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

Title: SU-F-T-390: Dosimetric Impact of Leaf Interdigitation in Prostate Cancer Dynamic IMRT Treatment Planning

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this work is to study the dosimetric impact of leaf interdigitation in prostate cancer dynamic IMRT treatment planning. Methods: Fifteen previously treated prostate cancer patients were replanned for dynamic IMRT (dMLC) with and without leaf interdigitation using Monaco 3.3 TPS on the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator. The prescription dose of PTV was 70Gy/35 fractions. Various dosimetric variables, such as PTV coverage, OAR sparing, delivery efficiency and optimization time, were evaluated for each plan. Results: Interdigitation did not improve the coverage, HI and CI for PTV. Regarding OARs, sparing was equivalent with and without interdigitation. Interdigitation shown an increase in MUs and segments. It was worth noting that leaf interdigitation saved the optimization time. Conclusion: This study shows that leaf interdigitation does not improve plan quality when performing dMLC treatment plan for prostate cancer. However, it influences delivery efficiency and optimization time. Interdigitation may gain efficiency for dosimetrist when designing the prostate cancer dMLC plans.

Authors:
 [1]
  1. Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, Shandong province (China)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648988
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; EFFICIENCY; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; NEOPLASMS; OPTIMIZATION; PLANNING; PROSTATE; RADIOTHERAPY

Citation Formats

Duan, J. SU-F-T-390: Dosimetric Impact of Leaf Interdigitation in Prostate Cancer Dynamic IMRT Treatment Planning. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956575.
Duan, J. SU-F-T-390: Dosimetric Impact of Leaf Interdigitation in Prostate Cancer Dynamic IMRT Treatment Planning. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956575.
Duan, J. 2016. "SU-F-T-390: Dosimetric Impact of Leaf Interdigitation in Prostate Cancer Dynamic IMRT Treatment Planning". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956575.
@article{osti_22648988,
title = {SU-F-T-390: Dosimetric Impact of Leaf Interdigitation in Prostate Cancer Dynamic IMRT Treatment Planning},
author = {Duan, J},
abstractNote = {Purpose: The aim of this work is to study the dosimetric impact of leaf interdigitation in prostate cancer dynamic IMRT treatment planning. Methods: Fifteen previously treated prostate cancer patients were replanned for dynamic IMRT (dMLC) with and without leaf interdigitation using Monaco 3.3 TPS on the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator. The prescription dose of PTV was 70Gy/35 fractions. Various dosimetric variables, such as PTV coverage, OAR sparing, delivery efficiency and optimization time, were evaluated for each plan. Results: Interdigitation did not improve the coverage, HI and CI for PTV. Regarding OARs, sparing was equivalent with and without interdigitation. Interdigitation shown an increase in MUs and segments. It was worth noting that leaf interdigitation saved the optimization time. Conclusion: This study shows that leaf interdigitation does not improve plan quality when performing dMLC treatment plan for prostate cancer. However, it influences delivery efficiency and optimization time. Interdigitation may gain efficiency for dosimetrist when designing the prostate cancer dMLC plans.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956575},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: To evaluate the effects of leaf with or without interdigitation in multiple brain metastasis volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. Methods: Twenty patients with 2 to 6 brain metastases of our hospital were retrospectively studied to be planned with dual arc VMAT using Monaco 3.3 TPS on the Elekta Synergy linear accelerator. The prescription dose of PTV was 60Gy/30 fractions. Two plans with or without leaf interdigitation were designed. The homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), dose volume histograms (DVHs), monitor unit (MU), treatment time (T), the segments, the dose coverage of the target, were all evaluated. Results: Themore » plans with leaf interdigitation could achieve better CI (p<0.05) than without leaf interdigitation, while no significant difference were found in HI (p> 0.05) and the dose coverage of the target (p> 0.05).The MU,T, and the segments of the plan with leaf interdigitation were more than the plan without leaf interdigitation (p<0.05). There was no significant difference found in radiation dose of spinal cord, lenses and parotids, while the maximum dose of brain stem of leaf without interdigitation was higher than leaf with interdigitation (p< 0.05). It was worth noting that the areas of low dose regions with leaf interdigitation plan were much less than the without leaf interdigitation plan in the doublication planes (p< 0.05). Conclusion: This study shows that leaf with interdigitation has some advantages than leaf without interdigitation in multiple brain metastasis VMAT plans although the clinical relevance remains to be proven.« less
  • We examine the quality of plans created using multicriteria optimization (MCO) treatment planning in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in treatment of localized prostate cancer. Nine random cases of patients receiving IMRT to the prostate were selected. Each case was associated with a clinically approved plan created using Corvus. The cases were replanned using MCO-based planning in RayStation. Dose-volume histogram data from both planning systems were presented to 2 radiation oncologists in a blinded evaluation, and were compared at a number of dose-volume points. Both physicians rated all 9 MCO plans as superior to the clinically approved plans (p<10{sup −5}). Targetmore » coverage was equivalent (p = 0.81). Maximum doses to the prostate and bladder and the V50 and V70 to the anterior rectum were reduced in all MCO plans (p<0.05). Treatment planning time with MCO took approximately 60 minutes per case. MCO-based planning for prostate IMRT is efficient and produces high-quality plans with good target homogeneity and sparing of the anterior rectum, bladder, and femoral heads, without sacrificing target coverage.« less
  • Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the dosimetric impact of the combination of photon energy and treatment technique on radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer when knowledge based planning was used. Methods: A total of 16 patients with localized prostate cancer were retrospectively retrieved from database and used for this study. For each patient, four types of treatment plans with different combinations of photon energy (6X and 10X) and treatment techniques (7-field IMRT and 2-arc VMAT) were created using a prostate DVH estimation model in RapidPlan™ and Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical System). For any beam arrangement,more » DVH objectives and weighting priorities were generated based on the geometric relationship between the OAR and PTV. Photon optimization algorithm was used for plan optimization and AAA algorithm was used for final dose calculation. Plans were evaluated in terms of the pre-defined dosimetric endpoints for PTV, rectum, bladder, penile bulb, and femur heads. A Student’s paired t-test was used for statistical analysis and p > 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: For PTV, V95 was statistically similar among all four types of plans, though the mean dose of 10X plans was higher than that of 6X plans. VMAT plans showed higher heterogeneity index than IMRT plans. No statistically significant difference in dosimetry metrics was observed for rectum, bladder, and penile bulb among plan types. For left and right femur, VMAT plans had a higher mean dose than IMRT plans regardless of photon energy, whereas the maximum dose was similar. Conclusion: Overall, the dosimetric endpoints were similar regardless of photon energy and treatment techniques when knowledge based auto planning was used. Given the similarity in dosimetry metrics of rectum, bladder, and penile bulb, the genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicities should be comparable among the selections of photon energy and treatment techniques.« 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
  • Purpose: To quantify and compare the dosimetric impact of motion management correction strategies during VMAT and IMRT for hypofractionated prostate treatment. Methods: Two arc VMAT and 9 field IMRT plans were generated for two prostate cancer patients undergoing hypofractionated radiotherapy (7.5Gy × 5 and 8Gy × 5). 212 motion traces were retrospectively extracted from treatment records of prostate cancer patients with implanted Calypso beacons. Dose to the CTV and normal tissues was reconstructed for each trace and plan taking into account the actual treatment delivery time. Following motion correction scenarios were simulated: (1) VMAT plan – (a) No correction, (b)more » correction between arcs, (c) correction every 20 degrees of gantry rotation and (2) IMRT plan - (a) No correction,(b) correction between fields. Two mm action threshold for position correction was assumed. The 5–95% confidence interval (CI) range was extracted from the family of DVHs for each correction scenario. Results: Treatment duration for 8Gy plan (VMAT vs IMRT) was 3 vs 12 mins and for 7.5Gy plan was 3 vs 9 mins. In the absence of correction, the VMAT 5–−95% CI dose spread was, on average, less than the IMRT dose spread by 2% for CTVD95, 9% for rectalwall (RW) D1cc and 9% for bladderwall (BW) D53. Further, VMAT b/w arcs correction strategy reduced the spread about the planned value compared to IMRT b/w fields correction by: 1% for CTVD95, 2.6% for RW1cc and 2% for BWD53. VMAT 20 degree strategy led to greater reduction in dose spread compared to IMRT by: 2% for CTVD95, 4.5% for RW1cc and 6.7% for BWD53. Conclusion: In the absence of a correction strategy, the limited motion during VMAT’s shorter delivery times translates into less motion-induced dosimetric degradation than IMRT. Performing limited periodic motion correction during VMAT can yield excellent conformity to planned values that is superior to IMRT. This work was partially supported by Varian Medical Systems.« less