Matthew Hoffmann1, Jacqueline Pacey2, Josie Goodworth2, Andrea Laszcyzk3, Richard Ford3, Brendon Chick1, Stuart Greenham2, Justin Westhuyzen2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mid-North Coast Cancer Institute, Port Macquarie, New South Wales, Australia. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mid-North Coast Cancer Institute, Coffs Harbour, New South Wales, Australia. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern New South Wales Cancer Institute, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: To assess a class solution template for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer using plan analysis software. BACKGROUND: VMAT is a development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with potential advantages for the delivery of radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer. Class solutions are increasingly used for facilitating RT planning. Plan analysis software provides an objective tool for evaluating class solutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The class solution for VMAT was based on the current static field IMRT template. The plans of 77 prostate cancer patients were evaluated using a set of in-house plan quality metrics (scores) (PlanIQ™, Sun Nuclear Corporation). The metrics compared the class solution for VMAT planning with the IMRT template and the delivered clinical plan (CP). Eight metrics were associated with target coverage and ten with organs-at-risk (OAR). Individual metrics were summed and the combined scores were subjected to non-parametric analysis. The low-dose wash for both static IMRT and VMAT plans were evaluated using 40 Gy and 25 Gy isodose volumes. RESULTS: VMAT plans were of equal or better quality than the IMRT template and CP for target coverage (combined score) and OAR combined score. The 40 Gy isodose volume was marginally higher with VMAT than IMRT (4.9%) but lower than CP (-6.6%)(P = 0.0074). The 25 Gy volume was significantly lower with VMAT than both IMRT (-32.7%) and CP (-34.4%)(P < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Automated VMAT planning for prostate cancer is feasible and the plans are equal to or better than the current IMRT class solution and the delivered clinical plan.
AIM: To assess a class solution template for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer using plan analysis software. BACKGROUND: VMAT is a development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with potential advantages for the delivery of radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer. Class solutions are increasingly used for facilitating RT planning. Plan analysis software provides an objective tool for evaluating class solutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The class solution for VMAT was based on the current static field IMRT template. The plans of 77 prostate cancer patients were evaluated using a set of in-house plan quality metrics (scores) (PlanIQ™, Sun Nuclear Corporation). The metrics compared the class solution for VMAT planning with the IMRT template and the delivered clinical plan (CP). Eight metrics were associated with target coverage and ten with organs-at-risk (OAR). Individual metrics were summed and the combined scores were subjected to non-parametric analysis. The low-dose wash for both static IMRT and VMAT plans were evaluated using 40 Gy and 25 Gy isodose volumes. RESULTS: VMAT plans were of equal or better quality than the IMRT template and CP for target coverage (combined score) and OAR combined score. The 40 Gy isodose volume was marginally higher with VMAT than IMRT (4.9%) but lower than CP (-6.6%)(P = 0.0074). The 25 Gy volume was significantly lower with VMAT than both IMRT (-32.7%) and CP (-34.4%)(P < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Automated VMAT planning for prostate cancer is feasible and the plans are equal to or better than the current IMRT class solution and the delivered clinical plan.
Authors: David Palma; Emily Vollans; Kerry James; Sandy Nakano; Vitali Moiseenko; Richard Shaffer; Michael McKenzie; James Morris; Karl Otto Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Richard Powis; Andrew Bird; Matthew Brennan; Susan Hinks; Hannah Newman; Katie Reed; John Sage; Gareth Webster Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 3.481