PURPOSE: To demonstrate plan quality and provide a practical, systematic approach to the treatment planning technique for single isocenter cranial radiosurgery with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT; RapidArc, Varian Medical systems, Palo Alto, CA). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen patients with 1 or more brain metastases underwent single isocenter VMAT radiosurgery. All plans were normalized to deliver 100% of the prescription dose to 99%-100% of the target volume. All targets per plan were treated to the same dose. Plans were created with dose control tuning structures surrounding targets to maximize conformity and dose gradient. Plan quality was evaluated by calculation of conformity index (CI = 100% isodose volume/target volume) and homogeneity index (HI = maximum dose/prescription dose) scores for each target and a Paddick gradient index (GI = 50% isodose volume/100% isodose volume) score for each plan. RESULTS: The median number of targets per patient was 2 (range, 1-5). The median number of non-coplanar arcs utilized per plan was 2 (range, 1- 4). Single target plans were created with 1 or 2 non-coplanar arcs while multitarget plans utilized 2 to 4 non-coplanar arcs. Prescription doses ranged from 5-16 Gy in 1-5 fractions. The mean conformity index was 1.12 (± SD, 0.13) and the mean HI was 1.44 (± SD, 0.11) for all targets. The mean GI per plan was 3.34 (± SD, 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: We have outlined a practical approach to cranial radiosurgery treatment planning using the single isocenter VMAT platform. One or 2 arc single isocenter plans are often adequate for treatment of single targets, while 2-4 arcs may be more advantageous for multiple targets. Given the high plan quality and extreme clinical efficiency, this single isocenter VMAT approach will continue to become more prevalent for linac-based radiosurgical treatment of 1 or more intracranial targets and will likely replace multiple isocenter techniques.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate plan quality and provide a practical, systematic approach to the treatment planning technique for single isocenter cranial radiosurgery with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT; RapidArc, Varian Medical systems, Palo Alto, CA). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen patients with 1 or more brain metastases underwent single isocenter VMAT radiosurgery. All plans were normalized to deliver 100% of the prescription dose to 99%-100% of the target volume. All targets per plan were treated to the same dose. Plans were created with dose control tuning structures surrounding targets to maximize conformity and dose gradient. Plan quality was evaluated by calculation of conformity index (CI = 100% isodose volume/target volume) and homogeneity index (HI = maximum dose/prescription dose) scores for each target and a Paddick gradient index (GI = 50% isodose volume/100% isodose volume) score for each plan. RESULTS: The median number of targets per patient was 2 (range, 1-5). The median number of non-coplanar arcs utilized per plan was 2 (range, 1- 4). Single target plans were created with 1 or 2 non-coplanar arcs while multitarget plans utilized 2 to 4 non-coplanar arcs. Prescription doses ranged from 5-16 Gy in 1-5 fractions. The mean conformity index was 1.12 (± SD, 0.13) and the mean HI was 1.44 (± SD, 0.11) for all targets. The mean GI per plan was 3.34 (± SD, 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: We have outlined a practical approach to cranial radiosurgery treatment planning using the single isocenter VMAT platform. One or 2 arc single isocenter plans are often adequate for treatment of single targets, while 2-4 arcs may be more advantageous for multiple targets. Given the high plan quality and extreme clinical efficiency, this single isocenter VMAT approach will continue to become more prevalent for linac-based radiosurgical treatment of 1 or more intracranial targets and will likely replace multiple isocenter techniques.
Authors: Olivia Claire Barrett; Andrew M McDonald; Jonathan W Thompson; Markus Bredel; Gerald McGwin; Kristen O Riley; John B Fiveash Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2017
Authors: Steven K M Lau; Kaveh Zakeri; Xiao Zhao; Ruben Carmona; Erik Knipprath; Daniel R Simpson; Sameer K Nath; Gwe-Ya Kim; Parag Sanghvi; Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth; Clark C Chen; Kevin T Murphy Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Amish P Shah; Dylan T Meeks; Twyla R Willoughby; Naren Ramakrishna; Christopher J Warner; Cameron W Swanick; Patrick Kelly; Sanford L Meeks Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2020
Authors: A Serna; P P Escolar; V Puchades; F Mata; D Ramos; M A Gómez; A Iglesias; J Salinas; M Alcaraz Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Ganesh Narayanasamy; Sotirios Stathakis; Alonso N Gutierrez; Evangelos Pappas; Richard Crownover; John R Floyd; Niko Papanikolaou Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-09-09
Authors: Evan M Thomas; Richard A Popple; Xingen Wu; Grant M Clark; James M Markert; Barton L Guthrie; Yu Yuan; Michael C Dobelbower; Sharon A Spencer; John B Fiveash Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Paul M Foreman; Bradford E Jackson; Karan P Singh; Andrew K Romeo; Barton L Guthrie; Winfield S Fisher; Kristen O Riley; James M Markert; Christopher D Willey; Markus Bredel; John B Fiveash Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2017-12-14 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Zhanerke Abisheva; Scott R Floyd; Joseph K Salama; John Kirkpatrick; Fang-Fang Yin; Michael J Moravan; William Giles; Justus Adamson Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2019