Intra‐arc binary collimation with dynamic axes trajectory optimization for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with multiple prescriptions.

Purpose: This work generates multi‐metastases cranial stereotactic radiosurgery/radiotherapy (SRS/SRT) plans using a novel treatment planning technique in which dynamic couch, collimator, and gantry trajectories are used with periodic binary target collimation. The performance of this planning technique is evaluated against conventional volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) planning in terms of various dose and plan quality metrics. Methods: A 3D cost space (referred to herein as the combined optimization of dynamic axes or CODA cube) was calculated based on an overlap between targets and organs‐at‐risk (OARs) and uncollimated areas between targets (island blocking) for all combinations of couch, gantry, and collimator angles. Gradient descent through the cube was applied to determine dynamic trajectories. At each control point (CP), each target can either be conformally treated or blocked by the multi‐leaf collimator (referred to as intra‐arc binary collimation, iABC). Simulated annealing was used to optimize the collimation patterns throughout the arcs as well as the monitor units (MUs) delivered at each CP. Seven previously treated VMAT plans were selected for comparison against the CODA–iABC planning technique. Two CODA–iABC plans were developed: a single gantry arc plan and a plan with one gantry arc and two couch arcs. Plan quality comparison metrics included maximum and mean dose to OARs (brainstem, chiasm, optic nerves, eyes, and lenses), the volume of normal brain receiving 12 Gy (V12Gy), total MUs, target conformity, and dose‐gradient index. Results: Treatment plans generated with 1‐arc CODA–iABC plans delivered an average of 21% and 30% higher maximum and mean doses to brainstem, respectively, when compared to VMAT plans. Treatment plans generated with 3‐arc CODA–iABC used an average of 24% fewer MUs and resulted in an average reduction of 48% maximum dose and 50% mean dose to the OARs, when compared to VMAT. Target conformity values were worse in both CODA–iABC plans than VMAT by an average of 35% and 15%, respectively. There are no significant differences in V12Gy for all three planning techniques; however, 3‐arc CODA–iABC is more effective at reducing dose to normal brain in the low‐dose region (<12 Gy). Conclusion: CODA–iABC is a novel planning technique that has been developed to automatically generate patient‐specific multi‐axis trajectories for multiple metastases cranial SRS/SRT. This work has demonstrated the feasibility of planning with this novel method. The 1‐arc CODA–iABC planning technique is slightly dosimetric inferior to VMAT. With an increased sampling of a three‐dimensional CODA cube by using a 3‐arc CODA–iABC technique, there was improved total dose sparing to all the OARs and increased MU efficiency, but with a cost in target conformity, when compared to VMAT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]