| Literature DB >> 31762823 |
Chengqiang Li1, Jinhu Chen1, Jian Zhu1, Guanzhong Gong1, Cheng Tao1, Zhenjiang Li1, Jie Lu1, Yong Yin1.
Abstract
Purpose: Varian Halcyon is a novel machine with dual-layer leaves, single flattening filter free (FFF) energy and an enclosed bore. The purpose of this study was to compare the differences in dosimetry and plan parameters of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans between the Halcyon and Trilogy accelerators. Methods and Materials: A total of 30 IMRT plans from cervical carcinoma patients were retrospectively analyzed on the Trilogy and Eclipse v13.5 treatment planning systems (TPSs). For each patient, a new plan based on Halcyon was created with the same planning parameters and optimization constraints using the Eclipse Version 15.1 TPS. To compare plan qualities, dosimetry parameters regarding planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk (OARs), monitor unit (MU) efficiency, segment size and treatment time were evaluated. Evaluation of the helical diode array system was performed with gamma-index analysis.Entities:
Keywords: Dual-layer MLC; Flattening filter free; Intensity-modulated radiotherapy; Segment area
Year: 2019 PMID: 31762823 PMCID: PMC6856582 DOI: 10.7150/jca.32500
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Figure 1The mean DVHs of PTV averaged over 30 patients for the Trilogy (black solid) and Halcyon (red dashed) plans
Target coverage metrics and OAR doses
| Structures | Parameters | Halcyon | Trilogy | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PTV | D2%(Gy) | 54.86±0.16 | 54.73±0.34 | -2.36 | 0.190 | |
| D98%(Gy) | 50.35±0.42 | 50.25±0.59 | -0.57 | 0.573 | ||
| HI | 0.09±0.01 | 0.09±0.02 | -0.47 | 0.645 | ||
| CI | 0.81±0.04 | 0.83±0.03 | -3.05 | 0.206 | ||
| GI | 5.05±0.84 | 5.06±0.79 | -0.29 | 0.773 | ||
| OAR | Bladder | V20(%) | 83.14±8.54 | 88.01±7.21 | -0.23 | 0.822 |
| V30(%) | 46.25±9.10 | 54.87±8.95 | -2.20 | |||
| V40(%) | 24.37±6.87 | 28.41±7.62 | -3.34 | |||
| Dmean(Gy) | 31.04±2.57 | 32.83±2.26 | -1.27 | 0.081 | ||
| Rectum | V20(%) | 86.72±11.32 | 92.91±5.58 | -2.02 | ||
| V30(%) | 42.35±12.38 | 58.26±9.76 | -4.47 | |||
| V40(%) | 19.05±8.62 | 22.94±9.40 | -1.46 | 0.146 | ||
| Dmean(Gy) | 30.13±3.13 | 32.78±2.30 | -3.23 | |||
| Femoral Head_L | V20(%) | 29.00±9.49 | 44.30±13.20 | -4.43 | ||
| V30(%) | 6.81±3.84 | 12.21±8.71 | -2.84 | |||
| V40(%) | 0.41±0.89 | 0.96±1.62 | -2.27 | |||
| Dmean(Gy) | 17.18±2.20 | 20.45±2.46 | -4.53 | |||
| Femoral Head_R | V20(%) | 30.30±9.13 | 43.95±11.40 | -4.44 | ||
| V30(%) | 8.39±4.5 | 10.91±9.12 | 0.56 | 0.575 | ||
| V40(%) | 1.11±1.41 | 0.71±1.72 | -2.08 | 0. 370 | ||
| Dmean(Gy) | 17.57±2.24 | 20.22±2.16 | -3.91 | |||
| Normal Tissue | V5(%) | 51.24±8.63 | 51.86±7.78 | -0.699 | 0.440 | |
Figure 2The mean DVHs of OARs averaged over 30 patients for the Trilogy (black solid) and Halcyon (red dashed) plans.
Figure 3Comparison of MUs (a), segment areas (b) and the segment area ratio of proximal MLC to distal MLC (c) for 30 patients.
Delivery accuracy by average gamma evaluation passing rate of the ArcCHECK measurements
| Passing rates | Halcyon | Trilogy | z | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3%/3 mm | 99.41±0.26 | 99.76±0.32 | -2.45. | 0.362 |
| 3%/2 mm | 98.14±0.72 | 97.97±0.88 | -2.28 | 0.731 |
| 2%/3 mm | 98.00±0.75 | 98.37±0.64 | -1.84 | 0.205 |
| 2%/2 mm | 94.96±1.22 | 95.14±1.89 | -1.19 | 0.811 |