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

Title: SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and double-arc volumetricmodulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with simultaneous integrated boost in rectal cancer. Methods: Ten patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT were included in this analysis. For each patient, two treatment techniques were designed for each patient: the fixed 7 fields IMRT and double-arc VMAT with RapidArc technique. The treatment plan was designed to deliver in one process with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). The prescribed doses to the planning target volume of the subclinical disease (PTV1) and the gross disease (PTV2) were 45 Gy and 55 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk, total MU and the delivery time in two techniques were compared to explore the dosimetric differences. Results: For the target dose and homogeneity in PTV1 and PTV2, no statistically differences were observed in the two plans. VMAT plans showed a better conformity in PTV1. VMAT plans reduced the mean dose to bladder, small bowel, femur heads and iliac wings. For iliac wings, VMAT plans resulted in a statistically significant reduction in irradiated volume of 15 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy butmore » increased the 10 Gy irradiated volume. VMAT plans reduced the small bowel irradiated volume of 20 Gy and 30 Gy. Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed a significant reduction of monitor units by nearly 30% and reduced treatment time by an average of 70% Conclusion: Compared to IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed the similar target dose and reduced the dose of the organs at risk, especially for small bowel and iliac wings. For rectal cancer, VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost can be carried out with high quality and efficiency.« less

Authors:
; ; ;  [1]
  1. Shandong Cancer Hospital, Jinan, Shandong (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22545163
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:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; BLADDER; FEMUR; HEALTH HAZARDS; IRRADIATION; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; RECTUM

Citation Formats

Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, and Liu, T. SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, & Liu, T. SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
Sun, T, Lin, X, Yin, Y, and Liu, T. Mon . "SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4924390.
@article{osti_22545163,
title = {SU-E-T-29: A Dosimetric Study of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Rectal Cancer},
author = {Sun, T and Lin, X and Yin, Y and Liu, T},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To compare the dosimetric differences among fixed field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and double-arc volumetricmodulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with simultaneous integrated boost in rectal cancer. Methods: Ten patients with rectal cancer previously treated with IMRT were included in this analysis. For each patient, two treatment techniques were designed for each patient: the fixed 7 fields IMRT and double-arc VMAT with RapidArc technique. The treatment plan was designed to deliver in one process with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB). The prescribed doses to the planning target volume of the subclinical disease (PTV1) and the gross disease (PTV2) were 45 Gy and 55 Gy in 25 fractions, respectively. The dose distribution in the target, the dose to the organs at risk, total MU and the delivery time in two techniques were compared to explore the dosimetric differences. Results: For the target dose and homogeneity in PTV1 and PTV2, no statistically differences were observed in the two plans. VMAT plans showed a better conformity in PTV1. VMAT plans reduced the mean dose to bladder, small bowel, femur heads and iliac wings. For iliac wings, VMAT plans resulted in a statistically significant reduction in irradiated volume of 15 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy but increased the 10 Gy irradiated volume. VMAT plans reduced the small bowel irradiated volume of 20 Gy and 30 Gy. Compared with IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed a significant reduction of monitor units by nearly 30% and reduced treatment time by an average of 70% Conclusion: Compared to IMRT plans, VMAT plans showed the similar target dose and reduced the dose of the organs at risk, especially for small bowel and iliac wings. For rectal cancer, VMAT with simultaneous integrated boost can be carried out with high quality and efficiency.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4924390},
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: To compare the plan quality and performance of Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) Treatment plan between Seven field (7F) and Nine field(9F) Intensity Modulated Radiotherapies and Single Arc (SA) and Dual Arc (DA) Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy( VMAT). Methods: Retrospective planning study of 16 patients treated in Elekta Synergy Platform (mlci2) by 9F-IMRT were replanned with 7F-IMRT, Single Arc VMAT and Dual Arc VMAT using CMS, Monaco Treatment Planning System (TPS) with Monte Carlo simulation. Target delineation done as per Radiation Therapy Oncology Protocols (RTOG 0225&0615). Dose Prescribed as 70Gy to Planning Target Volumes (PTV70) and 61Gy to PTV61 inmore » 33 fraction as a SIB technique. Conformity Index(CI), Homogeneity Index(HI) were used as analysis parameter for Target Volumes as well as Mean dose and Max dose for Organ at Risk(OAR,s).Treatment Delivery Time(min), Monitor unit per fraction (MU/fraction), Patient specific quality assurance were also analysed. Results: A Poor dose coverage and Conformity index (CI) was observed in PTV70 by 7F-IMRT among other techniques. SA-VMAT achieved poor dose coverage in PTV61. No statistical significance difference observed in OAR,s except Spinal cord (P= 0.03) and Right optic nerve (P=0.03). DA-VMAT achieved superior target coverage, higher CI (P =0.02) and Better HI (P=0.03) for PTV70 other techniques (7F-IMRT/9F-IMRT/SA-VMAT). A better dose spare for Parotid glands and spinal cord were seen in DA-VMAT. The average treatment delivery time were 5.82mins, 6.72mins, 3.24mins, 4.3mins for 7F-IMRT, 9F-IMRT, SA-VMAT and DA-VMAT respectively. Significance difference Observed in MU/fr (P <0.001) and Patient quality assurance pass rate were >95% (Gamma analysis (Γ3mm, 3%). Conclusion: DA-VAMT showed better target dose coverage and achieved better or equal performance in sparing OARs among other techniques. SA-VMAT offered least Treatment Time than other techniques but achieved poor target coverage. DA-VMAT offered shorter delivery time than 7F-IMRT and 9F-IMRT without compromising the plan quality.« less
  • Purpose: To compare and analyze the characteristics of intensity-modulated arc therapy(IMAT) versus fixed-gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy(IMRT) in treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods: Twelve patients treated in our radiotherapy center were selected for this study. The patient subsequently underwent 4D-CT simulation.Margins of 5mm and 10mm were added to the ITV to generate the CTV and PTV respectively. Three treatment plans (IMRT,one single arc (RA1),double arcs (RA2))were generated with Eclipse ver.8.6 planning systems. Using a dose level of 75Gy in 15fractions to the ITV,60Gy in 15fractions to the CTV and 45Gy in 15fractions to the PTV respectively. The target and normol tissuemore » volumes were compared,as were the dosimetry parameters. Results: There were no significant differences in CI of ITV,PTV,HI of ITV,CTV and PTV, V5,V10,V15,V20,V25,V30,V45,V50 of total-lung and mean lung dose (all p>0.05). However, the differences were significant in terms of CI of CTV,V5 of B-P (all p<0.05). On the MU, IMRT=1540MU,RA1=1006 MU and RA2=1096 MU. (F=12.00,P=0.000).On the treatment time, IMRT= 13.5min,RA1= 1.5min,and RA2=2.5 min (F= 30.11,P=0.000 ). Conclusion: IMAT is equal to IMRT in dosimetril evaluation. Due to much less Mu and delivery time,IMAT is an ideal technique in treating patients by reduceing the uncomfortable influnce which could effect the treatment.« 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
  • 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: This study evaluates the dosimetric differences using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients previously treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy IMRT for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in early stage lung cancer. Methods: We evaluated 9 consecutive medically inoperable lung cancer patients at the start of the SBRT program who were treated with IMRT from November 2010 to October 2011. These patients were treated using 6 MV energy. The 9 cases were then re-planned with VMAT performed with arc therapy using 6 MV flattening filter free (FFF) energy with the same organs at risk (OARS) constraints. Data collected formore » the treatment plans included target coverage, beam on time, dose to OARS and gamma pass rate. Results: Five patients were T1N0 and four patients were T2N0 with all tumors less than 5 cm. The average GTV was 13.02 cm3 (0.83–40.87) and average PTV was 44.65 cm3 (14.06–118.08). The IMRT plans had a mean of 7.2 angles (6–9) and 5.4 minutes (3.6–11.1) per plan. The VMAT plans had a mean of 2.8 arcs (2–3) and 4.0 minutes (2.2–6.0) per plan. VMAT had slightly more target coverage than IMRT with average increase in D95 of 2.68% (1.24–5.73) and D99 of 3.65% (0.88–8.77). VMAT produced lower doses to all OARs. The largest reductions were in maximum doses to the spinal cord with an average reduction of 24.1%, esophagus with an average reduction of 22.1%, and lung with an average reduction in the V20 of 16.3% The mean gamma pass rate was 99.8% (99.2–100) at 3 mm and 3% for VMAT with comparable values for IMRT. Conclusion: These findings suggest that using VMAT for SBRT in early stage lung cancer is superior to IMRT in terms of dose coverage, OAR dose and a lower treatment delivery time with a similar gamma pass rate.« less