Hongbin Cao1, Zhiyan Xiao2, Yin Zhang3, Tiffany Kwong4, Shabbar F Danish5, Joseph Weiner3, Xiao Wang3, Ning Yue3, Zhitao Dai6, Yu Kuang7, Yongrui Bai1, Ke Nie3. 1. 1Department of Radiation Oncology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. 2. 2Proton Therapy Center, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. 3. 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers-Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey. 4. 4Department of Radiological Science, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California. 5. 5Department of Neurosurgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey. 6. 6Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Hospital, The Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China; and. 7. 7Department of Medical Physics, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to compare the dosimetric quality of hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery in treating sizeable brain tumors across the following treatment platforms: GammaKnife (GK) Icon, CyberKnife (CK) G4, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) on the Varian TrueBeam STx, double scattering proton therapy (DSPT) on the Mevion S250, and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) on the Varian ProBeam. METHODS: In this retrospective study, stereotactic radiotherapy treatment plans were generated for 10 patients with sizeable brain tumors (> 3 cm in longest diameter) who had been treated with VMAT. Six treatment plans, 20-30 Gy in 5 fractions, were generated for each patient using the same constraints for each of the following radiosurgical methods: 1) GK, 2) CK, 3) coplanar arc VMAT (VMAT-C), 4) noncoplanar arc VMAT (VMAT-NC), 5) DSPT, and 6) IMPT. The coverage; conformity index; gradient index (GI); homogeneity index; mean and maximum point dose of organs at risk; total dose volume (V) in Gy to the normal brain for 2 Gy (V2), 5 Gy (V5), and 12 Gy (V12); and integral dose were compared across all platforms. RESULTS: Among the 6 techniques, GK consistently produced a sharper dose falloff despite a greater central target dose. GK gave the lowest GI, with a mean of 2.7 ± 0.1, followed by CK (2.9 ± 0.1), VMAT-NC (3.1 ± 0.3), and VMAT-C (3.5 ± 0.3). The highest mean GIs for the proton beam treatments were 3.8 ± 0.4 for DSPT and 3.9 ± 0.4 for IMPT. The GK consistently targeted the lowest normal brain volume, delivering 5 to 12 Gy when treating relatively smaller- to intermediate-sized lesions (less than 15-20 cm3). Yet, the differences across the 6 modalities relative to GK decreased with the increase of target volume. In particular, the proton treatments delivered the lowest V5 to the normal brain when the target size was over 15-20 cm3 and also produced the lowest integral dose to the normal brain regardless of the target size. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an insightful understanding of dosimetric quality from both photon and proton treatment across the most advanced stereotactic radiotherapy platforms.
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to compare the dosimetric quality of hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery in treating sizeable brain tumors across the following treatment platforms: GammaKnife (GK) Icon, CyberKnife (CK) G4, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) on the Varian TrueBeam STx, double scattering proton therapy (DSPT) on the Mevion S250, and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) on the Varian ProBeam. METHODS: In this retrospective study, stereotactic radiotherapy treatment plans were generated for 10 patients with sizeable brain tumors (> 3 cm in longest diameter) who had been treated with VMAT. Six treatment plans, 20-30 Gy in 5 fractions, were generated for each patient using the same constraints for each of the following radiosurgical methods: 1) GK, 2) CK, 3) coplanar arc VMAT (VMAT-C), 4) noncoplanar arc VMAT (VMAT-NC), 5) DSPT, and 6) IMPT. The coverage; conformity index; gradient index (GI); homogeneity index; mean and maximum point dose of organs at risk; total dose volume (V) in Gy to the normal brain for 2 Gy (V2), 5 Gy (V5), and 12 Gy (V12); and integral dose were compared across all platforms. RESULTS: Among the 6 techniques, GK consistently produced a sharper dose falloff despite a greater central target dose. GK gave the lowest GI, with a mean of 2.7 ± 0.1, followed by CK (2.9 ± 0.1), VMAT-NC (3.1 ± 0.3), and VMAT-C (3.5 ± 0.3). The highest mean GIs for the proton beam treatments were 3.8 ± 0.4 for DSPT and 3.9 ± 0.4 for IMPT. The GK consistently targeted the lowest normal brain volume, delivering 5 to 12 Gy when treating relatively smaller- to intermediate-sized lesions (less than 15-20 cm3). Yet, the differences across the 6 modalities relative to GK decreased with the increase of target volume. In particular, the proton treatments delivered the lowest V5 to the normal brain when the target size was over 15-20 cm3 and also produced the lowest integral dose to the normal brain regardless of the target size. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an insightful understanding of dosimetric quality from both photon and proton treatment across the most advanced stereotactic radiotherapy platforms.
Authors: Basem A Dahshan; Joshua S Weir; Robert P Bice; Paul Renz; Daniel T Cifarelli; Linda Poplawski; Joshua Hack; John A Vargo; Christopher P Cifarelli Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: K A Kessel; A Deichl; J Gempt; B Meyer; C Posch; C Diehl; C Zimmer; S E Combs Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2021-05-15 Impact factor: 3.405