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

Title: SU-F-T-632: On the Use of Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy for Thoracic Vertebral Metastases SBRT Treatment

Abstract

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate quality, efficiency and delivery accuracy of intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) plans for thoracic-vertebral metastases using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Methods: After obtaining approval of RPC-benchmark plan, seven previously treated thoracic-vertebral metastases patients with non-coplanar hybrid arcs(NC-HA)using 1–2 3D-dynamic conformal partial-arcs plus 7–9 IMRT-beams were re-optimized with IMAT using 3 full co-planar arcs. Tumors were located between T2–T7. T1/T2-weighted MRI images were co-registered with planning-CT. PTVs were between 24.3–240.1cc(median=48.1cc). Prescription was 30Gy in 5 fractions with 6-MV beams at Novalis-TX consisting of HD-MLC.Plans were compared for target coverage:conformality index(CI),homogeneity index(HI),PTVD90. Organs-at-risks(OARs)was evaluated for spinal cord(Dmax, D0.35cc, and D1.2cc), esophagus(Dmax and D5cc),heart(Dmax, D15cc)and lung(V5 and V10). Dose delivery efficiency and accuracy of each IMAT plan was assessed via quality assurance(QA) plan. Beam-on time was recorded and a gamma index was used to compare agreement between planned and measured doses. Results: SBRT IMAT plans resulted in superior CI(1.02 vs. 1.36, p=0.05) and HI (0.14 vs. 0.27, p=0.01). PTVD90 was improved but statistically insignificant (31.0 vs. 30.4Gy, p=0.38). IMAT resulted in statistically significant improvements in OARs sparing: esophagus max(22.5 vs. 27.0Gy, p=0.03), esophagus 5cc (17.6 vs. 21.5Gy, p=0.02) and heart max(13.1 vs. 15.8Gy, p=0.03). Spinal cord,lung V5 and V10more » were lower but statistically insignificant. Average total MU and beam-on time were 2598±354 vs. 3542±495 and 4.7±0.6 min vs. 7.1±1.0min for IMAT vs. NC-HA (without accounting for couch kicks time for NC-HA). IMAT plans demonstrated an accurate dose delivery of 95.5±1.0% for clinical gamma passing-rate of 2%/2mm criteria on MapCHECK, that was comparable to NC-HA plans. Conclusion: IMAT plans provided highly conformal and homogeneous dose distributions to target and reduced OARs doses compared to NC-HA. Total MU was reduced by a factor of 1.4 and subsequently decreased treatment times significantly - potentially minimizing intra-fraction motion error and owing to patient comfort. SBRT using IMAT planning for single fraction thoracic-vertebrae metastases will be investigated.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. University of Kansas Hospital, Kansas City, KS (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22649192
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; DELIVERY; ESOPHAGUS; METASTASES; NMR IMAGING; PLANNING; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; RADIOTHERAPY; SPINAL CORD

Citation Formats

Pokhrel, D, Mallory, M, Badkul, R, Jiang, H, Saleh, H, Wang, F, and Lominska, C. SU-F-T-632: On the Use of Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy for Thoracic Vertebral Metastases SBRT Treatment. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956817.
Pokhrel, D, Mallory, M, Badkul, R, Jiang, H, Saleh, H, Wang, F, & Lominska, C. SU-F-T-632: On the Use of Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy for Thoracic Vertebral Metastases SBRT Treatment. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956817.
Pokhrel, D, Mallory, M, Badkul, R, Jiang, H, Saleh, H, Wang, F, and Lominska, C. Wed . "SU-F-T-632: On the Use of Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy for Thoracic Vertebral Metastases SBRT Treatment". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956817.
@article{osti_22649192,
title = {SU-F-T-632: On the Use of Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy for Thoracic Vertebral Metastases SBRT Treatment},
author = {Pokhrel, D and Mallory, M and Badkul, R and Jiang, H and Saleh, H and Wang, F and Lominska, C},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate quality, efficiency and delivery accuracy of intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) plans for thoracic-vertebral metastases using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Methods: After obtaining approval of RPC-benchmark plan, seven previously treated thoracic-vertebral metastases patients with non-coplanar hybrid arcs(NC-HA)using 1–2 3D-dynamic conformal partial-arcs plus 7–9 IMRT-beams were re-optimized with IMAT using 3 full co-planar arcs. Tumors were located between T2–T7. T1/T2-weighted MRI images were co-registered with planning-CT. PTVs were between 24.3–240.1cc(median=48.1cc). Prescription was 30Gy in 5 fractions with 6-MV beams at Novalis-TX consisting of HD-MLC.Plans were compared for target coverage:conformality index(CI),homogeneity index(HI),PTVD90. Organs-at-risks(OARs)was evaluated for spinal cord(Dmax, D0.35cc, and D1.2cc), esophagus(Dmax and D5cc),heart(Dmax, D15cc)and lung(V5 and V10). Dose delivery efficiency and accuracy of each IMAT plan was assessed via quality assurance(QA) plan. Beam-on time was recorded and a gamma index was used to compare agreement between planned and measured doses. Results: SBRT IMAT plans resulted in superior CI(1.02 vs. 1.36, p=0.05) and HI (0.14 vs. 0.27, p=0.01). PTVD90 was improved but statistically insignificant (31.0 vs. 30.4Gy, p=0.38). IMAT resulted in statistically significant improvements in OARs sparing: esophagus max(22.5 vs. 27.0Gy, p=0.03), esophagus 5cc (17.6 vs. 21.5Gy, p=0.02) and heart max(13.1 vs. 15.8Gy, p=0.03). Spinal cord,lung V5 and V10 were lower but statistically insignificant. Average total MU and beam-on time were 2598±354 vs. 3542±495 and 4.7±0.6 min vs. 7.1±1.0min for IMAT vs. NC-HA (without accounting for couch kicks time for NC-HA). IMAT plans demonstrated an accurate dose delivery of 95.5±1.0% for clinical gamma passing-rate of 2%/2mm criteria on MapCHECK, that was comparable to NC-HA plans. Conclusion: IMAT plans provided highly conformal and homogeneous dose distributions to target and reduced OARs doses compared to NC-HA. Total MU was reduced by a factor of 1.4 and subsequently decreased treatment times significantly - potentially minimizing intra-fraction motion error and owing to patient comfort. SBRT using IMAT planning for single fraction thoracic-vertebrae metastases will be investigated.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956817},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • Purpose: Recent clinical studies have shown a correlation between radiation dose to the thoracic vertebral bodies (TVB) and the development of hematologic toxicity (HT) in patients receiving chemoradiation (CRT) for lung cancer (LuCa). The feasibility of a bone-marrow sparing (BMS) approach in this group of patients is unknown. We hypothesized that radiation dose to the TVB can be reduced with an intensity modulated radiation therapy(IMRT)/volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy(VMAT) without affecting plan quality. Methods: We identified LuCa cases treated with curative intent CRT using IMRT/VMAT from 4/2009 to 2/2015. The TVBs from T1–T10 were retrospectively contoured. No constraints were placed onmore » the TVB structure initially. A subset were re-planned with BMS-IMRT/VMAT with an objective or reducing the mean TVB dose to <23 Gy. The following data were collected on the initial and BMS plans: mean dose to planning target volume (PTV), lungs-PTV, esophagus, heart; lung V20; cord max dose. Pairwise comparisons were performed using the signed rank test. Results: 94 cases received CRT with IMRT/VMAT. We selected 11 cases (7 IMRT, 4 VMAT) with a range of initial mean TVB doses (median 35.7 Gy, range 18.9–41.4 Gy). Median prescription dose was 60 Gy. BMS-IMRT/VMAT significantly reduced the mean TVB dose by a median of 10.2 Gy (range, 1.0–16.7 Gy, p=0.001) and reduced the cord max dose by 2.9 Gy (p=0.014). BMS-IMRT/VMAT had no impact on lung mean (median +17 cGy, p=0.700), lung V20 (median +0.5%, p=0.898), esophagus mean (median +13 cGy, p=1.000) or heart mean (median +16 cGy, p=0.365). PTV-mean dose was not affected by BMS-IMRT/VMAT (median +13 cGy, p=0.653). Conclusion: BMS-IMRT/VMAT was able to significantly reduce radiation dose to the TVB without compromising plan quality. Prospective evaluation of BMS-IMRT/VMAT in patients receiving CRT for LuCa is warranted to determine if this approach results in clinically significant reductions in HT.« 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
  • To retrospectively evaluate quality, efficiency, and delivery accuracy of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for single-fraction treatment of thoracic vertebral metastases using image-guided stereotactic body radiosurgery (SBRS) after RTOG 0631 dosimetric compliance criteria. After obtaining credentialing for MD Anderson spine phantom irradiation validation, 10 previously treated patients with thoracic vertebral metastases with noncoplanar hybrid arcs using 1 to 2 3D-conformal partial arcs plus 7 to 9 intensity-modulated radiation therapy beams were retrospectively re-optimized with VMAT using 3 full coplanar arcs. Tumors were located between T2 and T12. Contrast-enhanced T1/T2-weighted magnetic resonance images were coregistered with planning computed tomography and planningmore » target volumes (PTV) were between 14.4 and 230.1 cc (median = 38.0 cc). Prescription dose was 16 Gy in 1 fraction with 6 MV beams at Novalis-TX linear accelerator consisting of micro multileaf collimators. Each plan was assessed for target coverage using conformality index, the conformation number, the ratio of the volume receiving 50% of the prescription dose over PTV, R50%, homogeneity index (HI), and PTV-1600 coverage per RTOG 0631 requirements. Organs-at-risk doses were evaluated for maximum doses to spinal cord (D{sub 0.03} {sub cc}, D{sub 0.35} {sub cc}), partial spinal cord (D{sub 10%}), esophagus (D{sub 0.03} {sub cc} and D{sub 5} {sub cc}), heart (D{sub 0.03} {sub cc} and D{sub 15} {sub cc}), and lung (V{sub 5}, V{sub 10}, and maximum dose to 1000 cc of lung). Dose delivery efficiency and accuracy of each VMAT-SBRS plan were assessed using quality assurance (QA) plan on MapCHECK device. Total beam-on time was recorded during QA procedure, and a clinical gamma index (2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm) was used to compare agreement between planned and measured doses. All 10 VMAT-SBRS plans met RTOG 0631 dosimetric requirements for PTV coverage. The plans demonstrated highly conformal and homogenous coverage of the vertebral PTV with mean HI, conformality index, conformation number, and R{sub 50%} values of 0.13 ± 0.03 (range: 0.09 to 0.18), 1.03 ± 0.04 (range: 0.98 to 1.09), 0.81 ± 0.06 (range: 0.72 to 0.89), and 4.2 ± 0.94 (range: 2.7 to 5.4), respectively. All 10 patients met protocol guidelines with maximum dose to spinal cord (average: 8.83 ± 1.9 Gy, range: 5.9 to 10.9 Gy); dose to 0.35 cc of spinal cord (average: 7.62 ± 1.7 Gy, range: 5.4 to 9.6 Gy); and dose to 10% of partial spinal cord (average 6.31 ± 1.5 Gy, range: 3.5 to 8.5 Gy) less than 14, 10, and 10 Gy, respectively. For all 10 patients, the maximum dose to esophagus (average: 9.41 ± 4.3 Gy, range: 1.5 to 14.9 Gy) and dose to 5 cc of esophagus (average: 7.43 ± 3.8 Gy, range: 1.1 to 11.8 Gy) were kept less than protocol requirements 16 Gy and 11.9 Gy, respectively. In a similar manner, all 10 patients met protocol compliance criteria with maximum dose to heart (average: 4.62 ± 3.5 Gy, range: 1.3 to 10.2 Gy) and dose to 15 cc of heart (average: 2.23 ± 1.8 Gy, range: 0.3 to 5.6 Gy) less than 22 and 16 Gy, respectively. The dose to the lung was retained much lower than protocol guidelines for all 10 patients. The total number of monitor units was, on average, 6919 ± 1187. The average beam-on time was 11.5 ± 2.0 minutes. The VMAT plans demonstrated dose delivery accuracy of 95.8 ± 0.7%, on average, for clinical gamma passing rate with 2%/2 mm criteria and 98.3 ± 0.8%, on average, with 3%/3 mm criteria. All VMAT-SBRS plans were considered clinically acceptable per RTOG 0631 dosimetric compliance criteria. VMAT planning provided highly conformal and homogenous dose distributions for the lower-dose vertebral PTV and the spinal cord as well as organs-at-risk such as esophagus, heart, and lung. Higher QA pass rates and shorter beam-on time suggest that VMAT-SBRS is a clinically feasible, fast, and effective treatment option for patients with thoracic vertebral metastases.« less
  • Purpose: This study evaluates a novel algorithm that can be used with any treatment planning system for simple and rapid generation of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plans for treating multiple brain metastases using a single isocenter dynamic conformal arc (DCA) approach. This technique is compared with a single isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique in terms of delivery time, conformity, low dose spread and delivery accuracy. Methods: Five patients, with a total of 37 (5 – 11) targets were planned using a previously published method for generating optimal VMAT plans and using the proposed DCA algorithm. All planning target volumesmore » (PTVs) were planned to 20 Gy, meeting a minimum 99% coverage and maximum 135 % hot spot for both techniques. Quality assurance was performed using radiochromic film, with films placed in the high dose regions of each PTV. Normal tissue volumes receiving 12 Gy and 6 Gy (V12 and V6) were computed for each plan. Conformity index (CI) and gamma evaluations (95% of points passing 4%/0.5mm) were computed for each PTV. Results: Delivery times, including beam on and table rotation times, were comparable: 17 – 22 minutes for all deliveries. V12s for DCA plans were (18.5±15.2 cc) vs. VMAT (19.7±14.4 cc). V6s were significantly lower for DCA (69.0±52.0 cc) compared with VMAT (154.0±91.0 cc) (p <<0.05). CIs for VMAT targets were (1.38±0.50) vs. DCA (1.61±0.41). 36 of 37 DCA planned targets passed gamma tests, while 29 of 37 VMAT planned targets passed. Conclusion: Single isocenter DCA plans were easily achieved. The evaluation suggests that DCA may represent a favorable technique compared with VMAT for multiple target SRS by reducing dose to normal tissue and more accurately depicting deliverable dose.« less
  • Purpose: To compare three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D CRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) Methods: A retrospective study of clinically treated lung SBRT cases treated between 2010 and 2015 at our hospital was performed. All treatment modalities were included in this evaluation (VMAT, 3D CRT, static IMRT, and dynamic conformal arc therapy). However, the majority of treatment modalities were either VMAT or 3D CRT. Treatment times of patients and dosimetric plan quality metrics were compared. Treatment times were calculated based on the time the therapist opened and closed the patient’s treatment plan. This treatmentmore » time closely approximates the utilization time of the treatment room. The dosimetric plan quality metrics evaluated include ICRU conformity index, the volume of 105% prescribed dose outside PTV, the ratio of volume of 50% prescribed dose to the volume of PTV, the percentage of maximum dose at 2 cm away from PTV to the prescribed dose, and the V20 (percentage of lung volume receiving 20 Gy or more). Results: Treatment time comparisons show that on average VMAT has shorter treatment times than 3D CRT. Dose conformity, defined by the ICRU conformity index, and high dose spillage, defined by the volume of 105% dose outside the PTV, is reduced when using VMAT compared to 3D CRT. V20 and intermediate dose spillage/fall-off metrics of VMAT and 3D are not significantly different. Conclusion: Clinically treated lung SBRT cases indicate VMAT is superior to 3D with regard to shorter treatment times, plan dose conformity, and plan high dose spillage.« less