Cochlea-sparing acoustic neuroma treatment with 4π radiation therapy.

PurposeThis study investigates whether 4π noncoplanar radiation therapy can spare the cochleae and consequently potentially improve hearing preservation in patients with acoustic neuroma who are treated with radiation therapy.Methods and materialsClinical radiation therapy plans for 30 patients with acoustic neuroma were included (14 stereotactic radiation surgery [SRS], 6 stereotactic radiation therapy [SRT], and 10 intensity modulated radiation therapy [IMRT]). The 4π plans were created for each patient with 20 optimal beams selected using a greedy column generation method and subsequently recalculated in Eclipse for comparison. Organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, homogeneity index, conformity, and tumor control probability (TCP) were compared. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) was calculated for sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) at 3 and 5 years posttreatment. The dose for each plan was then escalated to achieve 99.5% TCP.Results4π significantly reduced the mean dose to both cochleae by 2.0 Gy (32%) for SRS, 3.2 Gy (29%) for SRT, and 10.0 Gy (32%) for IMRT. The maximum dose to both cochleae was also reduced with 4π by 1.6 Gy (20%), 2.2 Gy (15%), and 7.1 Gy (18%) for SRS, SRT, and IMRT plans, respectively. The reductions in mean/maximum brainstem dose with 4π were also statistically significant. Mean doses to other OARs were reduced by 19% to 56% on average. 4π plans had a similar CN and TCP, with a significantly higher average homogeneity index (0.93 vs 0.92) and significantly lower average NTCP for SNHL at both 3 years (30.8% vs 40.8%) and 5 years (43.3% vs 61.7%). An average dose escalation of approximately 116% of the prescription dose achieved 99.5% TCP, which resulted in 32.6% and 43.4% NTCP for SNHL at 3 years and 46.4% and 64.7% at 5 years for 4π and clinical plans, respectively.ConclusionsCompared with clinical planning methods, optimized 4π radiation therapy enables statistically significant sparing of the cochleae in acoustic neuroma treatment as well as lowering of other OAR doses, potentially reducing the risk of hearing loss

Viability of Non-Coplanar VMAT for Liver SBRT as Compared to Coplanar VMAT and Beam Orientation Optimized 4π IMRT.

PurposeThe 4π static non-coplanar radiotherapy delivery technique has demonstrated better normal tissue sparing and dose conformity than the clinically used volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). It is unclear whether this is a fundamental limitation of VMAT delivery or the coplanar nature of its typical clinical plans. The dosimetry and the limits of normal tissue toxicity constrained dose escalation of coplanar VMAT, non-coplanar VMAT and 4π radiotherapy are quantified in this study.Methods and materialsClinical stereotactic body radiation therapy plans for 20 liver patients receiving 30-60 Gy using coplanar VMAT (cVMAT) were re-planned using 3-4 partial non-coplanar arcs (nVMAT) and 4π with 20 intensity-modulated non-coplanar fields. The conformity number (CN), homogeneity index (HI), 50% dose spillage volume (R50), normal liver volume receiving >15 Gy (VL>15), dose to organs at risk (OARs), and tumor control probability (TCP) were compared for all three treatment plans. The maximum tolerable dose (MTD) yielding a normal liver normal tissue control probability (NTCP) below 1%, 5%, and 10% was calculated with the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model for each plan, as well as the resulting survival fractions at one, two, three, and four years.ResultsCompared to cVMAT, the nVMAT and 4π plans reduced VL>15 by an average of 5 cm3 and 80 cm3, respectively. 4π reduced the 50% dose spillage volume by ~23% compared to both VMAT plans, and either significantly decreased or maintained OAR doses. The 4π MTDs and survival fractions were significantly higher than both cVMAT and nVMAT (p<0.05) for all normal liver NTCP limits used in this study.ConclusionsThe 4π technique provides significantly better OAR sparing than both cVMAT and vMAT and enables more clinically relevant dose escalation for tumor local control. Therefore, despite the current accessibility of nVMAT, it is not a viable alternative to 4π for liver SBRT

A Sparse Orthogonal Collimator for Small Animal Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Using Rectangular Aperture Optimization

To achieve more translatable preclinical research results, small animal irradiation needs to more closely simulate human radiation therapy. Although the clinical gold standard is intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the direct translation of this method for small animals is impractical. To address this challenge, the Sparse Orthogonal Collimator (SOC), a dose-modulating device based on the novel Rectangular Aperture Optimization (RAO) approach, was developed to deliver IMRT on the small animal scale using an image-guided small animal irradiator.A treatment planning system was developed based on RAO, and several planning experiments were performed for evaluation. RAO achieved highly conformal doses to concave and complex targets, with SOC-based plans achieving superior dosimetry to those optimized for a hypothetical miniature multileaf collimator. Beam commissioning data, including output factors, off-axis factors, and percent depth dose curves, were acquired for our small animal irradiator and incorporated into the treatment planning system. A plan post-processing step was implemented for aperture-size-specific dose recalculation and aperture weighting reoptimization.The SOC system, with four orthogonal, double-focused tungsten leaf pairs, was designed and fabricated, and control software was developed. The SOC was installed on the small animal irradiator and the alignment was evaluated, with submillimeter shifts measured between the SOC and primary collimator axes over the full gantry rotation. Abutting field and grid dose patterns were created to analyze leaf positioning error, with measured deviations within recommended guidelines. Extremely low leaf transmission was measured, and penumbra was independent of leaf position. Three RAO IMRT plans were delivered and analyzed, with good agreement between the intended and measured dose distributions.By using advanced optimization techniques, complex IMRT plans were achieved using a simple dose modulation device. The sparse orthogonal collimator was developed and commissioned, with promising preliminary dosimetry results. This platform considerably reduces the gap in treatment plan quality between clinical and preclinical radiotherapy, potentially improving the translation of small animal research results

A Prospective Phase II Study of Automated Non-Coplanar VMAT for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Initial Report of Feasibility, Safety, and Patient-Reported Outcomes

This study reports the initial results for the first 15 patients on a prospective phase II clinical trial exploring the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of the HyperArc technique for recurrent head and neck cancer treatment. Eligible patients were simulated and planned with both conventional VMAT and HyperArc techniques and the plan with superior dosimetry was selected for treatment. Dosimetry, delivery feasibility and safety, treatment-related toxicity, and patient-reported quality of life (QOL) were all evaluated. HyperArc was chosen over conventional VMAT for all 15 patients and enabled statistically significant increases in dose conformity (R50% reduced by 1.2 ± 2.1, p < 0.05) and mean PTV and GTV doses (by 15.7 ± 4.9 Gy, p < 0.01 and 17.1 ± 6.0 Gy, p < 0.01, respectively). The average HyperArc delivery was 2.8 min longer than conventional VMAT (p < 0.01), and the mean intrafraction motion was ≤ 0.5 ± 0.4 mm and ≤0.3 ± 0.1°. With a median follow-up of 12 months, treatment-related toxicity was minimal (only one grade 3 acute toxicity above baseline) and patient-reported QOL metrics were favorable. HyperArc enabled superior dosimetry and significant target dose escalation compared to conventional VMAT planning, and treatment delivery was feasible, safe, and well-tolerated by patients

Cochlea-sparing acoustic neuroma treatment with 4π radiation therapy.

PurposeThis study investigates whether 4π noncoplanar radiation therapy can spare the cochleae and consequently potentially improve hearing preservation in patients with acoustic neuroma who are treated with radiation therapy.Methods and materialsClinical radiation therapy plans for 30 patients with acoustic neuroma were included (14 stereotactic radiation surgery [SRS], 6 stereotactic radiation therapy [SRT], and 10 intensity modulated radiation therapy [IMRT]). The 4π plans were created for each patient with 20 optimal beams selected using a greedy column generation method and subsequently recalculated in Eclipse for comparison. Organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, homogeneity index, conformity, and tumor control probability (TCP) were compared. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) was calculated for sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) at 3 and 5 years posttreatment. The dose for each plan was then escalated to achieve 99.5% TCP.Results4π significantly reduced the mean dose to both cochleae by 2.0 Gy (32%) for SRS, 3.2 Gy (29%) for SRT, and 10.0 Gy (32%) for IMRT. The maximum dose to both cochleae was also reduced with 4π by 1.6 Gy (20%), 2.2 Gy (15%), and 7.1 Gy (18%) for SRS, SRT, and IMRT plans, respectively. The reductions in mean/maximum brainstem dose with 4π were also statistically significant. Mean doses to other OARs were reduced by 19% to 56% on average. 4π plans had a similar CN and TCP, with a significantly higher average homogeneity index (0.93 vs 0.92) and significantly lower average NTCP for SNHL at both 3 years (30.8% vs 40.8%) and 5 years (43.3% vs 61.7%). An average dose escalation of approximately 116% of the prescription dose achieved 99.5% TCP, which resulted in 32.6% and 43.4% NTCP for SNHL at 3 years and 46.4% and 64.7% at 5 years for 4π and clinical plans, respectively.ConclusionsCompared with clinical planning methods, optimized 4π radiation therapy enables statistically significant sparing of the cochleae in acoustic neuroma treatment as well as lowering of other OAR doses, potentially reducing the risk of hearing loss

Cochlea-sparing acoustic neuroma treatment with 4π radiation therapy

Purpose: This study investigates whether 4π noncoplanar radiation therapy can spare the cochleae and consequently potentially improve hearing preservation in patients with acoustic neuroma who are treated with radiation therapy. Methods and materials: Clinical radiation therapy plans for 30 patients with acoustic neuroma were included (14 stereotactic radiation surgery [SRS], 6 stereotactic radiation therapy [SRT], and 10 intensity modulated radiation therapy [IMRT]). The 4π plans were created for each patient with 20 optimal beams selected using a greedy column generation method and subsequently recalculated in Eclipse for comparison. Organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, homogeneity index, conformity, and tumor control probability (TCP) were compared. Normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) was calculated for sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) at 3 and 5 years posttreatment. The dose for each plan was then escalated to achieve 99.5% TCP. Results: 4π significantly reduced the mean dose to both cochleae by 2.0 Gy (32%) for SRS, 3.2 Gy (29%) for SRT, and 10.0 Gy (32%) for IMRT. The maximum dose to both cochleae was also reduced with 4π by 1.6 Gy (20%), 2.2 Gy (15%), and 7.1 Gy (18%) for SRS, SRT, and IMRT plans, respectively. The reductions in mean/maximum brainstem dose with 4π were also statistically significant. Mean doses to other OARs were reduced by 19% to 56% on average. 4π plans had a similar CN and TCP, with a significantly higher average homogeneity index (0.93 vs 0.92) and significantly lower average NTCP for SNHL at both 3 years (30.8% vs 40.8%) and 5 years (43.3% vs 61.7%). An average dose escalation of approximately 116% of the prescription dose achieved 99.5% TCP, which resulted in 32.6% and 43.4% NTCP for SNHL at 3 years and 46.4% and 64.7% at 5 years for 4π and clinical plans, respectively. Conclusions: Compared with clinical planning methods, optimized 4π radiation therapy enables statistically significant sparing of the cochleae in acoustic neuroma treatment as well as lowering of other OAR doses, potentially reducing the risk of hearing loss