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

Title: SU-F-SPS-10: The Dosimetric Comparison of GammaKnife and Cyberknife Treatment Plans for Brain SRS Treatment

Abstract

Purpose: Brain stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) involves the use of precisely directed, single session radiation to create a desired radiobiologic response within the brain target with acceptable minimal effects on surrounding structures or tissues. In this study, the dosimetric comparison of GammaKnife perfection and Cyberknife M6 treatment plans were made. Methods: Treatment plannings were done for GammaKnife perfection unit using Gammaplan treatment planning system (TPS) on the CT scan of head and neck randophantom simulating the treatment of sterotactic treatments for one brain metastasis. The dose distribution were calculated using TMR 10 algorithm. The treatment planning for the same target were also done for Cyberknife M6 machine using Multiplan (TPS) with Monte Carlo algorithm. Using the same film batch, the net OD to dose calibration curve was obtained using both machine by delivering 0- 800 cGy. Films were scanned 48 hours after irradiation using an Epson 1000XL flatbed scanner. Dose distribution were measured using EBT3 film dosimeter. The measured and calculated doses were compared. Results: The dose distribution in the target and 2 cm beyond the target edge were calculated on TPSs and measured using EBT3 film. For cyberknife treatment plans, the gamma analysis passing rates between measured and calculated dosemore » distributions were 99.2% and 96.7% for target and peripheral region of target respectively. For gammaknife treatment plans, the gamma analysis passing rates were 98.9% and 93.2% for target and peripheral region of target respectively. Conclusion: The study shows that dosimetrically comparable plans are achievable with Cyberknife and GammaKnife. Although TMR 10 algorithm predicts the target dose.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Medipol University, Istanbul, Istanbul (Turkey)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22624426
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 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; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ALGORITHMS; ANIMAL TISSUES; BIOMEDICAL RADIOGRAPHY; BRAIN; CALIBRATION; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; DOSEMETERS; HEAD; IMAGE PROCESSING; IRRADIATION; MAGNETORESISTANCE; METASTASES; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NECK; PLANNING; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; SURGERY; TUNNEL EFFECT

Citation Formats

Sanli, E, Mabhouti, H, Cebe, M, Codel, G, Pacaci, P, Serin, E, Kucuk, N, Kucukmorkoc, E, Doyuran, M, Canoglu, D, Altinok, A, Acar, H, and Caglar Ozkok, H. SU-F-SPS-10: The Dosimetric Comparison of GammaKnife and Cyberknife Treatment Plans for Brain SRS Treatment. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4955685.
Sanli, E, Mabhouti, H, Cebe, M, Codel, G, Pacaci, P, Serin, E, Kucuk, N, Kucukmorkoc, E, Doyuran, M, Canoglu, D, Altinok, A, Acar, H, & Caglar Ozkok, H. SU-F-SPS-10: The Dosimetric Comparison of GammaKnife and Cyberknife Treatment Plans for Brain SRS Treatment. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955685.
Sanli, E, Mabhouti, H, Cebe, M, Codel, G, Pacaci, P, Serin, E, Kucuk, N, Kucukmorkoc, E, Doyuran, M, Canoglu, D, Altinok, A, Acar, H, and Caglar Ozkok, H. 2016. "SU-F-SPS-10: The Dosimetric Comparison of GammaKnife and Cyberknife Treatment Plans for Brain SRS Treatment". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955685.
@article{osti_22624426,
title = {SU-F-SPS-10: The Dosimetric Comparison of GammaKnife and Cyberknife Treatment Plans for Brain SRS Treatment},
author = {Sanli, E and Mabhouti, H and Cebe, M and Codel, G and Pacaci, P and Serin, E and Kucuk, N and Kucukmorkoc, E and Doyuran, M and Canoglu, D and Altinok, A and Acar, H and Caglar Ozkok, H},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Brain stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) involves the use of precisely directed, single session radiation to create a desired radiobiologic response within the brain target with acceptable minimal effects on surrounding structures or tissues. In this study, the dosimetric comparison of GammaKnife perfection and Cyberknife M6 treatment plans were made. Methods: Treatment plannings were done for GammaKnife perfection unit using Gammaplan treatment planning system (TPS) on the CT scan of head and neck randophantom simulating the treatment of sterotactic treatments for one brain metastasis. The dose distribution were calculated using TMR 10 algorithm. The treatment planning for the same target were also done for Cyberknife M6 machine using Multiplan (TPS) with Monte Carlo algorithm. Using the same film batch, the net OD to dose calibration curve was obtained using both machine by delivering 0- 800 cGy. Films were scanned 48 hours after irradiation using an Epson 1000XL flatbed scanner. Dose distribution were measured using EBT3 film dosimeter. The measured and calculated doses were compared. Results: The dose distribution in the target and 2 cm beyond the target edge were calculated on TPSs and measured using EBT3 film. For cyberknife treatment plans, the gamma analysis passing rates between measured and calculated dose distributions were 99.2% and 96.7% for target and peripheral region of target respectively. For gammaknife treatment plans, the gamma analysis passing rates were 98.9% and 93.2% for target and peripheral region of target respectively. Conclusion: The study shows that dosimetrically comparable plans are achievable with Cyberknife and GammaKnife. Although TMR 10 algorithm predicts the target dose.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4955685},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: Brain stereotactic radiosurgery involves the use of precisely directed, single session radiation to create a desired radiobiologic response within the brain target with acceptable minimal effects on surrounding structures or tissues. In this study, the dosimetric comparison of Truebeam 2.0 and Cyberknife M6 treatment plans were made. Methods: For Truebeam 2.0 machine, treatment planning were done using 2 full arc VMAT technique with 6 FFF beam on the CT scan of Randophantom simulating the treatment of sterotactic treatments for one brain metastasis. The dose distribution were calculated using Eclipse treatment planning system with Acuros XB algorithm. The treatment planningmore » of the same target were also done for Cyberknife M6 machine with Multiplan treatment planning system using Monte Carlo algorithm. Using the same film batch, the net OD to dose calibration curve was obtained using both machine by delivering 0- 800 cGy. Films were scanned 48 hours after irradiation using an Epson 1000XL flatbed scanner. Dose distribution were measured using EBT3 film dosimeter. The measured and calculated doses were compared. Results: The dose distribution in the target and 2 cm beyond the target edge were calculated on TPSs and measured using EBT3 film. For cyberknife plans, the gamma analysis passing rates between measured and calculated dose distributions were 99.2% and 96.7% for target and peripheral region of target respectively. For Truebeam plans, the gamma analysis passing rates were 99.1% and 95.5% for target and peripheral region of target respectively. Conclusion: Although, target dose distribution calculated accurately by Acuros XB and Monte Carlo algorithms, Monte carlo calculation algorithm predicts dose distribution around the peripheral region of target more accurately than Acuros algorithm.« less
  • Purpose: To analyze and compare the characteristics of dose distributions between Gamma Knife (GK) and CyberKnife (CK), in treating arteriovenous malformations (AVMs), and evaluate the influences on their clinical applications. Methods: Twenty four patients with AVMs treated with CK of prescribed dose (PD) of 16–25 Gy in single fraction were selected. Each patient’s CT images used for CK treatment planning with contours of targets and critical organs were exported and then loaded into the GK planning system. GK treatment plan with the same PD used in CK was generated for each patient. The metrics for dose comparison between GK andmore » CK included conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI) of 75%, 50% and 25% of the PD, heterogeneity index (HI), volume of brain tissues covered by 10 Gy and 12 Gy, maximum dose to brainstem and beam-on time. Paired Samples t-test was used to analyze these metrics for significance (p value). Results: The CI were 0.744 ± 0.075 (GK) and 0.768 ± 0.086 (CK), p = 0.281. The GI75%, GI50%, and GI25% in GK and CK were 1.735 ± 0.100 and 2.439 ± 0.338 (p < 0.001), 3.169 ± 0.265 and 4.972 ± 0.852 (p < 0.001), and 8.650 ± 0.914 and 14.261 ± 2.476 (p < 0.001). The HI were 0.728 ± 0.072 (GK) and 0.313 ± 0.069 (CK), p < 0.001. There were significant differences both for volume of brain tissues covered by 10 Gy and 12 Gy in GK and CK (p < 0.001). GK had smaller maximum dose to brainstem. CK had shorter beam-on time. Conclusion: GK has similar dose conformity as CK, and has better normal tissue sparing but is less efficient than CK.« less
  • Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare dosimetric indices of Cyberknife versus Linac for localised prostate cancer Methods: In this study, twenty patients were taken from Cyberknife Multiplan TPS v 4.6.0. All these patients underwent hypo fractionated boost treatment for localised prostate cancer in Cyberknife with the prescription dose of 18Gy in 3 fractions. For each patient VMAT stereotactic plans were generated in Monaco TPS v 5.0 using Elekta beam modulator MLC machine for 6MV photon beam. The plans quality were evaluated by comparing dosimetry indices such that D95, D90, D5 for target volume and V100, V80, V50,more » V30 for critical organs. The p values were calculated for target and OAR to ascertain the significant differences. Results: For each case, D95 of target coverage was achieved with 100% prescription dose with p value of 0.9998. The p value for D90, D5 and V100 for linac and Cyberknife plans was 0.9938, 0.9918 and 0.9838 respectively. For rectum, rectum-PTV and bladder doses were significantly less in Cyberknife compared to linac plans. For rectum, rectum-PTV and bladder at V100 the p value is 0.2402, 0.002, and 0.1615 respectively. Other indices V80, V50 and V30 were comparable in both plans. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that both linac and Cyberknife plans were shown adequate target coverage, while in Cyberknife the treatment time is longer and more MUs to be delivered. However, better conformity, lesser doses to the critical organs and dose gradient outside target for localised prostate treatment were achieved in Cyberknife plans due to multiple non coplanar beam arrangements.« less
  • Purpose: The latest publications indicate that the Ray Tracing algorithm significantly overestimates the dose delivered as compared to the Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm. The purpose of this study is to quantify this overestimation and to identify significant correlations between the RT and MC calculated dose distributions. Methods: Preliminary results are based on 50 preexisting RT algorithm dose optimization and calculation treatment plans prepared on the Multiplan treatment planning system (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). The analysis will be expanded to include 100 plans. These plans are recalculated using the MC algorithm, with high resolution and 1% uncertainty. The geometry and numbermore » of beams for a given plan, as well as the number of monitor units, is constant for the calculations for both algorithms and normalized differences are compared. Results: MC calculated doses were significantly smaller than RT doses. The D95 of the PTV was 27% lower for the MC calculation. The GTV and PTV mean coverage were 13 and 39% less for MC calculation. The first parameter of conformality, as defined as the ratio of the Prescription Isodose Volume to the PTV Volume was on average 1.18 for RT and 0.62 for MC. Maximum doses delivered to OARs was reduced in the MC plans. The doses for 1000 and 1500 cc of total lung minus PTV, respectively were reduced by 39% and 53% for the MC plans. The correlation of the ratio of air in PTV to the PTV with the difference in PTV coverage had a coefficient of −0.54. Conclusion: The preliminary results confirm that the RT algorithm significantly overestimates the dosages delivered confirming previous analyses. Finally, subdividing the data into different size regimes increased the correlation for the smaller size PTVs indicating the MC algorithm improvement verses the RT algorithm is dependent upon the size of the PTV.« less
  • Purpose: To assess the impacts that multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf width has on the dose conformity and normal brain tissue doses of single and multiple isocenter stereotactic IMRT (SRT) plans for multiple intracranial tumors. Methods: Fourteen patients with 2–3 targets were studied retrospectively. Patients treated with multiple isocenter treatment plans using 9 to 12 non-coplanar beams per lesion underwent repeat planning using single isocenter and 10 to 12 non-coplanar beams with 2.5mm, 3mm and 5mm MLC leaf widths. Brainlab iPlan treatment planning system for delivery with the 2.5mm MLC served as reference. Identical contour sets and dose-volume constraints were applied.more » The prescribed dose to each target was 25 Gy to be delivered over 5 fractions with a minimum of 99% dose to cover ≥ 95% of the target volume. Results: The lesions and normal brains ranged in size from 0.11 to 51.67cc (median, 2.75cc) and 1090 to 1641cc (median, 1401cc), respectively. The Paddick conformity index for single and multiple isocenter (2.5mm vs. 3mm and 5mm MLCs) was (0.79±0.08 vs. 0.79±0.07 and 0.77±0.08) and (0.79±0.09 vs. 0.77±0.09 and 0.76±0.08), respectively. The average normal brain volumes receiving 15 Gy for single and multiple isocenter (2.5mm vs. 3mm and 5mm MLCs) were (3.65% vs. 3.95% and 4.09%) and (2.89% vs. 2.91% and 2.92%), respectively. Conclusion: The average dose conformity observed for the different leaf width for single and multiple isocenter plans were similar, throughout. However, the average normal brain volumes receiving 2.5 to 15 Gy were consistently lower for the 2.5mm MLC leaf width, especially for single isocenter plans. The clinical consequences of these integral normal brain tissue doses are still unknown, but employing the use of the 2.5mm MLC option is desirable at sparing normal brain tissue for both single and multiple isocenter cases.« less