Cargando…

A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse

BACKGROUND: The newest release of the Eclipse (Varian) treatment planning system (TPS) includes an optimizing engine for Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning. The purpose of this study was to evaluate this new algorithm and to compare it to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (I...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peters, Samuel, Schiefer, Hans, Plasswilm, Ludwig
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4107584/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25011529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-153
_version_ 1782327619287515136
author Peters, Samuel
Schiefer, Hans
Plasswilm, Ludwig
author_facet Peters, Samuel
Schiefer, Hans
Plasswilm, Ludwig
author_sort Peters, Samuel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The newest release of the Eclipse (Varian) treatment planning system (TPS) includes an optimizing engine for Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning. The purpose of this study was to evaluate this new algorithm and to compare it to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for various disease sites by creating single- and double-arc VMAT plans. METHODS: A total of 162 plans were evaluated in this study, including 38 endometrial, 57 head and neck, 12 brain, 10 breast and 45 prostate cancer cases. The real-life IMRT plans were developed during routine clinical cases using the TPS Eclipse. VMAT plans were generated using a preclinical version of Eclipse with tumor-region-specific optimizing templates without interference of the operator: with one full arc (1A) and with two full arcs (2A), and with partial arcs for breast and prostate with hip implant cases. All plans were evaluated based on target coverage, homogeneity and conformity. The organs at risk (OARs) were analyzed according to plan objectives, such as the mean and maximum doses. If one or more objectives were exceeded, the plan was considered clinically unacceptable, and a second VMAT plan was created by adapting the optimization penalties once. RESULTS: Compared to IMRT, single- and double-arc VMAT plans showed comparable or better results concerning the target coverage: the maximum dose in the target for 1A is the same as that for IMRT; for 2A, an average reduction of 1.3% over all plans was observed. The conformity showed a statistically significant improvement for both 1A (+3%) and 2A (+6%). The mean total body dose was statistically significant lower for the considered arc techniques (IMRT: 16.0 Gy, VMAT: 15.3 Gy, p < 0.001). However, the sparing of OARs shows individual behavior that depends strongly on the different tumor regions. A clear difference is found in the number of monitor units (MUs) per plan: VMAT shows a reduction of 31%. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that based on optimizing templates with minimal interaction of the operator, the Eclipse TPS is able to achieve a plan quality for the Elekta VMAT delivery technique that is comparable to that of fixed-field IMRT. Plans with two arcs show better dose distributions than plans with one arc.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4107584
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41075842014-08-04 A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse Peters, Samuel Schiefer, Hans Plasswilm, Ludwig Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: The newest release of the Eclipse (Varian) treatment planning system (TPS) includes an optimizing engine for Elekta volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning. The purpose of this study was to evaluate this new algorithm and to compare it to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for various disease sites by creating single- and double-arc VMAT plans. METHODS: A total of 162 plans were evaluated in this study, including 38 endometrial, 57 head and neck, 12 brain, 10 breast and 45 prostate cancer cases. The real-life IMRT plans were developed during routine clinical cases using the TPS Eclipse. VMAT plans were generated using a preclinical version of Eclipse with tumor-region-specific optimizing templates without interference of the operator: with one full arc (1A) and with two full arcs (2A), and with partial arcs for breast and prostate with hip implant cases. All plans were evaluated based on target coverage, homogeneity and conformity. The organs at risk (OARs) were analyzed according to plan objectives, such as the mean and maximum doses. If one or more objectives were exceeded, the plan was considered clinically unacceptable, and a second VMAT plan was created by adapting the optimization penalties once. RESULTS: Compared to IMRT, single- and double-arc VMAT plans showed comparable or better results concerning the target coverage: the maximum dose in the target for 1A is the same as that for IMRT; for 2A, an average reduction of 1.3% over all plans was observed. The conformity showed a statistically significant improvement for both 1A (+3%) and 2A (+6%). The mean total body dose was statistically significant lower for the considered arc techniques (IMRT: 16.0 Gy, VMAT: 15.3 Gy, p < 0.001). However, the sparing of OARs shows individual behavior that depends strongly on the different tumor regions. A clear difference is found in the number of monitor units (MUs) per plan: VMAT shows a reduction of 31%. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that based on optimizing templates with minimal interaction of the operator, the Eclipse TPS is able to achieve a plan quality for the Elekta VMAT delivery technique that is comparable to that of fixed-field IMRT. Plans with two arcs show better dose distributions than plans with one arc. BioMed Central 2014-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4107584/ /pubmed/25011529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-153 Text en Copyright © 2014 Peters et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Peters, Samuel
Schiefer, Hans
Plasswilm, Ludwig
A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
title A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
title_full A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
title_fullStr A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
title_full_unstemmed A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
title_short A treatment planning study comparing Elekta VMAT and fixed field IMRT using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
title_sort treatment planning study comparing elekta vmat and fixed field imrt using the varian treatment planning system eclipse
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4107584/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25011529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-153
work_keys_str_mv AT peterssamuel atreatmentplanningstudycomparingelektavmatandfixedfieldimrtusingthevariantreatmentplanningsystemeclipse
AT schieferhans atreatmentplanningstudycomparingelektavmatandfixedfieldimrtusingthevariantreatmentplanningsystemeclipse
AT plasswilmludwig atreatmentplanningstudycomparingelektavmatandfixedfieldimrtusingthevariantreatmentplanningsystemeclipse
AT peterssamuel treatmentplanningstudycomparingelektavmatandfixedfieldimrtusingthevariantreatmentplanningsystemeclipse
AT schieferhans treatmentplanningstudycomparingelektavmatandfixedfieldimrtusingthevariantreatmentplanningsystemeclipse
AT plasswilmludwig treatmentplanningstudycomparingelektavmatandfixedfieldimrtusingthevariantreatmentplanningsystemeclipse