Qianyi Xu1, Jiajin Fan2, Jimm Grimm3, Tamara LaCouture4, Sucha Asbell1, Joo Han Park1, Gregory Kubicek1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, 19111, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21231, USA. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Kennedy Health System, Sewell, NJ, 08080, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is no consensus on the optimal prescription isodose line (IDL) in CyberKnife (CK) SRS. We designed a strategy to search for optimal CK plans at different levels of IDLs and investigated the dosimetric impact on the quality of CK plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The retrospective study consisted of 13 CK patients with 16 brain tumors. The mean volume and size of the tumors was 9.7 ± 10.4 cc and 30.3 ± 10.9 mm, respectively. Four shells were created at distances of 2-3 mm to 60 mm from the target. The constraint dose of the innermost shell (D1) was the primary optimization parameter. For isolated brain tumors, D1 started from the prescription dose and gradually reduced after optimization started over. The optimal plans were reached when the coverage started to degrade and the desired IDL was achieved. For eight tumors abutting an OAR, both the D1 and constraint dose to the OAR were gradually pushed until an optimal plan was reached for the desired IDL. RESULTS: For the isolated tumors, the V5 Gy, V10 Gy, V15 Gy, V20 Gy, and V25 Gy of low IDL (49.6 ± 2.1%) plans were on average 23.6%, 28.6%, 33.8%, 26.2%, and 10.6% lower, respectively, comparing to the high IDL (88.6 ± 1.3%) plans. The Conformality Index (CI) of the low IDL plans outperformed the high IDL plans (mean: 1.15 vs. 1.24), except for a lesion under 0.5 cc. The quality of the middle IDL plans (69.6 ± 1.5%) was close to the low IDL plans. Similar results were observed for tumors abutting an OAR. CONCLUSIONS: Low IDL plans outperformed high IDL plans for all metrics in tumors > 0.5 cc. The lower dose exposure of normal brain tissue and better CI could potentially reduce radiation necrosis while the higher maximum dose could improve local control.
PURPOSE: There is no consensus on the optimal prescription isodose line (IDL) in CyberKnife (CK) SRS. We designed a strategy to search for optimal CK plans at different levels of IDLs and investigated the dosimetric impact on the quality of CK plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The retrospective study consisted of 13 CK patients with 16 brain tumors. The mean volume and size of the tumors was 9.7 ± 10.4 cc and 30.3 ± 10.9 mm, respectively. Four shells were created at distances of 2-3 mm to 60 mm from the target. The constraint dose of the innermost shell (D1) was the primary optimization parameter. For isolated brain tumors, D1 started from the prescription dose and gradually reduced after optimization started over. The optimal plans were reached when the coverage started to degrade and the desired IDL was achieved. For eight tumors abutting an OAR, both the D1 and constraint dose to the OAR were gradually pushed until an optimal plan was reached for the desired IDL. RESULTS: For the isolated tumors, the V5 Gy, V10 Gy, V15 Gy, V20 Gy, and V25 Gy of low IDL (49.6 ± 2.1%) plans were on average 23.6%, 28.6%, 33.8%, 26.2%, and 10.6% lower, respectively, comparing to the high IDL (88.6 ± 1.3%) plans. The Conformality Index (CI) of the low IDL plans outperformed the high IDL plans (mean: 1.15 vs. 1.24), except for a lesion under 0.5 cc. The quality of the middle IDL plans (69.6 ± 1.5%) was close to the low IDL plans. Similar results were observed for tumors abutting an OAR. CONCLUSIONS: Low IDL plans outperformed high IDL plans for all metrics in tumors > 0.5 cc. The lower dose exposure of normal brain tissue and better CI could potentially reduce radiation necrosis while the higher maximum dose could improve local control.
Authors: Alexandra Hellerbach; Markus Eichner; Daniel Rueß; Klaus Luyken; Mauritius Hoevels; Michael Judge; Christian Baues; Maximilian Ruge; Martin Kocher; Harald Treuer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 4.033