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

Title: SU-F-T-502: FFF Beams, Jaw-Tracking and Treatment Techniques: Out of Field Dose Considerations for Pediatric Radiation Therapy Delivery

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the extended dose profile delivered by 3DCRT and VMAT techniques for flattened and flattening-filter-free(FFF) photon beams (6X, 6XFFF,10XFFF), with and without jaw-tracking (JT) on Varian TrueBeam linac. The goal is to determine which treatment technique/modality will minimize the peripheral photon dose exposure (and ultimately minimize the risk of second malignant neoplasms (SMN)) in pediatric patients. Methods: 3DCRT, VMAT, and jaw tracking VMAT (JTVMAT) plans with 6X, 6XFFF and 10XFFF x-ray beams were created on a 30×60×22.5cm solid water phantom with a 551 cc PTV. The 3DCRT plans consisted of a 4FLD arrangement. The optimization objectives for the single-arc VMAT plans was V95%Rx=98% to PTV and minimize dose to a 5cm diameter organ at risk (OAR). The OAR to PTV distance varied from 0–30cm along the long axis at 7.5cm depth. The dose to the center of the OAR was measured using a 0.6cc ion chamber. Results: Relative to the 6X flattened beam, the 10XFFF photon beam had the lowest dose in the penumbra and peripheral region (>15 cm) region by up to 20% and 40%, respectively for all modalities (3DCRT, VMAT, JTVMAT). The 6XFFF beams only showed a dose reduction in the peripheral region (by up tomore » 20%). JT did not significantly affect the peripheral dose for all modalities and energies. Conclusion: Treating pediatric patients with a 10XFFF beam is the most effective way to reduce photon scatter dose in both the penumbra and peripheral regions. However, the neutron dose contribution resulting from the 10MV beam still needs to be considered. For all modalities, 6XFFF was the next effective method to reduce peripheral photon doses. 3DCRT beams had the lowest peripheral doses for all energies compared to VMAT and JTVMAT, however previous publications have shown that this comes at the expense of PTV conformity and OAR sparing.« less

Authors:
;  [1];  [2]
  1. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC (Canada)
  2. (Canada)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22649089
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; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; MINIMIZATION; PEDIATRICS; PHOTON BEAMS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; X RADIATION

Citation Formats

Ben Bouchta, Y, Bergman, A, and Vancouver Cancer Center-British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC. SU-F-T-502: FFF Beams, Jaw-Tracking and Treatment Techniques: Out of Field Dose Considerations for Pediatric Radiation Therapy Delivery. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956687.
Ben Bouchta, Y, Bergman, A, & Vancouver Cancer Center-British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC. SU-F-T-502: FFF Beams, Jaw-Tracking and Treatment Techniques: Out of Field Dose Considerations for Pediatric Radiation Therapy Delivery. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956687.
Ben Bouchta, Y, Bergman, A, and Vancouver Cancer Center-British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC. 2016. "SU-F-T-502: FFF Beams, Jaw-Tracking and Treatment Techniques: Out of Field Dose Considerations for Pediatric Radiation Therapy Delivery". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956687.
@article{osti_22649089,
title = {SU-F-T-502: FFF Beams, Jaw-Tracking and Treatment Techniques: Out of Field Dose Considerations for Pediatric Radiation Therapy Delivery},
author = {Ben Bouchta, Y and Bergman, A and Vancouver Cancer Center-British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To compare the extended dose profile delivered by 3DCRT and VMAT techniques for flattened and flattening-filter-free(FFF) photon beams (6X, 6XFFF,10XFFF), with and without jaw-tracking (JT) on Varian TrueBeam linac. The goal is to determine which treatment technique/modality will minimize the peripheral photon dose exposure (and ultimately minimize the risk of second malignant neoplasms (SMN)) in pediatric patients. Methods: 3DCRT, VMAT, and jaw tracking VMAT (JTVMAT) plans with 6X, 6XFFF and 10XFFF x-ray beams were created on a 30×60×22.5cm solid water phantom with a 551 cc PTV. The 3DCRT plans consisted of a 4FLD arrangement. The optimization objectives for the single-arc VMAT plans was V95%Rx=98% to PTV and minimize dose to a 5cm diameter organ at risk (OAR). The OAR to PTV distance varied from 0–30cm along the long axis at 7.5cm depth. The dose to the center of the OAR was measured using a 0.6cc ion chamber. Results: Relative to the 6X flattened beam, the 10XFFF photon beam had the lowest dose in the penumbra and peripheral region (>15 cm) region by up to 20% and 40%, respectively for all modalities (3DCRT, VMAT, JTVMAT). The 6XFFF beams only showed a dose reduction in the peripheral region (by up to 20%). JT did not significantly affect the peripheral dose for all modalities and energies. Conclusion: Treating pediatric patients with a 10XFFF beam is the most effective way to reduce photon scatter dose in both the penumbra and peripheral regions. However, the neutron dose contribution resulting from the 10MV beam still needs to be considered. For all modalities, 6XFFF was the next effective method to reduce peripheral photon doses. 3DCRT beams had the lowest peripheral doses for all energies compared to VMAT and JTVMAT, however previous publications have shown that this comes at the expense of PTV conformity and OAR sparing.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956687},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: Contemporary radiotherapy treatment techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy, could increase the radiation-induced malignancies because of the increased beam-on time, i.e., number of monitor units needed to deliver the same dose to the target and the larger volume irradiated with low doses. In this study, whole-body dose distributions from typical radiotherapy patient plans using different treatment techniques and therapy machines were measured using the same measurement setup and irradiation intention. Methods: Individually calibrated thermoluminescent dosimeters were used to measure absorbed dose in an anthropomorphic phantom at 184 locations. The dose distributions from 6 MVmore » beams were compared in terms of treatment technique (3D-conformal, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, helical TomoTherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy, hard wedges, and flattening filter-free radiotherapy) and therapy machine (Elekta, Siemens and Varian linear accelerators, Accuray CyberKnife and TomoTherapy). Results: Close to the target, the doses from intensity-modulated treatments (including flattening filter-free) were below the dose from a static treatment plan, whereas the CyberKnife showed a larger dose by a factor of two. Far away from the treatment field, the dose from intensity-modulated treatments showed an increase in dose from stray radiation of about 50% compared to the 3D-conformal treatment. For the flattening filter-free photon beams, the dose from stray radiation far away from the target was slightly lower than the dose from a static treatment. The CyberKnife irradiation and the treatment using hard wedges increased the dose from stray radiation by nearly a factor of three compared to the 3D-conformal treatment. Conclusions: This study showed that the dose outside of the treated volume is influenced by several sources. Therefore, when comparing different treatment techniques, the dose ratios vary with distance to the isocenter. The effective dose outside the treated volume of intensity-modulated treatments with or without flattening filter was 10%-30% larger when compared to 3D-conformal radiotherapy. This dose increase is much lower than the monitor unit scaled effective dose from a static treatment.« less
  • Purpose: To test the hypothesis that multileaf collimator (MLC) tracking improves the consistency between the planned and delivered dose compared with the dose without MLC tracking, in the setting of a prostate cancer volumetric modulated arc therapy trial. Methods and Materials: Multileaf collimator tracking was implemented for 15 patients in a prostate cancer radiation therapy trial; in total, 513 treatment fractions were delivered. During each treatment fraction, the prostate trajectory and treatment MLC positions were collected. These data were used as input for dose reconstruction (multiple isocenter shift method) to calculate the treated dose (with MLC tracking) and the dose thatmore » would have been delivered had MLC tracking not been applied (without MLC tracking). The percentage difference from planned for target and normal tissue dose-volume points were calculated. The hypothesis was tested for each dose-volume value via analysis of variance using the F test. Results: Of the 513 fractions delivered, 475 (93%) were suitable for analysis. The mean difference and standard deviation between the planned and treated MLC tracking doses and the planned and without-MLC tracking doses for all 475 fractions were, respectively, PTV D{sub 99%} −0.8% ± 1.1% versus −2.1% ± 2.7%; CTV D{sub 99%} −0.6% ± 0.8% versus −0.6% ± 1.1%; rectum V{sub 65%} 1.6% ± 7.9% versus −1.2% ± 18%; and bladder V{sub 65%} 0.5% ± 4.4% versus −0.0% ± 9.2% (P<.001 for all dose-volume results). Conclusion: This study shows that MLC tracking improves the consistency between the planned and delivered doses compared with the modeled doses without MLC tracking. The implications of this finding are potentially improved patient outcomes, as well as more reliable dose-volume data for radiobiological parameter determination.« less
  • Purpose: To plan, target, and calculate delivered dose in atrioventricular node (AVN) ablation with volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in an intact porcine model. Methods: Seven pigs underwent AVN irradiation, with prescription doses ranging between 25 and 55Gy in a single fraction. Cardiac CT scans were acquired at expiration. Two physicians contoured AVN targets on 10 phases, providing estimates of target motion and inter-physician variability. Treatment planning was conducted on a static phase-averaged CT. The volume designated to receive prescription dose covered the full extent of AVN cardiac motion, expanded by 4mm for setup uncertainty. Optimization limited doses to risk structuresmore » according to single-fraction tumor treatment protocols. Orthogonal kV images were used to align bony anatomy at time of treatment. Localization was further refined with respiratory-gated cone-beam CT, and range of cardiac motion was verified under fluoroscopy. Beam delivery was respiratory-gated for expiration with a mean efficiency of 60%. Deformable registration of the 10 cardiac CT phases was used to calculate actual delivered dose for comparison to electro-anatomical and visually evident lesions. Results: The mean [minimum,maximum] amplitude of AVN cardiac motion was LR 2.9 [1.7,3.9]mm, AP 6.6 [4.4,10.4]mm, and SI 5.6 [2.0,9.9]mm. Incorporating cardiac motion into the dose calculation showed the volume receiving full dose was 40–80% of the volume indicated on the static planning image, although the contoured AVN target received full dose in all animals. Initial results suggest the dimensions of the electro-anatomical lesion are correlated with the 40Gy isodose volume. Conclusion: Image-guidance techniques allow for accurate and precise delivery of VMAT for catheter-free arrhythmia ablation. An arsenal of advanced radiation planning, dose optimization, and image-guided delivery techniques was employed to assess and mitigate effects of cardiac and respiratory motion. Feasibility of delivery to the pulmonary veins and left ventricular myocardium will be investigated in future studies. D. Packer Disclosures: Abiomed, Biosense Webster, Inc., Boston Scientific Corp., CardioFocus, Inc., Johnson and Johnson, Excerpta Medica, Ortho-McNeil-Jannsen, Sanofi Aventis, CardioInsight Technologies, InfoBionic, SIEMENS, Medtronic, Inc., CardioDx, Inc., CardioInsight Technologies, FoxP2 Medica, Mediasphere Medical, Wiley-Blackwell, St. Jude Medical, Endosense, Thermedical, EP Advocate LLC, Hansen Medical, American Heart Association, EpiEP, NIH.« less
  • Reirradiation of patients who were previously treated with radiotherapy is vastly challenging. Pulsed low–dose rate (PLDR) external beam radiotherapy has the potential to reduce normal tissue toxicities while providing significant tumor control for recurrent cancers. This work investigates treatment planning techniques for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)-based PLDR treatment of various sites, including cases with pancreatic and prostate cancer. A total of 20 patients with clinical recurrence were selected for this study, including 10 cases with pancreatic cancer and 10 with prostate cancer. Large variations in the target volume were included to test the ability of IMRT using the existing treatmentmore » planning system and optimization algorithm to deliver uniform doses in individual gantry angles/fields for PLDR treatments. Treatment plans were generated with 10 gantry angles using the step-and-shoot IMRT delivery technique, which can be delivered in 3-minute intervals to achieve an effective low dose rate of 6.7 cGy/min. Instead of dose constraints on critical structures, ring structures were mainly used in PLDR-IMRT optimization. In this study, the PLDR-IMRT plans were compared with the PLDR-3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) plans and the PLDR-RapidArc plans. For the 10 cases with pancreatic cancer that were investigated, the mean planning target volume (PTV) dose for each gantry angle in the PLDR-IMRT plans ranged from 17.6 to 22.4 cGy. The maximum doses ranged between 22.9 and 34.8 cGy. The minimum doses ranged from 8.2 to 17.5 cGy. For the 10 cases with prostate cancer that were investigated, the mean PTV doses for individual gantry angles ranged from 18.8 to 22.6 cGy. The maximum doses per gantry angle were between 24.0 and 34.7 cGy. The minimum doses per gantry angle ranged from 4.4 to 17.4 cGy. A significant reduction in the organ at risk (OAR) dose was observed with the PLDR-IMRT plan when compared with that using the PLDR-3DCRT plan. The volume receiving an 18-Gy (V{sub 18}) dose for the left and right kidneys was reduced by 10.6% and 12.5%, respectively, for the pancreatic plans. The volume receiving a 45-Gy (V{sub 45}) dose for the small bowel decreased from 65.3% to 45.5%. For the cases with prostate cancer, the volume receiving a 40-Gy (V{sub 40}) dose for the bladder and the rectum was reduced significantly by 25.1% and 51.2%, respectively. When compared with the RapidArc technique, the volume receiving a 30-Gy (V{sub 30}) dose for the left and the right kidneys was lower in the IMRT plans. For most OARs, no significant differences were observed between the PLDR-IMRT and the PLDR-RapidArc plans. These results clearly demonstrated that the PLDR-IMRT plan was suitable for PLDR pancreatic and prostate cancer treatments in terms of the overall plan quality. A significant reduction in the OAR dose was achieved with the PLDR-IMRT plan when compared with that using the PLDR-3DCRT plan. For most OARs, no significant differences were observed between the PLDR-IMRT and the PLDR-RapidArc plans. When compared with the PLDR-3DCRT plan, the PLDR-IMRT plan could provide superior target coverage and normal tissue sparing for PLDR reirradiation of recurrent pancreatic and prostate cancers. The PLDR-IMRT plan is an effective treatment choice for recurrent cancers in most cancer centers.« less
  • Children diagnosed with central nervous system (CNS) malignancies often receive radiotherapy, which can cause radiogenic late effects. In order to identify and reduce the risk of these late effects, we must understand the radiation doses that these children receive. Modern treatment planning systems accurately estimate the absorbed dose within the treatment fields but poorly estimate the dose outside them. The purpose of our study was to measure the out-of-field dose for children receiving localized radiotherapy for CNS cancer and apply an analytical model for estimating dose as a function of distance from the field edge. Radiation fields designed for amore » 12-year-old boy treated in our clinic were applied to an anthropomorphic phantom containing more than 200 thermoluminescent dosimeters. A double-Gaussian function of absorbed dose versus distance from the field edge (i.e., 50% isodose line) was applied, and parameters were allowed to vary and were fit to the model by minimizing the root mean square deviation, RMSD. The fitted model accurately predicted the dose from distances of 4 cm to 50 cm (RMSD = 0.54 cGy/Gy), but the model was not useful in estimating dose for distances less than 4 cm because of wide variation in measured dose, and the double-Gaussian model failed by systematically underestimating the dose beyond 50 cm. In conclusion, the double-Gaussian model may be applicable for points at distances from the field edge between 4 cm and 50 cm, where most children's radiosensitive tissues are located, but for points beyond 50 cm, an improvement should be investigated.« less