Cargando…

Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing

PURPOSE: To evaluate and investigate the feasibility of flattening filter‐free (FFF) beam for the whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing. METHODS: Eighteen patients with volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in FFF and conventional beam modes were included in this study. Th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ji, Tianlong, Sun, Lu, Cai, Feng, Li, Guang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9540553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34333848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajco.13624
_version_ 1784803732590952448
author Ji, Tianlong
Sun, Lu
Cai, Feng
Li, Guang
author_facet Ji, Tianlong
Sun, Lu
Cai, Feng
Li, Guang
author_sort Ji, Tianlong
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate and investigate the feasibility of flattening filter‐free (FFF) beam for the whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing. METHODS: Eighteen patients with volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in FFF and conventional beam modes were included in this study. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy in 10 fractions. The conformity index (CI), heterogeneity index reported by TPS (HI‐M), and homogeneity index (HI) for planning target volume (PTV) were evaluated. Subsequently, the following parameters for PTV were calculated and compared: D (2%), D (98%); the mean dose, maximum dose, and minimal dose for OARs. Plan modulation index, total MUs, and the gamma index were used to evaluate the plan quality. RESULTS: HI‐M results were similar for the two techniques (1.239 vs. 1.247, respectively, p = 0.048); FFF beam plans yielded lower D2% compared to FF beam plans (3,416.3 cGy vs. 3,437.2 cGy, p = 0.22), mean dose (3,177.5 cGy vs. 3,195.2 cGy, p = 0.009), and CI (0.884 vs. 0.876, p = 0.001) for PTV. Significant differences were observed between the two beam modes (FF model vs. FFF model) for the maximum dose (1,612.9 cGy vs. 1,470.2 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001), minimum dose (987.6 cGy vs. 898.8 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001), and the mean dose (1144.4 cGy vs. 1047.3 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001) to the hippocampus, and the maximum dose to the eyes (2,792.6 cGy vs. 2,751.3 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001). The average total MUs for FFF‐VMAT plans was significantly greater than FF‐VMAT plans. However, differences for the plan modulation index and the gamma index were negligible. CONCLUSION: In comparison with FF beam, the FFF beam mode offers a clear benefit with respect to WBRT with hippocampal sparing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9540553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95405532022-10-14 Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing Ji, Tianlong Sun, Lu Cai, Feng Li, Guang Asia Pac J Clin Oncol Original Articles PURPOSE: To evaluate and investigate the feasibility of flattening filter‐free (FFF) beam for the whole‐brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing. METHODS: Eighteen patients with volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in FFF and conventional beam modes were included in this study. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy in 10 fractions. The conformity index (CI), heterogeneity index reported by TPS (HI‐M), and homogeneity index (HI) for planning target volume (PTV) were evaluated. Subsequently, the following parameters for PTV were calculated and compared: D (2%), D (98%); the mean dose, maximum dose, and minimal dose for OARs. Plan modulation index, total MUs, and the gamma index were used to evaluate the plan quality. RESULTS: HI‐M results were similar for the two techniques (1.239 vs. 1.247, respectively, p = 0.048); FFF beam plans yielded lower D2% compared to FF beam plans (3,416.3 cGy vs. 3,437.2 cGy, p = 0.22), mean dose (3,177.5 cGy vs. 3,195.2 cGy, p = 0.009), and CI (0.884 vs. 0.876, p = 0.001) for PTV. Significant differences were observed between the two beam modes (FF model vs. FFF model) for the maximum dose (1,612.9 cGy vs. 1,470.2 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001), minimum dose (987.6 cGy vs. 898.8 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001), and the mean dose (1144.4 cGy vs. 1047.3 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001) to the hippocampus, and the maximum dose to the eyes (2,792.6 cGy vs. 2,751.3 cGy, respectively, p < 0.001). The average total MUs for FFF‐VMAT plans was significantly greater than FF‐VMAT plans. However, differences for the plan modulation index and the gamma index were negligible. CONCLUSION: In comparison with FF beam, the FFF beam mode offers a clear benefit with respect to WBRT with hippocampal sparing. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-07-31 2022-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9540553/ /pubmed/34333848 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajco.13624 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Asia‐Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Ji, Tianlong
Sun, Lu
Cai, Feng
Li, Guang
Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing
title Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing
title_full Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing
title_fullStr Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing
title_short Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing
title_sort comparison between flattening filter‐free (fff) and flattened photon beam vmat plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (wbrt) with hippocampus sparing
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9540553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34333848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajco.13624
work_keys_str_mv AT jitianlong comparisonbetweenflatteningfilterfreefffandflattenedphotonbeamvmatplansforthewholebrainradiotherapywbrtwithhippocampussparing
AT sunlu comparisonbetweenflatteningfilterfreefffandflattenedphotonbeamvmatplansforthewholebrainradiotherapywbrtwithhippocampussparing
AT caifeng comparisonbetweenflatteningfilterfreefffandflattenedphotonbeamvmatplansforthewholebrainradiotherapywbrtwithhippocampussparing
AT liguang comparisonbetweenflatteningfilterfreefffandflattenedphotonbeamvmatplansforthewholebrainradiotherapywbrtwithhippocampussparing