PURPOSE: To propose single-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (SIDCA), a novel technique for radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases, and to compare SIDCA with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and multiple-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (MIDCA) for plan quality. METHODS AND MATERIALS: SIDCA, MIDCA, and VMAT plans were created on 6 patients with 3-5 metastases. Plans were evaluated using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group conformity index (RCI), Paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), volumes that received more than 100% (V(100%)), 50% (V(50%)), 25% (V(25%)) and 10% (V(10%)) of prescription dose, total monitor units (MUs), and delivery time (DT). RESULTS: SIDCA achieved conformal plans (RCI = 1.38 ± 0.12, PCI = 0.72 ± 0.06) with steep dose fall-off (GI = 3.97 ± 0.51). MIDCA plans had comparable plan quality and MUs as SIDCA, but 52% longer DT. The VMAT plans had better conformity (RCI = 1.15 ± 0.09, p < 0.01 and PCI = 0.86 ± 0.06, p < 0.01) than SIDCA, worse GI (4.34 ± 0.46, p < 0.01), higher V(25%) (p = 0.05) and V(10%) (p = 0.02), 49% less MUs and 46% shorter DT. CONCLUSIONS: All three techniques achieved conformal plans with steep dose fall-off from targets. SIDCA plans had similar plan quality as MIDCA but more efficient to delivery. SIDCA plans had lower peripheral dose spread than VMAT; VMAT plans had better conformity and faster delivery time than SIDCA.
PURPOSE: To propose single-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (SIDCA), a novel technique for radiosurgery of multiple brain metastases, and to compare SIDCA with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and multiple-isocenter dynamic conformal arcs (MIDCA) for plan quality. METHODS AND MATERIALS: SIDCA, MIDCA, and VMAT plans were created on 6 patients with 3-5 metastases. Plans were evaluated using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group conformity index (RCI), Paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), volumes that received more than 100% (V(100%)), 50% (V(50%)), 25% (V(25%)) and 10% (V(10%)) of prescription dose, total monitor units (MUs), and delivery time (DT). RESULTS: SIDCA achieved conformal plans (RCI = 1.38 ± 0.12, PCI = 0.72 ± 0.06) with steep dose fall-off (GI = 3.97 ± 0.51). MIDCA plans had comparable plan quality and MUs as SIDCA, but 52% longer DT. The VMAT plans had better conformity (RCI = 1.15 ± 0.09, p < 0.01 and PCI = 0.86 ± 0.06, p < 0.01) than SIDCA, worse GI (4.34 ± 0.46, p < 0.01), higher V(25%) (p = 0.05) and V(10%) (p = 0.02), 49% less MUs and 46% shorter DT. CONCLUSIONS: All three techniques achieved conformal plans with steep dose fall-off from targets. SIDCA plans had similar plan quality as MIDCA but more efficient to delivery. SIDCA plans had lower peripheral dose spread than VMAT; VMAT plans had better conformity and faster delivery time than SIDCA.
Authors: Vikren Sarkar; Adam Paxton; Martin W Szegedi; Hui Zhao; Long Huang; Geoff Nelson; Yu-Huei Jessica Huang; Fanchi Su; Prema Rassiah-Szegedi; Bill J Salter Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2018
Authors: Ning Wen; Joshua Kim; Anthony Doemer; Carri Glide-Hurst; Indrin J Chetty; Chang Liu; Eric Laugeman; Ilma Xhaferllari; Akila Kumarasiri; James Victoria; Maria Bellon; Steve Kalkanis; M Salim Siddiqui; Benjamin Movsas Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2018-05-25 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Nils D Arvold; Eudocia Q Lee; Minesh P Mehta; Kim Margolin; Brian M Alexander; Nancy U Lin; Carey K Anders; Riccardo Soffietti; D Ross Camidge; Michael A Vogelbaum; Ian F Dunn; Patrick Y Wen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 12.300
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