A dosimetrically motivated pathfinding approach for non-isocentric dynamic trajectory radiotherapy.
Objective.Non-isocentric dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) involves dynamic table translations in synchrony with intensity modulation and dynamic gantry, table, and/or collimator rotation. This work aims to develop and evaluate a novel dosimetrically motivated path determination technique for non-isocentric DTRT.Approach.The path determination considers all available beam directions, given on a user-specified grid of gantry angle, table angle, and longitudinal, vertical, and lateral table position. Additionally, the source-to-target distance of all beam directions can be extended by moving the table away from the gantry along the central beam axis to increase the collision-free space. The path determination uses a column generation algorithm to iteratively add beam directions to paths until a user-defined total path length is reached. A subsequent direct aperture optimization of the intensity modulation along the paths creates deliverable plans. Non-isocentric DTRT plans using the path determination and using a manual path setup were created for a craniospinal and a spinal irradiation case. Furthermore, VMAT, isocentric DTRT, and non-isocentric DTRT plans are created for a breast, head and neck (H&N), and esophagus case. Additionally, a HyperArc plan is created for the H&N case. The plans are compared in terms of the dosimetric treatment plan quality and estimated delivery time.Main results.For the craniospinal and spinal irradiation case, using path determination results in dose distributions with improved conformity but a slightly worse target homogeneity compared to manual path setup. The non-isocentric DTRT plans maintained target coverage while reducing the mean dose to organs-at-risk on average by 1.7 Gy (breast), 1.0 Gy (H&N), and 1.6 Gy (esophagus) compared to the VMAT plans and by 0.8 Gy (breast), 0.6 Gy (H&N), and 0.8 Gy (esophagus) compared to the isocentric DTRT plans.Significance.A general dosimetrically motivated path determination applicable to non-isocentric DTRT plans is successfully developed, further advancing the treatment planning for non-isocentric DTRT.
Guyer G
，Bertholet J
，Mueller S
，Zhu C
，Volken W
，Aebersold DM
，Manser P
，Fix MK
... -
《-》
Impact of the gradient in gantry-table rotation on dynamic trajectory radiotherapy plan quality.
To improve organ at risk (OAR) sparing, dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) extends VMAT by dynamic table and collimator rotation during beam-on. However, comprehensive investigations regarding the impact of the gantry-table (GT) rotation gradient on the DTRT plan quality have not been conducted.
To investigate the impact of a user-defined GT rotation gradient on plan quality of DTRT plans in terms of dosimetric plan quality, dosimetric robustness, deliverability, and delivery time.
The dynamic trajectories of DTRT are described by GT and gantry-collimator paths. The GT path is determined by minimizing the overlap of OARs with planning target volume (PTV). This approach is extended to consider a GT rotation gradient by means of a maximum gradient of the path ( G m a x ${G}_{max}$ ) between two adjacent control points ( G = | Δ table angle / Δ gantry angle | $G = | \Delta {{\mathrm{table\ angle}}/\Delta {\mathrm{gantry\ angle}}} |$ ) and maximum absolute change of G ( Δ G m a x ${{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ ). Four DTRT plans are created with different maximum G&∆G: G m a x ${G}_{max}$ & Δ G m a x ${{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ = 0.5&0.125 (DTRT-1), 1&0.125 (DTRT-2), 3&0.125 (DTRT-3) and 3&1(DTRT-4), including 3-4 dynamic trajectories, for three clinically motivated cases in the head and neck and brain region (A, B, and C). A reference VMAT plan for each case is created. For all plans, plan quality is assessed and compared. Dosimetric plan quality is evaluated by target coverage, conformity, and OAR sparing. Dosimetric robustness is evaluated against systematic and random patient-setup uncertainties between ± 3 mm $ \pm 3\ {\mathrm{mm}}$ in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions, and machine uncertainties between ± 4 ∘ $ \pm 4^\circ \ $ in the dynamically rotating machine components (gantry, table, collimator rotation). Delivery time is recorded. Deliverability and delivery accuracy on a TrueBeam are assessed by logfile analysis for all plans and additionally verified by film measurements for one case. All dose calculations are Monte Carlo based.
The extension of the DTRT planning process with user-defined G m a x & Δ G m a x ${G}_{max}\& {{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ to investigate the impact of the GT rotation gradient on plan quality is successfully demonstrated. With increasing G m a x & Δ G m a x ${G}_{max}\& {{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ , slight (case C, D m e a n , p a r o t i d l . ${D}_{mean,\ parotid\ l.}$ : up to-1Gy) and substantial (case A, D 0.03 c m 3 , o p t i c n e r v e r . ${D}_{0.03c{m}^3,\ optic\ nerve\ r.}$ : up to -9.3 Gy, caseB, D m e a n , b r a i n $\ {D}_{mean,\ brain}$ : up to -4.7Gy) improvements in OAR sparing are observed compared to VMAT, while maintaining similar target coverage. All plans are delivered on the TrueBeam. Expected and actual machine position values recorded in the logfiles deviated by <0.2° for gantry, table and collimator rotation. The film measurements agreed by >96% (2%global/2 mm Gamma passing rate) with the dose calculation. With increasing G m a x & Δ G m a x ${G}_{max}\& {{\Delta}}{G}_{max}$ , delivery time is prolonged by <2 min/trajectory (DTRT-4) compared to VMAT and DTRT-1. The DTRT plans for case A and B and the VMAT plan for case C plan reveal the best dosimetric robustness for the considered uncertainties.
The impact of the GT rotation gradient on DTRT plan quality is comprehensively investigated for three cases in the head and neck and brain region. Increasing freedom in this gradient improves dosimetric plan quality at the cost of increased delivery time for the investigated cases. No clear dependency of GT rotation gradient on dosimetric robustness is observed.
Loebner HA
，Mueller S
，Volken W
，Wallimann P
，Aebersold DM
，Stampanoni MFM
，Fix MK
，Manser P
... -
《-》
Part 1: Optimization and evaluation of dynamic trajectory radiotherapy.
Although volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is a well-accepted treatment technique in radiotherapy using a coplanar delivery approach, VMAT might be further improved by including dynamic table and collimator rotations leading to dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT). In this work, an optimization procedure for DTRT was developed and the potential benefit of DTRT was investigated for different treatment sites.
For this purpose, a dedicated optimization framework for DTRT was developed using the Eclipse Scripting Research Application Programming Interface (ESRAPI). The contours of the target and organs at risk (OARs) structures were exported by applying the ESRAPI and were used to determine the fractional volume-overlap of the OARs with the target from several potential beam directions. Thereby, an additional weighting was applied taking into account the relative position of the OAR with respect to the target and radiation beam, that is, penalizing directions where the OAR is proximal to the target. The resulting two-dimensional gantry-table map was used as input for an A* path finding algorithm returning an optimized gantry-table path. Thereby, the process is also taking into account CT scan length and collision restrictions. The A* algorithm was used again to determine the dynamic collimator angle path by optimizing the area between the MLC leaves and the target contour for each gantry-table path leading to gantry-collimator paths. The resulting gantry-table and gantry-collimator paths are combined and serve as input for the intensity modulation optimization using a research VMAT optimizer and the ESRAPI resulting in dynamic trajectories. This procedure was evaluated for five clinically motivated cases: two head and neck, one lung, one esophagus, and one prostate. Final dose calculations were performed using the Swiss Monte Carlo Plan (SMCP). Resulting dose distributions for the DTRT treatment plans and for the standard VMAT plans were compared based on dose distributions and dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters. For this comparison, the dose distribution for the VMAT plans were recalculated using the SMCP. In addition, the suitability of the delivery of a DTRT treatment plan was demonstrated by means of gafchromic film measurements on a TrueBeam linear accelerator.
DVHs for the target volumes showed similar or improved coverage and dose homogeneity for DTRT compared with VMAT using equal or less number of dynamic trajectories for DTRT than arcs for VMAT for all cases studied. Depending on the case, improvements in mean and maximum dose for the DTRT plans were achieved for almost all OARs compared with the VMAT plans. Improvements in DTRT treatment plans for mean and maximum dose compared to VMAT plans were up to 16% and 38% relative to the prescribed dose, respectively. The measured and calculated dose values resulted in a passing rate of more than 99.5% for the two-dimensional gamma analysis using 2% and 2 mm criteria and a threshold of 10%.
DTRT plans for different treatment sites were generated and compared with VMAT plans. The delivery is suitable and dose comparisons demonstrate a high potential of DTRT to reduce dose to OARs using less dynamic trajectories than arcs, while target coverage is preserved.
Fix MK
，Frei D
，Volken W
，Terribilini D
，Mueller S
，Elicin O
，Hemmatazad H
，Aebersold DM
，Manser P
... -
《-》
VMAT optimization with dynamic collimator rotation.
Although collimator rotation is an optimization variable that can be exploited for dosimetric advantages, existing Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) optimization uses a fixed collimator angle in each arc and only rotates the collimator between arcs. In this study, we develop a novel integrated optimization method for VMAT, accounting for dynamic collimator angles during the arc motion.
Direct Aperture Optimization (DAO) for Dynamic Collimator in VMAT (DC-VMAT) was achieved by adding to the existing dose fidelity objective an anisotropic total variation term for regulating the fluence smoothness, a binary variable for forming simple apertures, and a group sparsity term for controlling collimator rotation. The optimal collimator angle for each beam angle was selected using the Dijkstra's algorithm, where the node costs depend on the estimated fluence map at the current iteration and the edge costs account for the mechanical constraints of multi-leaf collimator (MLC). An alternating optimization strategy was implemented to solve the DAO and collimator angle selection (CAS). Feasibility of DC-VMAT using one full-arc with dynamic collimator rotation was tested on a phantom with two small spherical targets, a brain, a lung and a prostate cancer patient. The plan was compared against a static collimator VMAT (SC-VMAT) plan using three full arcs with 60 degrees of collimator angle separation in patient studies.
With the same target coverage, DC-VMAT achieved 20.3% reduction of R50 in the phantom study, and reduced the average max and mean OAR dose by 4.49% and 2.53% of the prescription dose in patient studies, as compared with SC-VMAT. The collimator rotation co-ordinated with the gantry rotation in DC-VMAT plans for deliverability. There were 13 beam angles in the single-arc DC-VMAT plan in patient studies that requires slower gantry rotation to accommodate multiple collimator angles.
The novel DC-VMAT approach utilizes the dynamic collimator rotation during arc delivery. In doing so, DC-VMAT affords more sophisticated intensity modulation, alleviating the limitation previously imposed by the square beamlet from the MLC leaf thickness and achieves higher effective modulation resolution. Consequently, DC-VMAT with a single arc manages to achieve superior dosimetry than SC-VMAT with three full arcs.
Lyu Q
，O'Connor D
，Ruan D
，Yu V
，Nguyen D
，Sheng K
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
