Cargando…
Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning
RaySearch RayStation Fallback (FB) planning module can generate an equivalent backup radiotherapy treatment plan facilitating treatment on other linear accelerators. FB plans were generated from the RayStation FB module by simulating the original plan target and organ at risk (OAR) dose distribution...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689873/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28291935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12032 |
_version_ | 1783279475935412224 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Xin Penagaricano, Jose Narayanasamy, Ganesh Corry, Peter Liu, TianXiao Sanjay, Maraboyina Paudel, Nava Morrill, Steven |
author_facet | Zhang, Xin Penagaricano, Jose Narayanasamy, Ganesh Corry, Peter Liu, TianXiao Sanjay, Maraboyina Paudel, Nava Morrill, Steven |
author_sort | Zhang, Xin |
collection | PubMed |
description | RaySearch RayStation Fallback (FB) planning module can generate an equivalent backup radiotherapy treatment plan facilitating treatment on other linear accelerators. FB plans were generated from the RayStation FB module by simulating the original plan target and organ at risk (OAR) dose distribution and delivered in various backup linear accelerators. In this study, helical tomotherapy (HT) backup plans used in Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator were generated with the RayStation FB module. About 30 patients, 10 with lung cancer, 10 with head and neck (HN) cancer, and 10 with prostate cancer, who were treated with HT, were included in this study. Intensity‐modulated radiotherapy Fallback plans (FB‐IMRT) were generated for all patients, and three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy Fallback plans (FB‐3D) were only generated for lung cancer patients. Dosimetric comparison study evaluated FB plans based on dose coverage to 95% of the PTV volume (R(95)), PTV mean dose (D(mean)), Paddick's conformity index (CI), and dose homogeneity index (HI). The evaluation results showed that all IMRT plans were statistically comparable between HT and FB‐IMRT plans except that PTV HI was worse in prostate, and PTV R(95) and HI were worse in HN multitarget plans for FB‐IMRT plans. For 3D lung cancer plans, only the PTV R(95) was statistically comparable between HT and FB‐3D plans, PTV D(mean) was higher, and CI and HI were worse compared to HT plans. The FB plans using a TrueBeam linear accelerator generally offer better OAR sparing compared to HT plans for all the patients. In this study, all cases of FB‐IMRT plans and 9/10 cases of FB‐3D plans were clinically acceptable without further modification and optimization once the FB plans were generated. However, the statistical differences between HT and FB‐IMRT/3D plans might not be of any clinically significant. One FB‐3D plan failed to simulate the original plan without further optimization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5689873 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56898732018-04-02 Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning Zhang, Xin Penagaricano, Jose Narayanasamy, Ganesh Corry, Peter Liu, TianXiao Sanjay, Maraboyina Paudel, Nava Morrill, Steven J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics RaySearch RayStation Fallback (FB) planning module can generate an equivalent backup radiotherapy treatment plan facilitating treatment on other linear accelerators. FB plans were generated from the RayStation FB module by simulating the original plan target and organ at risk (OAR) dose distribution and delivered in various backup linear accelerators. In this study, helical tomotherapy (HT) backup plans used in Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator were generated with the RayStation FB module. About 30 patients, 10 with lung cancer, 10 with head and neck (HN) cancer, and 10 with prostate cancer, who were treated with HT, were included in this study. Intensity‐modulated radiotherapy Fallback plans (FB‐IMRT) were generated for all patients, and three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy Fallback plans (FB‐3D) were only generated for lung cancer patients. Dosimetric comparison study evaluated FB plans based on dose coverage to 95% of the PTV volume (R(95)), PTV mean dose (D(mean)), Paddick's conformity index (CI), and dose homogeneity index (HI). The evaluation results showed that all IMRT plans were statistically comparable between HT and FB‐IMRT plans except that PTV HI was worse in prostate, and PTV R(95) and HI were worse in HN multitarget plans for FB‐IMRT plans. For 3D lung cancer plans, only the PTV R(95) was statistically comparable between HT and FB‐3D plans, PTV D(mean) was higher, and CI and HI were worse compared to HT plans. The FB plans using a TrueBeam linear accelerator generally offer better OAR sparing compared to HT plans for all the patients. In this study, all cases of FB‐IMRT plans and 9/10 cases of FB‐3D plans were clinically acceptable without further modification and optimization once the FB plans were generated. However, the statistical differences between HT and FB‐IMRT/3D plans might not be of any clinically significant. One FB‐3D plan failed to simulate the original plan without further optimization. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5689873/ /pubmed/28291935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12032 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Zhang, Xin Penagaricano, Jose Narayanasamy, Ganesh Corry, Peter Liu, TianXiao Sanjay, Maraboyina Paudel, Nava Morrill, Steven Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning |
title | Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning |
title_full | Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning |
title_fullStr | Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning |
title_full_unstemmed | Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning |
title_short | Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning |
title_sort | helical tomotherapy to linac plan conversion utilizing raystation fallback planning |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689873/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28291935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12032 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangxin helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT penagaricanojose helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT narayanasamyganesh helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT corrypeter helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT liutianxiao helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT sanjaymaraboyina helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT paudelnava helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning AT morrillsteven helicaltomotherapytolinacplanconversionutilizingraystationfallbackplanning |