Direct dosimetric comparison of linear accelerator vs. Gamma Knife fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (fSRT) of large brain tumors.
The purpose of this study was to directly compare the plan quality of Gamma Knife (GK) (Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden)- vs linear accelerator (LINAC)-based delivery techniques for fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (fSRT) of large brain metastases. Eighteen patients with clinical target volumes (CTVs) larger than 9.5 cc were selected to generate comparative plans for the prescription dose of 9 Gy × 3 fractions, utilizing the Eclipse (Varian, Palo Alto, US) vs Leksell GammaPlan (LGP) (Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden) treatment planning systems (TPS). Each GK plan was first developed using LGP's automatic planning, followed by manual adjustments/refinements. The same MRI and structures, including CTVs and organs at risk, were then DICOM-transferred to the Eclipse TPS. Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and Dynamic Conformal Arc (DCA) plans for a Truebeam, with high-definition multi-leaf collimators (MLCs), were developed on these MR images and structures using a single isocenter and 3 non-coplanar arcs. No planning target volume (PTV) margins were added, and no heterogeneity correction was used for either TPS. GK plans were prescribed to the 50% isodose line, and Eclipse VMAT and DCA plans allowed a maximum dose up to 170% and ∼125%, respectively. Gradient index (GI), Paddick Conformity Index (PCI), V20GyRind, and V4GyRind of all 3 techniques were calculated and compared. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to determine the statistical significance of the differences of these planning indices for the 3 planning techniques. A total of eighteen treatment targets were analyzed. Median CTV volume was 14.4 cc (range 9.5 cc - 55.9 cc). Mean ± standard deviation of PCI were 0.85 ± 0.03, 0.90 ± 0.03, and 0.72 ± 0.11 for GK, VMAT and DCA plans, respectively. They were respectively 2.64 ± 0.17, 2.46 ± 0.18, and 2.83 ± 0.48 for GI; 15.33 ± 8.45 cc, 10.47 ± 4.32 cc and 23.51 ± 16 cc for V20GyRind; and 316.28 ± 138.35 cc, 317.81 ± 108.21 cc, and 394.85 ± 142.16 cc for V4GyRind. The differences were statistically significant with p < 0.01 for all indices, except for V4GyRind (p > 0.129). In conclusion, a direct dosimetric comparison using the same MRI scan and contours was performed to evaluate the plan quality of various fSRT delivery techniques for CTV > 9.5 cc. LINAC VMAT plans provided the best dosimetric outcome in regard to PCI, GI, and V20GyRind. GK outcomes were similar to LINAC VMAT plans while LINAC DCA outcomes were significantly worse. Even though GK has a smaller physical penumbra, LINAC VMAT outperformed GK in this study due to enhanced penumbra sharpening and better beam optimization.
Calugaru E
，Whiting Z
，Delacruz B
，Ma D
，Garcia B
，Goenka A
，Chang J
... -
《-》
Hippocampal-sparing and target volume coverage in treating 3 to 10 brain metastases: A comparison of Gamma Knife, single-isocenter VMAT, CyberKnife, and TomoTherapy stereotactic radiosurgery.
Our purpose was to evaluate hippocampal doses and target volume coverage with and without hippocampal sparing when treating multiple brain metastases using various stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) platforms.
We selected 10 consecutive patients with 14 separate treatments who had been treated in our department for 3 to 10 brain metastases and added hippocampal avoidance contours. All 14 treatments were planned with GammaPlan for Gamma Knife, Eclipse for single isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), TomoTherapy Treatment Planning System (TPS) for TomoTherapy, and MultiPlan for CyberKnife. Initial planning was performed with the goal of planning target volume coverage of V100 ≥95% without hippocampal avoidance. If the maximum hippocampal point dose (Dmax) was <6.6 Gy in a single fraction and <40% of the hippocampi received ≤4.5 Gy, no second plan was performed. If either constraint was not met, replanning was performed with these constraints.
There was a median of 6 metastases per plan, with an average total tumor volume of 7.32 mL per plan. The median hippocampal Dmax (in Gy) without sparing averaged 1.65, 9.81, 4.38, and 5.46, respectively (P < .0001). Of 14 plans, 3 Gamma Knife and CyberKnife plans required replanning, whereas 13 VMAT and 8 TomoTherapy plans required replanning. The hippocampal constraints were not achievable in 1 plan on any platform when the tumor was bordering the hippocampus. The mean volume of brain receiving 12 Gy (in mL), which has been associated with symptomatic radionecrosis, was 23.57 with Gamma Knife, 76.77 with VMAT, 40.86 with CyberKnife, and 104.06 with TomoTherapy (P = .01). The overall average conformity indices for all plans ranged from 0.36 to 0.52.
Even with SRS, the hippocampi can receive a considerable dose; however, if the hippocampi are outlined as organs of risk, sparing these structures is feasible in nearly all situations with all 4 platforms, without detriment to target coverage, and should be considered in all patients undergoing SRS for multiple brain metastases.
Hippocampi play an important role in memory, and sparing of these structures in whole brain radiation can improve neurocognitive outcomes. The hippocampi are not routinely spared when using stereotactic radiosurgery. We evaluated the incidental dose to the hippocampi when treating multiple brain metastases and sought to examine if hippocampal sparing is feasible without detriment to target coverage. We found that hippocampal sparing is possible without affecting coverage or conformality in most cases across treatment platforms.
Zhang I
，Antone J
，Li J
，Saha S
，Riegel AC
，Vijeh L
，Lauritano J
，Marrero M
，Salas S
，Schulder M
，Zinkin H
，Goenka A
，Knisely J
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
