Search

Abstract Background Data on acute toxicities after stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) for brain metastases, including multiple and large lesions, are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the incidence and nature of toxicities immediately after SRT using a linear accelerator. Methods This retrospective study reviewed the medical records of 315 patients with brain metastases treated with SRT at our institution between May 2019 and February 2022. In total, 439 SRT sessions were performed for 2161 brain metastases. The outcome of interest was immediate side effects (ISEs), defined as new or worsening symptoms occurring during SRT or within 14 days after the end of SRT. Results Grade ≥ 2 and ≥ 3 ISEs occurred in 16 (3.6%) and 7 (1.6%) cases, respectively. Among 63 treatments for 10 or more lesions (range: 10–40), 1 (1.6%) ISE occurred. Among 22 treatments for lesions with a maximum tumor volume of > 10 cc, 2 (9.1%) ISEs occurred. Grade ≥ 3 ISEs included 1, 4, 1, and 1 cases of grade 3 nausea, grade 3 new-onset partial and generalized seizures, grade 3 obstructive hydrocephalus, and grade 5 intracranial hemorrhage, respectively. ISEs were more common in patients with a larger maximum tumor volume, primary sites other than lung and breast cancer, and pre-treatment neurological symptoms. Conclusion SRT using a linear accelerator for brain metastases, including multiple and large lesions, is safe, with a low incidence of ISEs. Serious complications immediately after SRT are rare but possible; therefore, careful follow-up is necessary after treatment initiation.

Abstract Background Total scalp irradiation presents technical and dosimetric challenges. While reports suggest that HyperArc, a new stereotactic radiosurgery planning technique applied to non-coplanar volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique, is associated with high conformity and rapid dose fall-off, the performance of HyperArc for total scalp irradiation has not been explored. The current study aimed to compare the dosimetric performance of HyperArc plans with those of non-coplanar VMAT plans in angiosarcoma of the scalp. Methods Ten patients with angiosarcoma of the scalp were included in this study. The performance of three different plans administered using TrueBeam Edge were compared: non-coplanar VMAT using flattening filter (FF) beams (VMAT-FF), HyperArc using FF beams (HyperArc-FF), and HyperArc using flattening filter free (FFF) beams (HyperArc-FFF). The dose distribution, dosimetric parameters, and dosimetric accuracy for each of these plans were evaluated. Results The three plans showed no statistically significant differences in target volume coverage, conformity, and homogeneity. The HyperArc-FF and HyperArc-FFF plans provided significantly lower mean brain doses (12.63 ± 3.31 Gy and 12.71 ± 3.40 Gy) than did the VMAT-FF plans (17.11 ± 5.25 Gy). There were almost no differences in sparing the organs at risk between the HyperArc-FF and HyperArc-FFF plans. The HyperArc-FF and HyperArc-FFF plans provided a shorter beam-on time than did the VMAT-FF plan. The 3%/2 mm gamma test pass rates were above 95% for all three plans. Conclusions Our results suggest that the HyperArc plan can be potentially used for radiation therapy of target regions with large and complicated shapes, such as the scalp, and that there are no advantages of using FFF beams.

Abstract Purpose The HyperArc VMAT (HA-VMAT) planning approach was newly developed to fulfill the demands of dose delivery for brain metastases stereotactic radiosurgery. We compared the dosimetric parameters of the HA-VMAT plan with those of the conventional VMAT (C-VMAT). Material and methods For 23 patients (1–4 brain metastases), C-VMAT and HA-VMAT plans with a prescription dose of 20–24 Gy were retrospectively generated, and dosimetric parameters for PTV (homogeneity index, HI; conformity index, CI; gradient index, GI) and brain tissue (V2Gy-V16Gy) were evaluated. Subsequently, the physical characteristics (modulation complexity score for VMAT, MCSV; Monitor unit, MU) of both treatment approaches were compared. Results HA-VMAT provided higher HI (1.41 ± 0.07 vs. 1.24 ± 0.07, p