Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.

BACKGROUND: Helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are both advanced techniques of delivering intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Here, we conduct a study to compare HT and partial-arc VMAT in their ability to spare organs at risk (OARs) when stereotactic ablative...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alexander Chi, Pan Ma, Guishan Fu, Gerry Hobbs, James S Welsh, Nam P Nguyen, Si Young Jang, Jinrong Dai, Jing Jin, Ritsuko Komaki
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3618449?pdf=render
id doaj-7d453fa14d4746cba3fa7df2e8ac59fb
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7d453fa14d4746cba3fa7df2e8ac59fb2020-11-25T02:33:51ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0184e5972910.1371/journal.pone.0059729Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.Alexander ChiPan MaGuishan FuGerry HobbsJames S WelshNam P NguyenSi Young JangJinrong DaiJing JinRitsuko KomakiBACKGROUND: Helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are both advanced techniques of delivering intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Here, we conduct a study to compare HT and partial-arc VMAT in their ability to spare organs at risk (OARs) when stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is delivered to treat centrally located early stage non-small-cell lung cancer or lung metastases. METHODS: 12 patients with centrally located lung lesions were randomly chosen. HT, 2 & 8 arc (Smart Arc, Pinnacle v9.0) plans were generated to deliver 70 Gy in 10 fractions to the planning target volume (PTV). Target and OAR dose parameters were compared. Each technique's ability to meet dose constraints was further investigated. RESULTS: HT and VMAT plans generated essentially equivalent PTV coverage and dose conformality indices, while a trend for improved dose homogeneity by increasing from 2 to 8 arcs was observed with VMAT. Increasing the number of arcs with VMAT also led to some improvement in OAR sparing. After normalizing to OAR dose constraints, HT was found to be superior to 2 or 8-arc VMAT for optimal OAR sparing (meeting all the dose constraints) (p = 0.0004). All dose constraints were met in HT plans. Increasing from 2 to 8 arcs could not help achieve optimal OAR sparing for 4 patients. 2/4 of them had 3 immediately adjacent structures. CONCLUSION: HT appears to be superior to VMAT in OAR sparing mainly in cases which require conformal dose avoidance of multiple immediately adjacent OARs. For such cases, increasing the number of arcs in VMAT cannot significantly improve OAR sparing.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3618449?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Alexander Chi
Pan Ma
Guishan Fu
Gerry Hobbs
James S Welsh
Nam P Nguyen
Si Young Jang
Jinrong Dai
Jing Jin
Ritsuko Komaki
spellingShingle Alexander Chi
Pan Ma
Guishan Fu
Gerry Hobbs
James S Welsh
Nam P Nguyen
Si Young Jang
Jinrong Dai
Jing Jin
Ritsuko Komaki
Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Alexander Chi
Pan Ma
Guishan Fu
Gerry Hobbs
James S Welsh
Nam P Nguyen
Si Young Jang
Jinrong Dai
Jing Jin
Ritsuko Komaki
author_sort Alexander Chi
title Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
title_short Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
title_full Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
title_fullStr Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
title_full_unstemmed Critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
title_sort critical structure sparing in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for central lung lesions: helical tomotherapy vs. volumetric modulated arc therapy.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description BACKGROUND: Helical tomotherapy (HT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are both advanced techniques of delivering intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Here, we conduct a study to compare HT and partial-arc VMAT in their ability to spare organs at risk (OARs) when stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is delivered to treat centrally located early stage non-small-cell lung cancer or lung metastases. METHODS: 12 patients with centrally located lung lesions were randomly chosen. HT, 2 & 8 arc (Smart Arc, Pinnacle v9.0) plans were generated to deliver 70 Gy in 10 fractions to the planning target volume (PTV). Target and OAR dose parameters were compared. Each technique's ability to meet dose constraints was further investigated. RESULTS: HT and VMAT plans generated essentially equivalent PTV coverage and dose conformality indices, while a trend for improved dose homogeneity by increasing from 2 to 8 arcs was observed with VMAT. Increasing the number of arcs with VMAT also led to some improvement in OAR sparing. After normalizing to OAR dose constraints, HT was found to be superior to 2 or 8-arc VMAT for optimal OAR sparing (meeting all the dose constraints) (p = 0.0004). All dose constraints were met in HT plans. Increasing from 2 to 8 arcs could not help achieve optimal OAR sparing for 4 patients. 2/4 of them had 3 immediately adjacent structures. CONCLUSION: HT appears to be superior to VMAT in OAR sparing mainly in cases which require conformal dose avoidance of multiple immediately adjacent OARs. For such cases, increasing the number of arcs in VMAT cannot significantly improve OAR sparing.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3618449?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT alexanderchi criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT panma criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT guishanfu criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT gerryhobbs criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT jamesswelsh criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT nampnguyen criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT siyoungjang criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT jinrongdai criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT jingjin criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
AT ritsukokomaki criticalstructuresparinginstereotacticablativeradiotherapyforcentrallunglesionshelicaltomotherapyvsvolumetricmodulatedarctherapy
_version_ 1724812065750646784