Cargando…

Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases

Purpose: The Elements Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery treatment planning system uses automated volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy that can provide a highly conformal dose distribution to targets, which can provide superior sparing of the spinal cord. This study compares the dosimetric quality of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Trager, Michael, Landers, Angelia, Yu, Yan, Shi, Wenyin, Liu, Haisong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7146086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32318331
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00346
_version_ 1783520118062448640
author Trager, Michael
Landers, Angelia
Yu, Yan
Shi, Wenyin
Liu, Haisong
author_facet Trager, Michael
Landers, Angelia
Yu, Yan
Shi, Wenyin
Liu, Haisong
author_sort Trager, Michael
collection PubMed
description Purpose: The Elements Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery treatment planning system uses automated volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy that can provide a highly conformal dose distribution to targets, which can provide superior sparing of the spinal cord. This study compares the dosimetric quality of Elements plans with the clinical plans of 20 spine stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SRS/SBRT) patients treated at our institution. Methods: Twenty spine SRS/SBRT patients who were clinically treated at our institution were replanned using the automated Elements planning workflow with prespecified templates. Elements automatically evaluates the size and shape of the target to determine if splitting the PTV into simplistic subvolumes, each treated by their own arc(s), would increase conformity and spinal cord sparing. The conformity index, gradient index, PTV D(5%), and maximum and mean cord dose were evaluated for the Elements and clinical plans. Treatment delivery efficiency was also analyzed by comparing the total number of monitor units and the modulation factor. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed on the statistics. Results: Elements split the PTV for 50% of cases, requiring four or six arcs. Overall, Elements plans were found to be superior to clinical plans in conformity index, gradient index, and maximum cord dose. The PTV D(5%) and cord mean dose for the Elements plans trended higher and lower, respectively. The numbers of monitor units and modulation factor were also higher for Elements plans, although the differences were not significant. Conclusion: Automated Elements plans achieved superior conformity and cord dose sparing compared to clinical plans and PTV splitting successfully improved spinal cord sparing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7146086
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71460862020-04-21 Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases Trager, Michael Landers, Angelia Yu, Yan Shi, Wenyin Liu, Haisong Front Oncol Oncology Purpose: The Elements Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery treatment planning system uses automated volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy that can provide a highly conformal dose distribution to targets, which can provide superior sparing of the spinal cord. This study compares the dosimetric quality of Elements plans with the clinical plans of 20 spine stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SRS/SBRT) patients treated at our institution. Methods: Twenty spine SRS/SBRT patients who were clinically treated at our institution were replanned using the automated Elements planning workflow with prespecified templates. Elements automatically evaluates the size and shape of the target to determine if splitting the PTV into simplistic subvolumes, each treated by their own arc(s), would increase conformity and spinal cord sparing. The conformity index, gradient index, PTV D(5%), and maximum and mean cord dose were evaluated for the Elements and clinical plans. Treatment delivery efficiency was also analyzed by comparing the total number of monitor units and the modulation factor. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed on the statistics. Results: Elements split the PTV for 50% of cases, requiring four or six arcs. Overall, Elements plans were found to be superior to clinical plans in conformity index, gradient index, and maximum cord dose. The PTV D(5%) and cord mean dose for the Elements plans trended higher and lower, respectively. The numbers of monitor units and modulation factor were also higher for Elements plans, although the differences were not significant. Conclusion: Automated Elements plans achieved superior conformity and cord dose sparing compared to clinical plans and PTV splitting successfully improved spinal cord sparing. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7146086/ /pubmed/32318331 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00346 Text en Copyright © 2020 Trager, Landers, Yu, Shi and Liu. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Trager, Michael
Landers, Angelia
Yu, Yan
Shi, Wenyin
Liu, Haisong
Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases
title Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases
title_full Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases
title_fullStr Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases
title_short Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases
title_sort evaluation of elements spine srs plan quality for srs and sbrt treatment of spine metastases
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7146086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32318331
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00346
work_keys_str_mv AT tragermichael evaluationofelementsspinesrsplanqualityforsrsandsbrttreatmentofspinemetastases
AT landersangelia evaluationofelementsspinesrsplanqualityforsrsandsbrttreatmentofspinemetastases
AT yuyan evaluationofelementsspinesrsplanqualityforsrsandsbrttreatmentofspinemetastases
AT shiwenyin evaluationofelementsspinesrsplanqualityforsrsandsbrttreatmentofspinemetastases
AT liuhaisong evaluationofelementsspinesrsplanqualityforsrsandsbrttreatmentofspinemetastases