Li Taoran, Irmen Peyton, Liu Haisong, Shi Wenyin, Alonso-Basanta Michelle, Zou Wei, Teo Boon-Keng Kevin, Metz James M, Dong Lei
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Front Oncol. 2019 Jan 22;9:7. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00007. eCollection 2019.
To evaluate the dosimetric performance and planning/delivery efficiency of a dual-layer MLC system for treating multiple brain metastases with a single isocenter. 10 patients each with 6-10 targets with volumes from 0.11 to 8.57 cc, and prescription doses from 15 to 24 Gy, were retrospectively studied. Halcyon has only coplanar delivery mode. Halcyon V1 MLC modulates only with the lower layer at 1 cm resolution, whereas V2 MLC modulates with both layers at an effective resolution of 0.5 cm. For each patient five plans were compared varying MLC and beam arrangements: the clinical plan using multi-aperture dynamic conformal arc (DCA) and non-coplanar arcs, Halcyon-V1 using coplanar-VMAT, Halcyon-V2 using coplanar-VMAT, HDMLC-0.25 cm using coplanar-VMAT, and HDMLC-0.25 cm using non-coplanar-VMAT. All same-case plans were generated following the same planning protocol and normalization. Conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), V12Gy, V6Gy, V3Gy, and brain mean dose were compared. All VMAT plans met clinical constraints for critical structures. For targets with diameter < 1 cm, Halcyon plans showed inferior CI among all techniques. For targets with diameter >1 cm, Halcyon VMAT plans had CI similar to non-coplanar VMAT plans, and better than non-coplanar clinical DCA plans. For GI, Halcyon MLC plans performed similarly to coplanar HDMLC plans and inferiorly compared to non-coplanar HDMLC plans. All coplanar VMAT plans (Halcyon MLC and HDMLC) and clinical DCA plans had similar V12Gy, but were inferior compared to non-coplanar VMAT plans. Halcyon plans had slightly reduced V3Gy and mean brain dose compared to HDMLC plans. The difference between Halcyon V1 and V2 is only significant in CI of tumors less than 1cm in diameter. Halcyon plans required longer optimization than Truebeam VMAT plans, but had similar delivery efficiency. For targets with diameter >1 cm, Halcyon's dual-layer stacked and staggered MLC is capable of producing similar dose conformity compared to HDMLC while reducing low dose spill to normal brain tissue. GI and V12Gy of Halcyon MLC plans were, in general, inferior to non-coplanar DCA or VMAT plans using HDMLC, likely due to coplanar geometry and wider MLC leaves. HDMLC maintained its advantage in CI for smaller targets with diameter <1 cm.
为评估用于单等中心治疗多发脑转移瘤的双层多叶准直器(MLC)系统的剂量学性能及计划/执行效率。对10例患者进行回顾性研究,每位患者有6 - 10个靶区,体积为0.11至8.57立方厘米,处方剂量为15至24戈瑞。Halcyon只有共面照射模式。Halcyon V1 MLC仅通过下层以1厘米分辨率进行调制,而V2 MLC通过两层以0.5厘米的有效分辨率进行调制。对于每位患者,比较了五种不同MLC和射束排列的计划:使用多野动态适形弧(DCA)和非共面弧的临床计划、使用共面容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)的Halcyon - V1、使用共面VMAT的Halcyon - V2、使用共面VMAT的HDMLC - 0.25厘米以及使用非共面VMAT的HDMLC - 0.25厘米。所有相同病例的计划均按照相同的计划协议和归一化方法生成。比较了适形指数(CI)、梯度指数(GI)、V12Gy、V6Gy、V3Gy和脑平均剂量。所有VMAT计划均满足关键结构的临床约束条件。对于直径<1厘米的靶区,在所有技术中Halcyon计划的CI较差。对于直径>1厘米的靶区,Halcyon VMAT计划的CI与非共面VMAT计划相似,且优于非共面临床DCA计划。对于GI,Halcyon MLC计划的表现与共面HDMLC计划相似,但与非共面HDMLC计划相比稍差。所有共面VMAT计划(Halcyon MLC和HDMLC)和临床DCA计划的V12Gy相似,但与非共面VMAT计划相比稍差。与HDMLC计划相比,Halcyon计划的V3Gy和脑平均剂量略有降低。Halcyon V1和V2之间的差异仅在直径小于1厘米的肿瘤的CI方面具有显著性。Halcyon计划比Truebeam VMAT计划需要更长的优化时间,但执行效率相似。对于直径>1厘米的靶区,Halcyon的双层堆叠和交错MLC与HDMLC相比能够产生相似的剂量适形性,同时减少对正常脑组织的低剂量溢出。Halcyon MLC计划的GI和V12Gy通常低于使用HDMLC的非共面DCA或VMAT计划,这可能是由于共面几何结构和更宽的MLC叶片所致。HDMLC在直径<1厘米的较小靶区的CI方面保持其优势。