• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.34
• /
• pp.83-92
• /
• 2022

Purpose: To evaluate usefulness of Tomotherapy and Halcyon VMAT treatment in radiation therapy for bi-breast cancer Materials and Methods: For 10 patients with bi-breast cancer, volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT) treatment plan was established using helical Tomotherapy(Accuray. USA) with field width of 5.0-cm and pitch of 0.287, and Halcyon(Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA, Version 3.0 USA) of 6arc and 8arc. Prescribed dose was 42.4 Gy/16, and V _40.3Gy of Planning Target Volume(PTV) was 90%. The quality of plan was evaluated by comparing the dose to tumor and normal organs, and the efficiency was evaluated by comparing total MU and beam on time. Results: About three treatment plans(Tomotherapy, Halcyon 6Arc VMAT, Halcyon 8Arc VMAT) , the mean homogeneity index(H.I) of PTV were 1.07, 1.10, 1.11, and the mean conformity index(C.I) of PTV were 1.21, 1.16, 1.17, respectively. The average value of the dose assessment item for a normal organ is V _5Gy(%) of both lung was 36.3, 31.2, 29.7, and V _15Gy(%) were 18.6, 15.5, 14.6, respectively. The mean heart dose(Gy) were 4.17, 2.69, 2.51. Total MU were (7498.6, 2494.2, 2471.5), and beam on time(sec) were 462.5, 195.4, 198.0. Conclusion: Halcyon VMAT showed similar quality of treatment plan compared to helical Tomotherapy, while also protecting normal organs. In addition, the efficiency of radiotherapy increased due to a decrease in Beam On Time and MU.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.38 no.1
• /
• pp.60-67
• /
• 2020

Purpose: We performed three-dimensional (3D) dose reconstruction-based pretreatment verification to evaluate gamma analysis acceptance criteria in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Pretreatment verification for 28 VMAT plans for prostate cancer was performed using the COMPASS system with a dolphin detector. The 3D reconstructed dose distribution of the treatment planning system calculation (TC) was compared with that of COMPASS independent calculation (CC) and COMPASS reconstruction from the dolphin detector measurement (CR). Gamma results (gamma failure rate and average gamma value [GFR and γAvg]) and dose-volume histogram (DVH) deviations, 98%, 2% and mean dose-volume difference (DD_98%, DD_2% and DD_mean), were evaluated. Gamma analyses were performed with two acceptance criteria, 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm. Results: The GFR in 2%/2 mm criteria were less than 8%, and those in 3%/3 mm criteria were less than 1% for all structures in comparisons between TC, CC, and CR. In the comparison between TC and CR, GFR and γAvg in 2%/2 mm criteria were significantly higher than those in 3%/3 mm criteria. The DVH deviations were within 2%, except for DD_mean (%) for rectum and bladder. Conclusions: The 3%/3 mm criteria were not strict enough to identify any discrepancies between planned and measured doses, and DVH deviations were less than 2% in most parameters. Therefore, gamma criteria of 2%/2 mm and DVH related parameters could be a useful tool for pretreatment verification for VMAT in prostate cancer.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.145-155
• /
• 2016

Purpose: Radiation therapy targeting axilla and groin lymph nodes improves regional disease control in locally advanced and high-risk skin cancers. However, trials generally used conventional two-dimensional radiotherapy (2D-RT), contributing towards relatively high rates of side effects from treatment. The goal of this study is to determine if three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) may improve radiation delivery to the target while avoiding organs at risk in the clinical context of skin cancer regional nodal irradiation. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients with locally advanced/high-risk skin cancers underwent computed tomography simulation. The relevant axilla or groin planning target volumes and organs at risk were delineated using standard definitions. Paired t-tests were used to compare the mean values of several dose-volumetric parameters for each of the 4 techniques. Results: In the axilla, the largest improvement for 3D-CRT compared to 2D-RT was for homogeneity index (13.9 vs. 54.3), at the expense of higher lung $V_{20}$ (28.0% vs. 12.6%). In the groin, the largest improvements for 3D-CRT compared to 2D-RT were for anorectum $D_{max}$ (13.6 vs. 38.9 Gy), bowel $D_{200cc}$ (7.3 vs. 23.1 Gy), femur $D_{50}$ (34.6 vs. 57.2 Gy), and genitalia $D_{max}$ (37.6 vs. 51.1 Gy). IMRT had further improvements compared to 3D-CRT for humerus $D_{mean}$ (16.9 vs. 22.4 Gy), brachial plexus $D_5$ (57.4 vs. 61.3 Gy), bladder $D_5$ (26.8 vs. 36.5 Gy), and femur $D_{50}$ (18.7 vs. 34.6 Gy). Fewer differences were observed between IMRT and VMAT. Conclusion: Compared to 2D-RT and 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT had dosimetric advantages in the treatment of nodal regions of skin cancer patients.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.16 no.12
• /
• pp.5019-5024
• /
• 2015

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the dosimetric and clinical feasibility of volumetric modulated arc based hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (RapidArc) treatment for large acoustic schwannoma (AS >10cc). Materials and Methods: Ten AS patients were immobilized using BrainLab mask. They were subject to multimodality imaging (magnetic resonance and computed tomography) to contour target and organs at risk (brainstem and cochlea). Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) based stereotactic plans were optimized in Eclipse (V11) treatment planning system (TPS) using progressive resolution optimizer-III and final dose calculations were performed using analytical anisotropic algorithm with 1.5 mm grid resolution. All AS presented in this study were treated with VMAT based HSRT to a total dose of 25Gy in 5 fractions (5fractions/week). VMAT plan contains 2-4 non-coplanar arcs. Treatment planning was performed to achieve at least 99% of PTV volume (D99) receives 100% of prescription dose (25Gy), while dose to OAR's were kept below the tolerance limits. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) were analyzed to assess plan quality. Treatments were delivered using upgraded 6 MV un-flattened photon beam (FFF) from Clinac-iX machine. Extensive pretreatment quality assurance measurements were carried out to report on quality of delivery. Point dosimetry was performed using three different detectors, which includes CC13 ion-chamber, Exradin A14 ion-chamber and Exradin W1 plastic scintillator detector (PSD) which have measuring volume of $0.13cm^3$, $0.009cm^3$ and $0.002cm^3$ respectively. Results: Average PTV volume of AS was 11.3cc (${\pm}4.8$), and located in eloquent areas. VMAT plans provided complete PTV coverage with average conformity index of 1.06 (${\pm}0.05$). OAR's dose were kept below tolerance limit recommend by American Association of Physicist in Medicine task group-101(brainstem $V_{0.5cc}$ < 23Gy, cochlea maximum < 25Gy and Optic pathway <25Gy). PSD resulted in superior dosimetric accuracy compared with other two detectors (p=0.021 for PSD.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.9 no.7
• /
• pp.449-457
• /
• 2015

In this study, to evaluate the usefulness of the treatment plan of tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in the radiotherapy for prostate cancer, the absorbed dose, dose volume histogram (DVH), treatment efficiency, and the results of dose verification accuracy using MapCHECK2 were compared and analyzed. Of the prostate cancer patients who underwent tomotherapy treatment in the Radiologic Oncology of H University Hospital between July 2014 and December 2014, 12 patients were randomly selected. As a result of analyzing the absorbed dose and DVH, both radiologic treatment plans showed slight differences in the treatment of the cancer tissues and the bladder, but the difference was in the error range of -5% to +3%, and did not exceed the side effect guideline or the tolerance dose limit. VMAT showed higher treatment efficiency than tomotherapy with a 2.5 times shorter treatment time and a 10.3 times less monitor unit (MU). Both showed 95% or higher dose accuracy satisfying the standard. VMAT showed 2.3% higher efficiency than tomotherapy. In both tomotherapy and VMAT, appropriate doses were absorbed for cancer tissues, and did not exceed the tolerance dose for normal tissues showing no significant difference in dose distribution. However, considering the shorter treatment time, lower total MU, and better treatment efficiency and dose verification accuracy, VMAT may be more useful than tomotherapy in cancer treatments.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.295-302
• /
• 2013

We estimated secondary scattered and leakage doses for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) and tomotherapy (TOMO) in patients with liver cancer. Five liver patients were planned by IMRT, VMAT and TOMO. Secondary scatter (and leakage) dose and organ equivalent doses (OEDs) are measured and estimated at various points 20 to 80 cm from the iso-center by using radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter (RPLGD). The secondary dose per Gy from IMRT, VMAT and TOMO for liver cancer, measured 20 to 80 cm from the iso-center, are 0.01~3.13, 0.03~2.34 and 0.04~1.29 cGy, respectively. The mean values of relative OED of secondary dose of VMAT and TOMO for five patients, which is normalized by IMRT, measured as 75.24% and 50.92% for thyroid, 75.14% and 40.61% for bowel, 72.30% and 47.77% for rectum, 76.21% and 49.93% for prostate. The secondary dose and OED from TOMO is relatively low to those from IMRT and VMAT. OED based estimation suggests that the secondary cancer risk from TOMO is less than or comparable to the risks from conventional IMRT and VMAT.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.157-163
• /
• 2018

Plans converted using dose-volume-histogram-based plan conversion (DPC) were evaluated by comparing them to the original plans. Changes in the dose volumetric (DV) parameters of five volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for head and neck (HN) cancer and five VMAT plans for prostate cancer were analyzed. For the HN plans, the homogeneity indices (HIs) of the three planning target volumes (PTV) increased by 0.03, 0.02, and 0.03, respectively, after DPC. The maximum doses to the PTVs increased by 1.20, 1.87, and 0.92 Gy, respectively, after DPC. The maximum doses to the optic chiasm, optic nerves, spinal cord, brain stem, lenses, and parotid glands increased after DPC by approximately 4.39, 3.62, 7.55, 7.96, 1.77, and 6.40 Gy, respectively. For the prostate plans after DPC, the HIs for the primary and boost PTVs increased by 0.05 and 0.03, respectively, and the maximum doses to each PTV increased by 1.84 and 0.19 Gy, respectively. After DPC, the mean doses to the rectum and femoral heads increased by approximately 6.19 and 2.79 Gy, respectively, and those to the bladder decreased by 0.20 Gy when summing the primary and boost plans. Because clinically unacceptable changes were sometimes observed after DPC, plans converted by DPC should be carefully reviewed before actual patient treatment.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.107-115
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical quality assurance results of portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device, a method that is extensively used for patient-specific quality assurance, and the newly released Mobius3D for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods: This retrospective study includes data from 122 patients who underwent IMRT and VMAT on the Novalis Tx and VitalBeam linear accelerators between April and June 2020. We used a paired t-test to compare portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device and the average gamma passing rates of MobiusFX using log files regenerated after patient treatment. Results: The average gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm) were 99.43%±1.02% and 99.32%±1.87% in VitalBeam and 97.53%±3.34% and 96.45%±13.94% in Novalis Tx, respectively. Comparison of the gamma passing rate results of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm as per the manufacturer's manual) does not show any statistically significant difference. Conclusions: Log file-based patient-specific quality assurance, including independent dose calculation, can be appropriately used in clinical practice as a second-check dosimetry, and it is considered comparable with primary quality assurance such as portal dosimetry.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.33
• /
• pp.89-97
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the dose change according to the gas volume variations in the rectum, which was not included in the treatment plan during radiation therapy for cervical cancer. Materials and methods: Static Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (S-IMRT) using a 9-field and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) using 2 full-arcs were established with treatment planning system on Computed Tomography images of a human phantom. Random gas parameters were included in the Planning Target Volume(PTV) with a maximum change of 2.0 cm in increments of 0.5 cm. Then, the Conformity Index (CI), Homogeneity Index (HI) and PTV D_max for the target volume were calculated, and the minimum dose (D_min), mean dose (D_mean) and Maximum Dose (D_max) were calculated and compared for OAR(organs at risk). For statistical analysis, T-test was performed to obtain a p-value, where the significance level was set to 0.05. Result: The HI coefficients of determination(R²) of S-IMRT and VMAT were 0.9423 and 0.8223, respectively, indicating a relatively clear correlation, and PTV D_max was found to increase up to 2.8% as the volume of a given gas parameter increased. In case of OAR evaluation, the dose in the bladder did not change with gas volume while a significant dose difference of more than D_mean 700 cGy was confirmed in rectum using both treatment plans at gas volumes of 1.0 cm or more. In all values except for D_mean of bladder, p-value was less than 0.05, confirming a statistically significant difference. Conclusion: In the case of gas generation not considered in the reference treatment plan, as the amount of gas increased, the dose difference at PTV and the dose delivered to the rectum increased. Therefore, during radiation therapy, it is necessary to make efforts to minimize the dose transmission error caused by a large amount of gas volumes in the rectum. Further studies will be necessary to evaluate dose transmission by not only varying the gas volume but also where the gas was located in the treatment field.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.33 no.4
• /
• pp.121-128
• /
• 2022

Purpose: This study evaluated the quality of plans based on magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) tri-Co-60, linac, and conventional linac-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (linac-VMAT) for prostate cancer. Methods: Twenty patients suffering from prostate cancer with intermediate risk who were treated by MAT were selected. Additional treatment plans (primary and boost plans) were generated based on MRgRT-tri-Co-60 and MRgRT-linac. The planning target volume (PTV) of MRgRT-based plans was created by adding a 3 mm margin from the clinical target volume (CTV) due to high soft-tissue contrast and real-time motion imaging. On the other hand, the PTV of conventional linac was generated based on a 1 cm margin from CTV. The targets of primary and boost plans were prostate plus seminal vesicle and prostate only, respectively. All plans were normalized to cover 95% of the target volume by 100% of the prescribed dose. Dosimetric characteristics were evaluated for each of the primary, boost, and sum plans. Results: For target coverage and conformity, the three plans showed similar results. In the sum plans, the average value of V_65Gy of the rectum of MRgRT-linac (2.62%±2.21%) was smaller than those of MRgRT tri-Co-60 (9.04%±3.01%) and linac-VMAT (9.73%±7.14%) (P<0.001). In the case of bladder, the average value of V_65Gy of MRgRT-linac was also smaller. Conclusions: In terms of organs at risk sparing, MRgRT-linac shows the best value while maintaining comparable target coverage among the three plans.