[Serial tomotherapy vs. MLC-IMRT (multileaf collimator intensity modulated radiotherapy) for simultaneous boost treatment large intracerebral lesions].
BACKGROUND
Recent data suggest that a radiosurgery boost treatment for up to three brain metastases in addition to whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is beneficial. Sequential treatment of multiple metastatic lesions is time-consuming and optimal normal tissue sparing is not trivial for larger metastases when separate plans are created and are only superimposed afterwards. Sequential Tomotherapy (see image I) with noncoplanar arcs and Multi-field IMRT may streamline the process and enable easy simultaneous treatment. We compared plans for 2-3 intracerebral targets calculated with Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) based on treatment with MLC or sequential Tomotherapy using the Peacock-System (see image II). Treatment time was not to exceed 90 min on a linac with standard dose rate. MIMiC plans without treatment-time restrictions were created as a benchmark.


METHODS
Calculations are based on a Siemens KD2 linac with a dose rate of 200 MU/min. Step-and-Shoot IMRT is performed with a standard MLC (2 x 29 leaves, 1 cm), serial Tomotherapy with the Multivane-Collimator MIMiC (NOMOS Inc. USA) (see image II). Treatment plans are created with Corvus 5.0. To create plans with good conformity we chose a noncoplanar beam- and arc geometry for each approach (IMRT 4-, MIMiC 5-couch angles). The benchmark MIMiC plans with maximally steep dose gradients had 9 couch angles. For plan comparison reasons, 10 Gy were prescribed to 90% of the PTV. Steepness of dose gradients, homogeneity and conformity were assessed by the following parameters: Volume encompassed by certain isodoses outside the target as well as homogeneity and conformity as indicated by Homogeneity- and Conformity-Index.


RESULTS
Plans without treatment-time restrictions had slightest dose to organ at risk (OAR), normal tissue and least Conformity-index. MIMiC- and MLC-IMRT based plans can be treated within the intended period of 90 min, all plans met the required dose (see Table 2). MLC based plans resulted in higher dose to organs at risk (OAR) (see table 1) and dose to tissue outside the targets (see table 3), as indicated by a higher CI (see image III). The HI was similar for all calculated plans (see image IV).


CONCLUSIONS
When treatment plans resulting in a similar treatment time were compared, serial Tomotherapy showed minor advantages over MLC based IMRT with regard to conformity, OAR sparing, and steepness of dose gradients. Both methods are inferior to serial Tomotherapy with ideal plan quality disregarding treatment efficiency. Treating multiple metastases in less than 1 h would therefore be possible on a LINAC with high dose rate and bidirectional rotation with minor compromises on gradient steepness.
Wolff
Dirk
D
Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim, Deutschland. wolff.dirk@gmx.de
Abo-Madyan
Yasser
Y
Dobler
Barbara
B
Lohr
Frank
F
Mai
Sabine
S
Polednik
Martin
M
Wenz
Frederik
F
D001932:Brain Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy* / Q000556:secondary / Q000601:surgery; D006801:Humans; D009362:Neoplasm Metastasis / Q000532:radiotherapy; D010347:Patient Care Planning; D016634:Radiosurgery / Q000379:methods; D011879:Radiotherapy Dosage; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D020266:Radiotherapy, Conformal / Q000379:methods; D050397:Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated / Q000379:methods*; D012189:Retrospective Studies