4.3 Article

Transition From Manual to Automated Planning and Delivery of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Stereotactic Radiosurgery: Clinical, Dosimetric, and Quality Assurance Results

Journal

PRACTICAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages E163-E171

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2020.10.013

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Properly planned single isocenter VMAT radiosurgery plans exhibit high quality and efficiency. The study compared manual planning with a new automated platform, HyperArc, and found that HyperArc produced high-quality plans with lower Paddick gradient index and mean brain doses, as well as shorter treatment times.
Purpose: Properly planned single isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) radiosurgery plans exhibit high quality and efficiency. We report here the largest clinical experience to date, to our knowledge, comparing manual planning with a new automated platform designed to standardize and simplify radiosurgery planning and delivery processes. Methods: We treated 693 patients with single isocenter VMAT radiosurgical plans generated by either our conventional manual (mVMAT) or a recently implemented automated (HyperArc (TM)) technique. All plans targeted the gross tumor volume without margin. Radiochromic film was used for patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA). We evaluated local control and toxicity data for a subgroup of 107 patients having 377 metastatic tumors that were treated with HyperArc. Results: The median Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) conformity index was 1.14 and was not different between the 2 techniques. The median Paddick gradient index was 5.42 for HyperArc versus 7.09 for mVMAT (P < .001). The median mean brain doses were 4.6% and 5.1% for HyperArc and mVMAT, respectively (P = .04). The PSQA for both techniques met clinical criteria, but 97% of the HyperArc plans satisfied the gamma tolerance limit recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group No. 218, compared with 94% of the mVMAT plans (P = .02). The median treatment-planning times were not significantly different. The median treatment times were 10.5 and 11.4 minutes for HyperArc and mVMAT, respectively (P < .001). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of local control was 90.1% at 1 year. Conclusions: HyperArc produces high-quality radiosurgical plans that are at least as good as mVMAT plans created by an expert manual planner with easier planning and more efficient delivery workflow. A less experienced planner can produce very high-quality radiosurgical plans even for patients with more than 10 targets. The use of a single-isocenter technique for multiple targets with no PTV margin did not compromise clinical outcomes, and 1-year local control for treated targets remained congruent with historical series. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Radiation Oncology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available