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

Title: SU-E-T-591: Optimizing the Flattening Filter Free Beam Selection in RapidArc-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Lung Cancer

Abstract

Purpose: To optimize the flattening filter free (FFF) beam energy selection in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment for stage I lung cancer with different fraction schemes. Methods: Twelve patients suffering from stage I lung cancer were enrolled in this study. Plans were designed using 6XFFF and 10XFFF beams with the most widely used fraction schemes of 4*12 Gy, 3*18 Gy and 1*34 Gy, respectively. The plan quality was appraised in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage, conformity of the prescribed dose (CI100%), intermediate dose spillage (R50% and D2cm), organs at risk (OARs) sparing and beam-on time. Results: The 10XFFF beam predicted 1% higher maximum, mean dose to the PTV and 4–5% higher R50% compared with the 6XFFF beam in the three fraction schemes, whereas the CI100% and D2cm was similar. Most importantly, the 6XFFF beam exhibited 3–10% lower dose to all the OARs. However, the 10XFFF beam reduced the beam-on time by 31.9±7.2%, 38.7±2.8% and 43.6±4.0% compared with the 6XFFF beam in the 4*12 Gy, 3*18 Gy and 1*34 Gy schemes, respectively. Beam-on time was 2.2±0.2 vs 1.5±0.1, 3.3±0.9 vs 2.0±0.5 and 6.3±0.9 vs 3.5±0.4 minutes for the 6XFFF and 10XFFF one in the three fraction schemes. Conclusion: Themore » 6XFFF beam obtains better OARs sparing in SBRT treatment for stage I lung cancer, but the 10XFFF one provides improved treatment efficiency. To balance the OARs sparing and intrafractional variation as a function of prolonged treatment time, the authors recommend to use the 6XFFF beam in the 4*12 Gy and 3*18 Gy schemes for better OARs sparing. However, for the 1*34 Gy scheme, the 10XFFF beam is recommended to achieve improved treatment efficiency.« less

Authors:
;  [1]
  1. Cancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22496304
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 42; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; BEAMS; FILTERS; GY RANGE 10-100; LUNGS; NEOPLASMS; OPTIMIZATION; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY

Citation Formats

Huang, B-T, and Lu, J-Y. SU-E-T-591: Optimizing the Flattening Filter Free Beam Selection in RapidArc-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Lung Cancer. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924954.
Huang, B-T, & Lu, J-Y. SU-E-T-591: Optimizing the Flattening Filter Free Beam Selection in RapidArc-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Lung Cancer. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924954.
Huang, B-T, and Lu, J-Y. Mon . "SU-E-T-591: Optimizing the Flattening Filter Free Beam Selection in RapidArc-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Lung Cancer". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924954.
@article{osti_22496304,
title = {SU-E-T-591: Optimizing the Flattening Filter Free Beam Selection in RapidArc-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Stage I Lung Cancer},
author = {Huang, B-T and Lu, J-Y},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To optimize the flattening filter free (FFF) beam energy selection in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment for stage I lung cancer with different fraction schemes. Methods: Twelve patients suffering from stage I lung cancer were enrolled in this study. Plans were designed using 6XFFF and 10XFFF beams with the most widely used fraction schemes of 4*12 Gy, 3*18 Gy and 1*34 Gy, respectively. The plan quality was appraised in terms of planning target volume (PTV) coverage, conformity of the prescribed dose (CI100%), intermediate dose spillage (R50% and D2cm), organs at risk (OARs) sparing and beam-on time. Results: The 10XFFF beam predicted 1% higher maximum, mean dose to the PTV and 4–5% higher R50% compared with the 6XFFF beam in the three fraction schemes, whereas the CI100% and D2cm was similar. Most importantly, the 6XFFF beam exhibited 3–10% lower dose to all the OARs. However, the 10XFFF beam reduced the beam-on time by 31.9±7.2%, 38.7±2.8% and 43.6±4.0% compared with the 6XFFF beam in the 4*12 Gy, 3*18 Gy and 1*34 Gy schemes, respectively. Beam-on time was 2.2±0.2 vs 1.5±0.1, 3.3±0.9 vs 2.0±0.5 and 6.3±0.9 vs 3.5±0.4 minutes for the 6XFFF and 10XFFF one in the three fraction schemes. Conclusion: The 6XFFF beam obtains better OARs sparing in SBRT treatment for stage I lung cancer, but the 10XFFF one provides improved treatment efficiency. To balance the OARs sparing and intrafractional variation as a function of prolonged treatment time, the authors recommend to use the 6XFFF beam in the 4*12 Gy and 3*18 Gy schemes for better OARs sparing. However, for the 1*34 Gy scheme, the 10XFFF beam is recommended to achieve improved treatment efficiency.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924954},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 42,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
  • Purpose: The present study aimed to investigate the dosimetric impacts of the anisotropic analytic algorithm (AAA) and the Acuros XB (AXB) plan for lung stereotactic ablative radiation therapy using flattening filter-free (FFF) beam. We retrospectively analyzed 10 patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 10 patients. The dosimetric parameters for the target and organs at risk (OARs) from the treatment plans calculated with these dose calculation algorithms were compared. The technical parameters, such as the computation times and the total monitor units (MUs), were also evaluated. Results: A comparison of DVHs from AXB and AAA showed that the AXB plan produced amore » high maximum PTV dose by average 4.40% with a statistical significance but slightly lower mean PTV dose by average 5.20% compared to the AAA plans. The maximum dose to the lung was slightly higher in the AXB compared to the AAA. For both algorithms, the values of V5, V10 and V20 for ipsilateral lung were higher in the AXB plan more than those of AAA. However, these parameters for contralateral lung were comparable. The differences of maximum dose for the spinal cord and heart were also small. The computation time of AXB was found fast with the relative difference of 13.7% than those of AAA. The average of monitor units (MUs) for all patients was higher in AXB plans than in the AAA plans. These results indicated that the difference between AXB and AAA are large in heterogeneous region with low density. Conclusion: The AXB provided the advantages such as the accuracy of calculations and the reduction of the computation time in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) with using FFF beam, especially for VMAT planning. In dose calculation with the media of different density, therefore, the careful attention should be taken regarding the impacts of different heterogeneity correction algorithms. The authors report no conflicts of interest.« less
  • Purpose: While rates of local control have been well characterized after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), less data are available characterizing survival and normal tissue toxicities, and no validated models exist assessing these parameters after SBRT. We evaluate the reliability of various machine learning techniques when applied to radiation oncology datasets to create predictive models of mortality, tumor control, and normal tissue complications. Methods: A dataset of 204 consecutive patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) at the University of Pennsylvania between 2009 and 2013more » was used to create predictive models of tumor control, normal tissue complications, and mortality in this IRB-approved study. Nearly 200 data fields of detailed patient- and tumor-specific information, radiotherapy dosimetric measurements, and clinical outcomes data were collected. Predictive models were created for local tumor control, 1- and 3-year overall survival, and nodal failure using 60% of the data (leaving the remainder as a test set). After applying feature selection and dimensionality reduction, nonlinear support vector classification was applied to the resulting features. Models were evaluated for accuracy and area under ROC curve on the 81-patient test set. Results: Models for common events in the dataset (such as mortality at one year) had the highest predictive power (AUC = .67, p < 0.05). For rare occurrences such as radiation pneumonitis and local failure (each occurring in less than 10% of patients), too few events were present to create reliable models. Conclusion: Although this study demonstrates the validity of predictive analytics using information extracted from patient medical records and can most reliably predict for survival after SBRT, larger sample sizes are needed to develop predictive models for normal tissue toxicities and more advanced machine learning methodologies need be consider in the future.« less
  • Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric and radiobiological impact of Acuros XB (AXB) and Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm (AAA) dose calculation algorithms on prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy plans with both conventional flattened (FF) and flattening-filter free (FFF) modes. Methods: For thirteen patients with prostate cancer, SBRT planning was performed using 10-MV photon beam with FF and FFF modes. The total dose prescribed to the PTV was 42.7 Gy in 7 fractions. All plans were initially calculated using AAA algorithm in Eclipse treatment planning system (11.0.34), and then were re-calculated using AXB with the same MUsmore » and MLC files. The four types of plans for different algorithms and beam energies were compared in terms of homogeneity and conformity. To evaluate the radiobiological impact, the tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) calculations were performed. Results: For PTV, both calculation algorithms and beam modes lead to comparable homogeneity and conformity. However, the averaged TCP values in AXB plans were always lower than in AAA plans with an average difference of 5.3% and 6.1% for 10-MV FFF and FF beam, respectively. In addition, the averaged NTCP values for organs at risk (OARs) were comparable. Conclusion: This study showed that prostate SBRT plan were comparable dosimetric results with different dose calculation algorithms as well as delivery beam modes. For biological results, even though NTCP values for both calculation algorithms and beam modes were similar, AXB plans produced slightly lower TCP compared to the AAA plans.« less
  • Purpose: To compare the dosimetric difference of volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT) for preoperative radiotherapy rectal cancer using 6MV X-ray flattening filter free(FFF) and flattening filter(FF) modes. Methods: FF-VMAT and FFF-VMAT plans were designed to 15 rectal cancer patients with preoperative radiotherapy by planning treatment system(Eclipse 10.0),respectively. Dose prescription was 50 Gy in 25 fractions. All plans were normalized to 50 Gy to 95% of PTV. The Dose Volume Histogram (DVH), target and risk organ doses, conformity indexes (CI), homogeneity indexes (HI), low dose volume of normal tissue(BP), monitor units(MU) and treatment time (TT) were compared between the two kinds ofmore » plans. Results: FF-VMAT provided the lower Dmean, V105, HI, and higher CI as compared with FFF-VMAT. The small intestine of D5, Bladder of D5, Dmean, V40, V50, L-femoral head of V40, R-femoral head of Dmean were lower in FF-VMAT than in FFF-VMAT. FF-VMAT had higher BP of V5, but no significantly different of V10, V15, V20, V30 as compared with FFF-VMAT. FF-VMAT reduceed the monitor units(MU) by 21%(P<0.05), as well as the treatment time(TT) was no significantly different(P>0.05), as compared with FFF-VMAT. Conclusion: The plan qualities of FF and FFF VMAT plans were comparable and both clinically acceptable. FF-VMAT as compared with FFF-VMAT, showing better target coverage, some of OARs sparing, the MUs of FFF-VMAT were higher than FF-VMAT, yet were delivered within the same time. This work was supported by the Medical Scientific Research Foundation of Guangdong Procvince (A2014455 to Changchun Ma)« less
  • Purpose: The study aims to reduce the monitor units (MUs) in the stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment for lung cancer by adjusting the optimizing parameters. Methods: Fourteen patients suffered from stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) were enrolled. Three groups of parameters were adjusted to investigate their effects on MU numbers and organs at risk (OARs) sparing: (1) the upper objective of planning target volume (UOPTV); (2) strength setting in the MU constraining objective; (3) max MU setting in the MU constraining objective. Results: We found that the parameters in the optimizer influenced the MU numbers in amore » priority, strength and max MU dependent manner. MU numbers showed a decreasing trend with the UOPTV increasing. MU numbers with low, medium and high priority for the UOPTV were 428±54, 312±48 and 258±31 MU/Gy, respectively. High priority for UOPTV also spared the heart, cord and lung while maintaining comparable PTV coverage than the low and medium priority group. It was observed that MU numbers tended to decrease with the strength increasing and max MU setting decreasing. With maximum strength, the MU numbers reached its minimum while maintaining comparable or improved dose to the normal tissues. It was also found that the MU numbers continued to decline at 85% and 75% max MU setting but no longer to decrease at 50% and 25%. Combined with high priority for UOPTV and MU constraining objectives, the MU numbers can be decreased as low as 223±26 MU/Gy. Conclusion:: The priority of UOPTV, MU constraining objective in the optimizer impact on the MU numbers in SBRT treatment for lung cancer. Giving high priority to the UOPTV, setting the strength to maximum value and the max MU to 50% in the MU objective achieves the lowest MU numbers while maintaining comparable or improved OAR sparing.« less