Assessing the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) relative to IMRT and helical tomotherapy in the management of localized, locally advanced, and post-operative prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To quantify differences in treatment delivery efficiency and dosimetry between step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and helical tomotherapy (HT) for prostate treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-five prostate cancer patients were selected retrospectively for this planning study. Treatment plans were generated for: prostate alone (n = 5), prostate + seminal vesicles (n = 5), prostate + seminal vesicles + pelvic lymph nodes (n = 5), prostate bed (n = 5), and prostate bed + pelvic lymph nodes (n = 5). Target coverage, dose homogeneity, integral dose, monitor units (MU), and sparing of organs at risk (OAR) were compared across techniques. Time required to deliver each plan was measured.
RESULTS: The dosimetric quality of IMRT, VMAT, and HT plans were comparable for target coverage (planning target volume V95%, clinical target volume V100% all >98.7%) and sparing of organs at risk (OAR) for all treatment groups. Although HT resulted in a slightly higher integral dose and mean doses to the OAR, it yielded a lower maximum dose to all OAR examined. VMAT resulted in reductions in treatment times over IMRT (mean = 75%) and HT (mean = 70%). VMAT required 15-38% fewer monitor units than IMRT over all treatment volumes, with the reduction per fraction ranging from 100-423 MU from the smallest to largest volumes.
CONCLUSIONS: VMAT improves efficiency of delivery for equivalent dosimetric quality as IMRT and HT across various prostate cancer treatment volumes in the intact and postoperative settings.