Search

Radiotherapy treatment plans using dynamic couch rotation during volumetric modulated arc therapy (DCR-VMAT) reduce the dose to organs at risk (OARs) compared to coplanar VMAT, while maintaining the dose to the planning target volume (PTV). This paper seeks to validate this finding with measurements. DCR-VMAT treatment plans were produced for five patients with primary brain tumours and delivered using a commercial linear accelerator (linac). Dosimetric accuracy was assessed using point dose and radiochromic film measurements. Linac-recorded mechanical errors were assessed by extracting deviations from log files for multi-leaf collimator (MLC), couch, and gantry positions every 20 ms. Dose distributions, reconstructed from every fifth log file sample, were calculated and used to determine deviations from the treatment plans. Median (range) treatment delivery times were 125 s (123–133 s) for DCR-VMAT, compared to 78 s (64–130 s) for coplanar VMAT. Absolute point doses were 0.8% (0.6%–1.7%) higher than prediction. For coronal and sagittal films, respectively, 99.2% (96.7%–100%) and 98.1% (92.9%–99.0%) of pixels above a 20% low dose threshold reported gamma

This paper gives an overview of recent developments in non-coplanar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Modern linear accelerators are capable of automating motion around multiple axes, allowing efficient delivery of highly non-coplanar radiotherapy techniques. Novel techniques developed for C-arm and non-standard linac geometries, methods of optimization, and clinical applications are reviewed. The additional degrees of freedom are shown to increase the therapeutic ratio, either through dose escalation to the target or dose reduction to functionally important organs at risk, by multiple research groups. Although significant work is still needed to translate these new non-coplanar radiotherapy techniques into the clinic, clinical implementation should be prioritized. Recent developments in non-coplanar radiotherapy demonstrate that it continues to have a place in modern cancer treatment.

Objective:To determine if subsets of patients may benefit from smaller or larger margins when using laser setup and bony anatomy verification of breast tumour bed (TB) boost radiotherapy (RT).Methods: Verification imaging data acquired using cone-beam CT, megavoltage CT or two-dimensional kilovoltage imaging on 218 patients were used (1574 images). TB setup errors for laser-only setup (dlaser) and for bony anatomy verification (dbone) were determined using clips implanted into the TB as a gold standard for the TB position. Cases were grouped by centre-, patient- and treatment-related factors, including breast volume, TB position, seroma visibility and surgical technique. Systematic (?) and random (?) TB setup errors were compared between groups, and TB planning target volume margins (MTB) were calculated.Results: For the study population, ?laser was between 2.8 and 3.4?mm, and ?bone was between 2.2 and 2.6?mm, respectively. Females with larger breasts (p?=?0.03), easily visible seroma (p???0.02) and open surgical technique (p???0.04) had larger ?laser. ?bone was larger for females with larger breasts (p?=?0.02) and lateral tumours (p?=?0.04). Females with medial tumours (p?Conclusion:If clips are not used, margins should be 8 and 10?mm for bony anatomy verification and laser setup, respectively. Individualization of TB margins may be considered based on breast volume, TB and seroma visibility.Advances in knowledge:Setup accuracy using lasers and bony anatomy is influenced by patient and treatment factors. Some patients may benefit from clip-based image guidance more than others.