Stereotactic body radiotherapy with volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy and flattening filter-free beams: dosimetric considerations.

PURPOSE: The present study comparatively evaluates the impact of energy-matched flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beams with different energy levels on the physical-dosimetric quality of lung and liver stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment plans. METHODS: For this purpose, 54 different lung and liver lesions from 44 patients who had already received SBRT combined with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were included in this retrospective planning study. Planning computed tomography scans already available were used for the renewed planning with 6 MV, 6 MV-FFF, 10 MV, and 10 MV-FFF under constant planning objectives. The treatment delivery data, dosimetric distributions, and dose-volume histograms as well as parameters such as the conformity index and gradient indices were the basis for the evaluation and comparison of treatment plans. RESULTS: A significant reduction of beam-on time (BOT) was achieved due to the high dose rates of FFF beams. In addition, we showed that for FFF beams compared to flattened beams of the same energy level, smaller planning target volumes (PTV) require fewer monitor units (MU) than larger PTVs. An equal to slightly superior target volume coverage and sparing of healthy tissue as well as organs at risk in both lung and liver lesions were found. Significant differences were seen mainly in the medium to lower dose range. CONCLUSION: We found that FFF beams together with VMAT represent an excellent combination for SBRT of lung or liver lesions with shortest BOT for 10 MV-FFF but significant dose savings for 6 MV-FFF in lung lesions.

Risk stratification by anamnesis increases SARS-CoV-2 test efficiency in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of testing asymptomatic cancer patients, we analyzed all tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) before and during radiotherapy at a tertiary cancer center throughout the second wave of the pandemic in Germany. METHODS: Results of all real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for SARS-CoV­2 performed at our radio-oncology department between 13 October 2020 and 11 March 2021 were included. Clinical data and anamnestic information at the time of testing were documented and examined for (i) the presence of COVID-19-related symptoms and (ii) virus-related anamnesis (high-risk [prior positive test or contact to a positive tested person within the last 14 days] or low-risk [inconspicuous anamnesis within the last 14 days]). RESULTS: A total of 1056 SARS-CoV­2 tests in 543 patients were analyzed. Of those, 1015 tests were performed in asymptomatic patients and 41 tests in patients with COVID-19-associated symptoms. Two of 940 (0.2%) tests in asymptomatic patients with low-risk anamnesis and three of 75 (4.0%) tests in asymptomatic patients with high-risk anamnesis showed a positive result. For symptomatic patients, SARS-CoV­2 was detected in three of 36 (8.3%) low-risk and three of five (60.0%) high-risk tests. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating the correlation between individual risk factors and positivity rates of SARS-CoV­2 tests in cancer patients. The data demonstrate that clinical and anamnestic assessment is a simple and effective measure to distinctly increase SARS-CoV­2 test efficiency. This might enable cancer centers to adjust test strategies in asymptomatic patients, especially when test resources are scarce.