Ganesh Narayanasamy1,2, Sotirios Stathakis1, Alonso N Gutierrez1, Evangelos Pappas3, Richard Crownover1, John R Floyd4, Niko Papanikolaou1. 1. 1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, TX. 2. 2 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR. 3. 3 Technological Educational Institute of Athens, Greece. 4. 4 Department of Neurosurgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, TX.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this treatment planning study, we compare the plan quality and delivery parameters for the treatment of multiple brain metastases using 2 monoisocentric techniques: the Multiple Metastases Element from Brainlab and the RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy from Varian Medical Systems. METHODS: Eight patients who were treated in our institution for multiple metastases (3-7 lesions) were replanned with Multiple Metastases Element using noncoplanar dynamic conformal arcs. The same patients were replanned with the RapidArc technique in Eclipse using 4 noncoplanar arcs. Both techniques were designed using a single isocenter. Plan quality metrics (conformity index, homogeneity index, gradient index, and R50%), monitor unit, and the planning time were recorded. Comparison of the Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans was performed using Shapiro-Wilk test, paired Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: A paired Wilcoxon signed rank test between Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc showed comparable plan quality metrics and dose to brain. Mean ± standard deviation values of conformity index were 1.8 ± 0.7 and 1.7 ± 0.6, homogeneity index were 1.3 ± 0.1 and 1.3 ± 0.1, gradient index were 5.0 ± 1.8 and 5.1 ± 1.9, and R50% were 4.9 ± 1.8 and 5.0 ± 1.9 for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. Mean brain dose was 2.3 and 2.7 Gy for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. The mean value of monitor units in Multiple Metastases Element plan was 7286 ± 1065, which is significantly lower than the RapidArc monitor units of 9966 ± 1533 ( P < .05). CONCLUSION: For the planning of multiple brain lesions to be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, Multiple Metastases Element planning software produced equivalent conformity, homogeneity, dose falloff, and brain V12 Gy but required significantly lower monitor units, when compared to RapidArc plans.
BACKGROUND: In this treatment planning study, we compare the plan quality and delivery parameters for the treatment of multiple brain metastases using 2 monoisocentric techniques: the Multiple Metastases Element from Brainlab and the RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy from Varian Medical Systems. METHODS: Eight patients who were treated in our institution for multiple metastases (3-7 lesions) were replanned with Multiple Metastases Element using noncoplanar dynamic conformal arcs. The same patients were replanned with the RapidArc technique in Eclipse using 4 noncoplanar arcs. Both techniques were designed using a single isocenter. Plan quality metrics (conformity index, homogeneity index, gradient index, and R50%), monitor unit, and the planning time were recorded. Comparison of the Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans was performed using Shapiro-Wilk test, paired Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: A paired Wilcoxon signed rank test between Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc showed comparable plan quality metrics and dose to brain. Mean ± standard deviation values of conformity index were 1.8 ± 0.7 and 1.7 ± 0.6, homogeneity index were 1.3 ± 0.1 and 1.3 ± 0.1, gradient index were 5.0 ± 1.8 and 5.1 ± 1.9, and R50% were 4.9 ± 1.8 and 5.0 ± 1.9 for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. Mean brain dose was 2.3 and 2.7 Gy for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. The mean value of monitor units in Multiple Metastases Element plan was 7286 ± 1065, which is significantly lower than the RapidArc monitor units of 9966 ± 1533 ( P < .05). CONCLUSION: For the planning of multiple brain lesions to be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, Multiple Metastases Element planning software produced equivalent conformity, homogeneity, dose falloff, and brain V12 Gy but required significantly lower monitor units, when compared to RapidArc plans.
Authors: Stanley H Benedict; Kamil M Yenice; David Followill; James M Galvin; William Hinson; Brian Kavanagh; Paul Keall; Michael Lovelock; Sanford Meeks; Lech Papiez; Thomas Purdie; Ramaswamy Sadagopan; Michael C Schell; Bill Salter; David J Schlesinger; Almon S Shiu; Timothy Solberg; Danny Y Song; Volker Stieber; Robert Timmerman; Wolfgang A Tomé; Dirk Verellen; Lu Wang; Fang-Fang Yin Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: E Shaw; C Scott; L Souhami; R Dinapoli; R Kline; J Loeffler; N Farnan Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Charles S Mayo; Linda Ding; Anthony Addesa; Sidney Kadish; T J Fitzgerald; Richard Moser Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Hendrik A Wolff; Daniela M Wagner; Hans Christiansen; Clemens F Hess; Hilke Vorwerk Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2010-09-13 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Haisong Liu; Evan M Thomas; Jun Li; Yan Yu; David Andrews; James M Markert; John B Fiveash; Wenyin Shi; Richard A Popple Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-12-02
Authors: Jan Hofmaier; Raphael Bodensohn; Sylvia Garny; Indrawati Hadi; Daniel F Fleischmann; Michael Eder; Yavuz Dinc; Michael Reiner; Stefanie Corradini; Katia Parodi; Claus Belka; Maximilian Niyazi Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Peter S Potrebko; Andrew Keller; Sean All; Samir Sejpal; Julie Pepe; Kunal Saigal; Shravan Kandula; William F Sensakovic; Ravi Shridhar; Jan Poleszczuk; Matthew Biagioli Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 2.102