A planning comparison of 3-dimensional conformal multiple static field, conformal arc, and volumetric modulated arc therapy for the delivery of stereotactic body radiotherapy for early stage lung cancer.

The primary objective of this study was to compare dosimetric variables as well as treatment times of multiple static fields (MSFs), conformal arcs (CAs), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques for the treatment of early stage lung cancer using stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Treatments of 23 patients previously treated with MSF of 48Gy to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV) in 4 fractions were replanned using CA and VMAT techniques. Dosimetric parameters of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0915 trial were evaluated, along with the van׳t Riet conformation number (CN), monitor units (MUs), and actual and calculated treatment times. Paired t-tests for noninferiority were used to compare the 3 techniques. CA had significant dosimetric improvements over MSF for the ratio of the prescription isodose volume to PTV (R100%, p < 0.0001), the maximum dose 2cm away from the PTV (D2cm, p = 0.005), and van׳t Riet CN (p < 0.0001). CA was not statistically inferior to MSF for the 50% prescription isodose volume to PTV (R50%, p = 0.05). VMAT was significantly better than CA for R100% (p < 0.0001), R50% (p < 0.0001), D2cm (p = 0.006), and CN (p < 0.0001). CA plans had significantly shorter treatment times than those of VMAT (p < 0.0001). Both CA and VMAT planning showed significant dosimetric improvements and shorter treatment times over those of MSF. VMAT showed the most favorable dosimetry of all 3 techniques; however, the dosimetric effect of tumor motion was not evaluated. CA plans were significantly faster to treat, and minimize the interplay of tumor motion and dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC) motion effects. Given these results, CA has become the treatment technique of choice at our facility.