOG guidelines for pelvic nodal volume delineation results in favorable dosimetry and acceptable acute toxicities for both the target and OARs. We are unable to conclude that VMAT provides a benefit compared with IMRT.« less