Search

To evaluate intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in patients with cervical cancer in terms of coverage, conformity, and dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters correlated with recommendations from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided brachytherapy.Eleven patients with histologically proven cervical cancer underwent primary chemoradiation for the pelvic lymph nodes, the uterus, the cervix, and the parametric region, with a symmetric margin of 1 cm. The prescription was for 50.4 Gy, with 1.8 Gy per fraction. The prescribed dose to the parametria was 2.12 Gy up to 59.36 Gy in 28 fractions as a simultaneous boost. For several reasons, the patients were unable to undergo brachytherapy. As an alternative, IMPT was planned with 5 fractions of 6 Gy to the cervix, including the macroscopic tumor with an MRI-guided target definition, with an isotropic margin of 5 mm for planning target volume (PTV) definition. Groupe-Europeen de Curietherapie and European society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) criteria were used for DVH evaluation. Reference comparison plans were optimized for volumetric modulated rapid arc (VMAT) therapy with the RapidArc (RA).The dose to the high-risk volume was calculated with α/β = 10 with 89.6 Gy. For IMPT, the clinical target volume showed a mean dose of 38.2 ± 5.0 Gy (35.0 ±1.8 Gy for RA). The D98% was 31.9 ± 2.6 Gy (RA: 30.8 ± 1.0 Gy). With regard to the organs at risk, the 2Gy Equivalent Dose (EQD2) (α/β = 3) to 2 cm(3) of the rectal wall, sigmoid wall, and bladder wall was 62.2 ± 6.4 Gy, 57.8 ± 6.1 Gy, and 80.6 ± 8.7 Gy (for RA: 75.3 ± 6.1 Gy, 66.9 ± 6.9 Gy, and 89.0 ± 7.2 Gy, respectively). For the IMPT boost plans in combination with external beam radiation therapy, all DVH parameters correlated with5% risk for grades 2 to 4 late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity.In patients who are not eligible for brachytherapy, IMPT as a boost technique additionally to external beam radiation therapy provides good target coverage and conformity and superior DVH parameters, compared with recommendations to MRI-guided brachytherapy. For selected patients, IMPT might be a valid alternative to brachytherapy and also superior to reference VMAT plans.

A feasibility study was performed to evaluate RapidArc (RA), and the potential benefit of flattening filter-free beams, on advanced esophageal cancer against intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT).The plans for 3D-CRT and IMRT with three to seven and five to seven fixed beams were compared against double-modulated arcs with avoidance sectors to spare the lungs for 10 patients. All plans were optimized for 6-MV photon beams. The RA plans were studied for conventional and flattening filter-free (FFF) beams. The objectives for the planning target volume were the volume receiving ≥ 95% or at most 107% of the prescribed dose of1% with a dose prescription of 59.4 Gy. For the organs at risk, the lung volume (minus the planning target volume) receiving ≥ 5 Gy was60%, that receiving 20 Gy was20%-30%, and the mean lung dose was15.0 Gy. The heart volume receiving 45 Gy was20%, volume receiving 30 Gy was50%. The spinal dose received by 1% was45 Gy. The technical delivery parameters for RA were assessed to compare the normal and FFF beam characteristics.RA and IMRT provided equivalent coverage and homogeneity, slightly superior to 3D-CRT. The conformity index was 1.2 ± 0.1 for RA and IMRT and 1.5 ± 0.2 for 3D-CRT. The mean lung dose was 12.2 ± 4.5 for IMRT, 11.3 ± 4.6 for RA, and 10.8 ± 4.4 for RA with FFF beams, 18.2 ± 8.5 for 3D-CRT. The percentage of volume receiving ≥ 20 Gy ranged from 23.6% ± 9.1% to 21.1% ± 9.7% for IMRT and RA (FFF beams) and 39.2% ± 17.0% for 3D-CRT. The heart and spine objectives were met by all techniques. The monitor units for IMRT and RA were 457 ± 139, 322 ± 20, and 387 ± 40, respectively. RA with FFF beams showed, compared with RA with normal beams, a ∼20% increase in monitor units per Gray, a 90% increase in the average dose rate, and 20% reduction in beam on time (owing to different gantry speeds).RA demonstrated, compared with conventional IMRT, a similar target coverage and some better dose sparing to the organs at risk; the advantage against conventional 3D-CRT was more evident. RA with FFF beams resulted in minor improvements in plan quality but with the potential for additional useful reduction in the treatment time.

To evaluate, with a dosimetric and clinical feasibility study, RapidArc (a volumetric modulated arc technique) for hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy treatment of large arteriovenous malformations (AVMs).Nine patients were subject to multimodality imaging (magnetic resonance, computed tomography, and digital subtraction angiography) to determine nidus and target volumes, as well as involved organs at risk (optical structures, inner ear, brain stem). Plans for multiple intensity-modulated arcs with a single isocenter were optimized for a fractionation of 25 Gy in 5 fractions. All plans were optimized for 6-MV photon beams. Dose-volume histograms were analyzed to assess plan quality. Delivery parameters were reported to appraise technical features of RapidArc, and pretreatment quality assurance measurements were carried out to report on quality of delivery.Average size of AVM nidus was 26.2 cm(3), and RapidArc plans provided complete target coverage with minimal overdosage (V(100%) = 100% and V(110%)1%) and excellent homogeneity (6%). Organs at risk were highly spared. The D(1%) to chiasm, eyes, lenses, optic nerves, and brainstem (mean ± SD) was 6.4 ± 8.3, 1.9 ± 3.8, 2.3 ± 2.2, 0.7 ± 0.9, 4.4 ± 7.2, 12.2 ± 9.6 Gy, respectively. Conformity index (CI(95%)) was 2.2 ± 0.1. The number of monitor units per gray was 277 ± 45, total beam-on time was 2.5 ± 0.3 min. Planning vs. delivery γ pass rate was 98.3% ± 0.9%. None of the patients developed acute toxicity. With a median follow-up of 9 months, 3 patients presented with deterioration of symptoms and were found to have postradiation changes but responded symptomatically to steroids. These patients continue to do well on follow-up. One patient developed headache and seizures, which was attributed to intracranial bleed, confirmed on imaging.Hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy can be successfully delivered using the RapidArc form of volumetric arc technology for intracranial AVMs. The quality of delivery and calculated parameters are in agreement with each other and are in line with published reports for other sites.

A planning study was performed to evaluate RapidArc (RA), a volumetric modulated arc technique, on malignant pleural mesothelioma. The benchmark was conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).The computed tomography data sets of 6 patients were included. The plans for IMRT with nine fixed beams were compared against double-modulated arcs with a single isocenter. All plans were optimized for 15-MV photon beams. The dose prescription was 54 Gy to the planning target volume. The planning objectives for the planning target volume were a minimal dose of95% and maximal dose of107%. For the organs at risk, the parameters were as follows: contralateral lung, percentage of volume receiving 5 Gy (V(5 Gy))60%, V(20 Gy)10%, mean10.0 Gy; liver, V(30 Gy)33%, mean31 Gy; heart, V(45 Gy)30%, V(50 Gy)20%, dose received by 1% of the volume (D(1%))60 Gy; contralateral kidney, V(15 Gy)20%; spine, D(1%)45 Gy; esophagus, V(55 Gy)30%; and spleen, V(40 Gy)50%. The monitor units (MUs) and delivery time were scored to measure the treatment efficiency. The pretreatment portal dosimetry scored delivery to the calculation agreement with the Gamma Agreement Index.RA and IMRT provided equivalent coverage and homogeneity. Both techniques fulfilled objectives on organs at risk with a tendency of RA to improve sparing. The conformity index was 1.9 +/- 0.1 for RA and IMRT. The number of MU/2 Gy was 734 +/- 82 for RA and 2,195 +/- 317 for IMRT. The planning vs. delivery agreement revealed a Gamma Agreement Index for IMRT of 96.0% +/- 2.6% and for RA of 95.7% +/- 1.5%. The treatment time was 3.7 +/- 0.3 min for RA and 13.4 +/- 0.1 min for IMRT.RA demonstrated compared with conventional IMRT, similar target coverage and better dose sparing to the organs at risks. The number of MUs and the time required to deliver a 2-Gy fraction were much lower for RA, allowing the possibility to incorporate this technique in the treatment options for mesothelioma patients.