Comparison between Volumetric Modulated arc Therapy based Coplanar and Noncoplanar Planning for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy of Liver

BACKGROUND: The study aims to investigate potential dosimetric benefits between non-coplanar and coplanar beam arrangements of Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans for liver stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). METHODS: Thirteen patients who had undergone liver SBRT treatment in our department were chosen retrospectively for the study. Two sets of SBRT-VMAT plans namely, non-coplanar (NC-VMAT) and Coplanar (C-VMAT) were generated in Monaco(v5.11) planning system for Elekta Versa HD Linac using unflatten 6MV photon. The NC-VMAT plans were created by two/three non-coplanar partial arcs with couch rotation of ±150 and had an arc span of 1300 to 1600 whereas the C-VMAT plans consisted of a full arc. Both plans were compared by statistically analyzing various dosimetric and technical parameters. RESULTS: There is no statistically significant difference observed between the C-VMAT and NC-VMAT plans for planning target volume (PTV) coverage. However, the spine dose (D1cc) was much less in the NC-VMAT plan compared to the C-VMAT plan, with mean values of 6.127 ± 3.08Gy and 9.058 ± 4.76Gy, respectively (p-value=0.002). The low dose spillage to the healthy tissue was compared by the volume receiving 5Gy (V5Gy) and 10Gy (V10Gy). V5Gy of the NC-VMAT plan was 2399.23±1870.76cc while that of C-VMAT plans was 2835.36±1930.20cc with the p-value <0.001. Moreover, the monitor units(MU) were less with NC-VMAT than with C-VMAT SBRT plans (p=0.015). CONCLUSION: The plan quality of NC-VMAT plans was favorable compared to C-VMAT plans for liver SBRT especially in reducing spine dose, low dose spillage to healthy tissue, and MU.

A Dosimetric Study Comparing Different Radiotherapy Planning Techniques With and Without Deep Inspiratory Breath Hold for Breast Cancer.

Objective: To analyze whether deep inspiratory breath hold (DIBH) would be dosimetrically beneficial irrespective of radiotherapy planning techniques for patients with left breast cancers requiring adjuvant radiotherapy. Methods: Planning CT scans were taken in free-breathing (FB) as well as deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) for patients requiring adjuvant radiotherapy for left breast cancers. After registration, three radiotherapy plans - 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated RT (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc-therapy (VMAT) - were generated for both FB and DIBH scans for each patient. The dose-volume parameters were collected from the dose-volume histogram and analyzed. A paired t-test is used for statistical analysis of the parameters. Findings: The study was conducted on thirteen patients. The mean dose of the left lung was reduced with DIBH by 32%, 24%, and 6% (8.6 Gy, 6.6 Gy, and 6.4 Gy) with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT, respectively. The mean heart dose was reduced by 3.3 Gy (2.2 vs 5.5 Gy), 2.2 Gy (7.5 vs 9.7 Gy), and 1.2 Gy (5.8 vs 7 Gy) with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT with DIBH. Similarly, the left anterior descending artery (LAD) mean dose was relatively reduced by 80%, 34%, and 20% when compared with the FB scans for 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT respectively, with max dose in the 3DCRT plan. Novelty/Applications: DIBH appears to have maximum benefit in achieving a better sparing of organs-at-risk for patients being considered for 3DCRT, and to a lesser extent with even IMRT and VMAT techniques.

Dosimetric analysis and clinical outcomes of brachial plexus as an organ-at-risk in head-and-neck cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: To document the dose received by brachial plexus (BP) in patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and report the incidence of brachial plexopathy. METHODS: Newly diagnosed patients of HNSCC treated with radical or adjuvant IMRT were included in this retrospective study. No dosimetric constraints were applied for BP maximum dose equivalent dose (EQD2 α/ß = 3). Patients with minimum 6-month follow-up were included and patients with suspicion of plexopathy were evaluated further. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were eligible and 127 BP were analyzed. The mean BP maximum dose (BPmax) was 62.4 Gy (+6.9), while mean BP volume was 28.1 cc (+4.1). Proportion of patients receiving BPmax >66 and >70 Gy were 34.7% and 14.2%. The mean BPmax for T4 tumors was significantly higher than T1 tumors (65 vs. 57.5 Gy, P = 0.005) but when adjusted for N-category, T-category was not independently significant in accounting for BPmax >66 or >70 Gy. Mean BPmax for N0 versus N2+ was 59.8 versus 65.6 Gy (P = 0.0001) and N1 versus N2+ was 61.6 versus 65.6 Gy (P = 0.018). After adjusting for T-category, patients with N2+ had a mean 4.2 Gy higher BPmax than N0-N1 (P = 0.0001). Stage III-IV patients had a mean six Gy higher BPmax doses than Stage I-II disease (P = 0.0001). With a median follow-up of 28 months (interquartile range 16-42), no patient had brachial plexopathy. CONCLUSION: Clinically significant plexopathy was not seen in spite of majority having over 2-years follow-up and a third of patients having dose above the recommended tolerance. Only nodal category independently influenced dose to the brachial plexii.