Cargando…

Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis

INTRODUCTION: The use of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams is becoming more prevalent in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim in this study was to assess the impact of dosimetric and radiobiological differences between FFF and flatt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Junxiang, Song, Hongchang, Li, Jie, Tang, Bin, Wu, Fan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9903338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36761961
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1108142
_version_ 1784883451725348864
author Wu, Junxiang
Song, Hongchang
Li, Jie
Tang, Bin
Wu, Fan
author_facet Wu, Junxiang
Song, Hongchang
Li, Jie
Tang, Bin
Wu, Fan
author_sort Wu, Junxiang
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The use of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams is becoming more prevalent in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim in this study was to assess the impact of dosimetric and radiobiological differences between FFF and flattening filter (FF) beams for lung SBRT based on the target volume. METHODS: A total of 198 lung stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans with FFF beams and FF beams were retrospectively selected for this study. For all plans, the prescribed dose was 50 Gy/5 fractions, and the dose volume histogram (DVH) for the target and organs at risk (OAR) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of the lung were recorded and compared. Moreover, monitor units (MUs), the beam on-time and the treatment time were evaluated. RESULTS: The study was performed following the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0813 and 0915 protocols. No significant differences in D(90), coverage rate (CR) or conformity index (CI) of the target were observed between FFF beams and FF beams (p>0.05). The D(2), R(50%) and gradient index (GI) for the target improved with FFF beams compared with FF beams (p<0.05). FFF beams also significantly reduced the dose for the lung, heart, spinal cord, esophagus and NTCP of the lung (p<0.05), compared with FF beams. However, there was no significant difference in sparing of the trachea (p>0.05). The mean MUs, beam on-time and treatment time were 1871 ± 278 MUs, 3.2 ± 0.2 min and 3.9 ± 0.3 min for FFF beams, and 1890 ± 260 MUs, 4.2 ± 0.3 min and 4.8 ± 0.4 min for FF beams, respectively. DISCUSSION: The FFF beam technique for lung SBRT with VMAT results in a better dose fall-off, better dose-sparing of OAR, lower NTCP of the lung and a shorter beam on-time compared with the FF beam technique. Additionally, the improvement in target and OAR-sparing for FFF beams was increased with increasing target volume.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9903338
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99033382023-02-08 Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis Wu, Junxiang Song, Hongchang Li, Jie Tang, Bin Wu, Fan Front Oncol Oncology INTRODUCTION: The use of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with flattening-filter-free (FFF) beams is becoming more prevalent in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim in this study was to assess the impact of dosimetric and radiobiological differences between FFF and flattening filter (FF) beams for lung SBRT based on the target volume. METHODS: A total of 198 lung stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans with FFF beams and FF beams were retrospectively selected for this study. For all plans, the prescribed dose was 50 Gy/5 fractions, and the dose volume histogram (DVH) for the target and organs at risk (OAR) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of the lung were recorded and compared. Moreover, monitor units (MUs), the beam on-time and the treatment time were evaluated. RESULTS: The study was performed following the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0813 and 0915 protocols. No significant differences in D(90), coverage rate (CR) or conformity index (CI) of the target were observed between FFF beams and FF beams (p>0.05). The D(2), R(50%) and gradient index (GI) for the target improved with FFF beams compared with FF beams (p<0.05). FFF beams also significantly reduced the dose for the lung, heart, spinal cord, esophagus and NTCP of the lung (p<0.05), compared with FF beams. However, there was no significant difference in sparing of the trachea (p>0.05). The mean MUs, beam on-time and treatment time were 1871 ± 278 MUs, 3.2 ± 0.2 min and 3.9 ± 0.3 min for FFF beams, and 1890 ± 260 MUs, 4.2 ± 0.3 min and 4.8 ± 0.4 min for FF beams, respectively. DISCUSSION: The FFF beam technique for lung SBRT with VMAT results in a better dose fall-off, better dose-sparing of OAR, lower NTCP of the lung and a shorter beam on-time compared with the FF beam technique. Additionally, the improvement in target and OAR-sparing for FFF beams was increased with increasing target volume. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9903338/ /pubmed/36761961 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1108142 Text en Copyright © 2023 Wu, Song, Li, Tang and Wu https://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
Wu, Junxiang
Song, Hongchang
Li, Jie
Tang, Bin
Wu, Fan
Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis
title Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis
title_full Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis
title_fullStr Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis
title_short Evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung SBRT: A volume-based analysis
title_sort evaluation of flattening-filter-free and flattening filter dosimetric and radiobiological criteria for lung sbrt: a volume-based analysis
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9903338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36761961
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1108142
work_keys_str_mv AT wujunxiang evaluationofflatteningfilterfreeandflatteningfilterdosimetricandradiobiologicalcriteriaforlungsbrtavolumebasedanalysis
AT songhongchang evaluationofflatteningfilterfreeandflatteningfilterdosimetricandradiobiologicalcriteriaforlungsbrtavolumebasedanalysis
AT lijie evaluationofflatteningfilterfreeandflatteningfilterdosimetricandradiobiologicalcriteriaforlungsbrtavolumebasedanalysis
AT tangbin evaluationofflatteningfilterfreeandflatteningfilterdosimetricandradiobiologicalcriteriaforlungsbrtavolumebasedanalysis
AT wufan evaluationofflatteningfilterfreeandflatteningfilterdosimetricandradiobiologicalcriteriaforlungsbrtavolumebasedanalysis