• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.16 no.8
• /
• pp.3257-3265
• /
• 2015

Background: Radiotherapy is an important treatment of choice for breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery, and we compare the feasibility of using dual arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT2), single arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT1) and Multi-beam Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (M-IMRT) on patients after breast-conserving surgery. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with breast cancer (half right-sided and half left-sided) treated by conservative lumpectomy and requiring whole breast radiotherapy with tumor bed boost were planned with three different radiotherapy techniques: 1) VMAT1; 2) VMAT2; 3) M-IMRT. The distributions for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were compared. Dosimetries for all the techniques were compared. Results: All three techniques satisfied the dose constraint well. VMAT2 showed no obvious difference in the homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI) of the PTV with respect to M-IMRT and VMAT1. VMAT2 clearly improved the treatment efficiency and can also decrease the mean dose and V5Gy of the contralateral lung. The mean dose and maximum dose of the spinal cord and contralateral breast were lower for VMAT2 than the other two techniques. The very low dose distribution (V1Gy) of the contralateral breast also showed great reduction in VMAT2 compared with the other two techniques. For the ipsilateral lung of right-sided breast cancer, the mean dose was decreased significantly in VMAT2 compared with VMAT1 and M-IMRT. The V20Gy and V30Gy of the ipsilateral lung of the left-sided breast cancer for VMAT2 showed obvious reduction compared with the other two techniques. The heart statistics of VMAT2 also decreased considerably compared to VMAT1 and M-IMRT. Conclusions: Compared to the other two techniques, the dual arc volumetric modulated arc therapy technique reduced radiation dose exposure to the organs at risk and maintained a reasonable target dose distribution.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.313-321
• /
• 2016

Purpose: Total scalp irradiation (TSI) is a rare but challenging indication. We previously reported that non-coplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was superior to coplanar IMRT in organ-at-risk (OAR) protection and target dose distribution. This consecutive treatment planning study compared IMRT with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Materials and Methods: A retrospective treatment plan databank search was performed and 5 patient cases were randomly selected. Cranial imaging was restored from the initial planning computed tomography (CT) and target volumes and OAR were redelineated. For each patients, three treatment plans were calculated (coplanar/non-coplanar IMRT, VMAT; prescribed dose 50 Gy, single dose 2 Gy). Conformity, homogeneity and dose volume histograms were used for plan. Results: VMAT featured the lowest monitor units and the sharpest dose gradient (1.6 Gy/mm). Planning target volume (PTV) coverage and homogeneity was better in VMAT (coverage, 0.95; homogeneity index [HI], 0.118) compared to IMRT (coverage, 0.94; HI, 0.119) but coplanar IMRT produced the most conformal plans (conformity index [CI], 0.43). Minimum PTV dose range was 66.8%-88.4% in coplanar, 77.5%-88.2% in non-coplanar IMRT and 82.8%-90.3% in VMAT. Mean dose to the brain, brain stem, optic system (maximum dose) and lenses were 18.6, 13.2, 9.1, and 5.2 Gy for VMAT, 21.9, 13.4, 14.5, and 6.3 Gy for non-coplanar and 22.8, 16.5, 11.5, and 5.9 Gy for coplanar IMRT. Maximum optic chiasm dose was 7.7, 8.4, and 11.1 Gy (non-coplanar IMRT, VMAT, and coplanar IMRT). Conclusion: Target coverage, homogeneity and OAR protection, was slightly superior in VMAT plans which also produced the sharpest dose gradient towards healthy tissue.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.15 no.10
• /
• pp.6187-6192
• /
• 2014

The use of WBRT(whole brain radiation therapy) has increased due to the increase in the incidence of metastatic brain tumors. The development of radiation therapy techniques is expected to improve the quality of life. The VMAT (Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy) is an excellent treatment technique that can distinguish the dose in each volume. Therefore, this study compared conventional WBRT and VMAT for hair loss according to the scalp dose using a head phantom. The CI (Conformity Index), HI (Homogeneity Index) and QOC (Quality of Coverage) were measured brain tissue. A 20 percent and 50 percent dose was measured at the scalp, eyeball, lens, and c-spine. Conventional WBRT is excellent at 10 percent of brain tissue. VMAT is far superior at 1000 percent at the other organs. VMAT at the prescribed dose can be used as radiation therapy of metastatic brain tumors with less hair loss.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.35
• /
• pp.23-31
• /
• 2023

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of Non-Treat Functionality Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy(NTF-VMAT) and Treat Functionality VMAT(TF-VMAT) treatment plans in reducing the low-dose area during radiation therapy for patients with multiple metastatic cancers. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on an Arccheck phantom, treatment planning target locations were set in pairs at intervals of 2 cm, 4 cm, and 6 cm on the X, Y, and Z axes. Based on these location settings, the volume of the low-dose area in NTF-VMAT and TF-VMAT was measured and compared. Results: The results of the study showed that, within a prescription dose range of 10% ~ 70%, the difference in low-dose area volumes across each axis was as follows: On the X-axis, there was a maximum difference of -47.6% and a minimum difference of -2.2%. On the Y-axis, there was a maximum difference of -17.5% and a minimum difference of -7.3%. The Z-axis showed a maximum difference of -39.7%, with the smallest difference being -6.8%. Conclusion: In radiation therapy for patients with multiple metastatic cancers, the TF-VMAT treatment plan was able to reduce the low-dose area by 10-40% compared to NTF-VMAT. This suggests that utilizing Treat Functionality, which includes the Island block technique, improves dose distribution and minimizes side effects, making it beneficial for the treatment of patients with multiple metastatic cancers.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.249-256
• /
• 2024

The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of treatment plans using full Arc and Partial Arc Coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy and Non-Coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy to minimize radiation treatment side effects, such as pneumonia, and protect normal organs in esophageal cancer radiotherapy. 30 patients who underwent Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer were included. Compared planning target volume, lung, heart, spinal cord and total monitor units among three treatment plans: fVMAT(2 Full Arc), pVMAT(4 Partial Arc), and ncVMAT(2 Partial Arc + 2 Non-Coplanar Arc). All plans met the PTV criteria, showing uniform distribution. The average dose to the heart was 5.8 Gy for fVMAT, 6.97 Gy for pVMAT, and 7.6 Gy for ncVMAT, with the lowest value in fVMAT, which was statistically significant. However, the average lung dose was 9.01 Gy for fVMAT, 7.71 Gy for pVMAT, and 7.12 Gy for ncVMAT, with V_5Gy(%) values of 52.22%, 38.61%, 36.35% and V_10Gy(%) values of 37.8%, 27.33%, 24.15% respectively. ncVMAT showed the lowest values, while fVMAT had the highest, with statistical significance. In conclusion, ncVMAT effectively reduces lung radiation exposure in esophageal cancer radiotherapy, potentially reducing the incidence of side effects such as pneumonia. However, considering factors like setup accuracy and treatment time, applying an appropriate treatment plan may lead to better outcomes.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.120-127
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the dosimetric performance of Mobius3D by comparison with an aSi-based electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and Octavius 4D, which are conventionally used for patient-specific prescription dose verification. Methods: The study was conducted using nine patients who were treated by volumetric modulated arc therapy. To evaluate the feasibility of Mobius3D for prescription dose verification, we compared the QA results of Mobius3D to an aSi-based EPID and the Octavius 4D dose verification methods. The first was the comparison of the Mobius3D verification phantom dose, and the second was to gamma index analysis. Results: The percentage differences between the calculated point dose and measurements from a PTW31010 ion chamber were 1.6%±1.3%, 2.0%±0.8%, and 1.2%±1.2%, using collapsed cone convolution, an analytical anisotropic algorithm, and the AcurosXB algorithm respectively. The average difference was found to be 1.6%±0.3%. Additionally, in the case of using the PTW31014 ion chamber, the corresponding results were 2.0%±1.4%, 2.4%±2.1%, and 1.6%±2.5%, showing an average agreement within 2.0%±0.3%. Considering all the criteria, the Mobius3D result showed that the percentage dose difference from the EPID was within 0.46%±0.34% on average, and the percentage dose difference from Octavius 4D was within 3.14%±2.85% on average. Conclusions: We conclude that Mobius3D can be used interchangeably with phantom-based dosimetry systems, which are commonly used as patient-specific prescription dose verification tools, especially under the conditions of 3%/3 mm and 95% pass rate.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.36 no.4
• /
• pp.332-340
• /
• 2018

Purpose: To retrospectively analyze dosimetric parameters of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) delivered to extranodal marginal zone B-cell lymphomas of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue in the stomach (gastric MALT lymphoma) to find out advantages of VMAT and conditions for definite benefits of VMAT. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients with stage I-II gastric MALT lymphoma received VMAT (n = 14) or 3D-CRT (n = 36) between December 2005 and April 2018. Twenty-seven patients were categorized according to whether the planning target volume (PTV) overlaps kidney(s). Dosimetric parameters were analyzed by dose-volume histogram. Results: Radiation dose to the liver was definitely lower with VMAT in terms of mean dose (p = 0.026) and V₁₅ (p = 0.008). The V₁₅ of the left kidney was lower with VMAT (p = 0.065). For those with PTV overlapping kidney(s), the left kidney V₁₅ was significantly lower with VMAT. Furthermore, the closer the distance between the PTV and kidneys, the less the left kidney V₁₅ with VMAT (p = 0.037). Delineation of kidney(s) by integrating all respiratory phases had no additional benefit. Conclusions: VMAT significantly increased monitor units, reduced treatment time and radiation dose to the liver and kidneys. The benefit of VMAT was definite in reducing the left kidney V₁₅, especially in geometrically challenging conditions of overlap or close separation between PTV and kidney(s).

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.61-66
• /
• 2017

The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of portal dosimetry in comparison with the MapCHECK2 measurments. In this study, a total of 65 treatment plans including both volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were retrospectively selected and analyzed (45 VMAT plans and 20 IMRT plans). A total of 4 types of linac models (VitalBeam, Trilogy, Clinac 21EXS, and Clianc iX) were used for the comparison between portal dosimetry and the MapCHECK2 measurements. The VMAT plans were delivered with two VitalBeam linacs (VitalBeam1 and VitalBeam2) and one Trilogy while the IMRT plans were delivered with one Clinac 21EXS and one Clinacl iX. The global gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry and the MapCHECK2 measurements were analyzed with a gamma criterion of 3%/3 mm for IMRT while those were analyzed with a gamma criterion of 2%/2 mm for VMAT. Spearman's correlation coefficients (r) were calculated between the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry and those of the MapCHECK2 measurements. For VMAT, the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry with the VitalBeam1, VitalBeam2, and Trilogy were $97.3%{\pm}3.5%$, $97.1%{\pm}3.4%$, and $97.5%{\pm}1.9%$, respectively. Those of the MapCHECK2 measurements were $96.8%{\pm}2.5%$, $96.3%{\pm}2.7%$, and $97.4%{\pm}1.3%$, respectively. For IMRT, the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry with Clinac 21EXS and Clinac iX were $99.7%{\pm}0.3%$ and $99.8%{\pm}0.2%$, respectively. Those of the MapCHECK2 measurements were $96.5%{\pm}3.3%$ and $97.7%{\pm}3.2%$, respectively. Except for the result with the Trilogy, no correlations were observed between the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry and those of the MapCHECK2 measurements. Therefore, both the MapCHECK2 measurements and portal dosimetry can be used as an alternative to each other for patient-specific QA for both IMRT and VMAT.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.70-81
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study was designed to investigate the dosimetric difference between intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in head and neck cancer (HNC). The study primarily focuses on low-dose spillage evaluation between these two techniques. Methods: This retrospective study involved 45 patients with HNC. The treatment plans were generated using the IMRT and VMAT techniques for all patients. Dosimetric comparisons were performed in terms of target coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, and various parameters, including conformity index, uniformity index, homogeneity index, conformation number, low-dose volumes, and normal tissue integral dose (NTID). Results: No significant (P>0.05) difference in planning target volume coverage (D_95%) was observed between IMRT and VMAT plans for supraglottic larynx, hard palate, and tongue cancers. A decrease in dose volumes ranging from 1 Gy to 30 Gy was observed for VMAT plans compared with those for IMRT plans, except for V_1Gy and V_30Gy for supraglottic larynx cancer and V_1Gy for tongue cancer. Moreover, decreases (P<0.05) in NTID were observed for VMAT plans compared with that for IMRT plans in supraglottic larynx (4.50%), hard palate (12.80%), and tongue (7.76%) cancers. In contrast, a slight increase in monitor units for VMAT compared with those for IMRT in supraglottic larynx (0.46%), hard palate (2.54%), and tongue (7.56%) cancers. Conclusions: For advanced-stage HNC, both IMRT and VMAT offer satisfactory clinical plans. VMAT offers a conformal and homogeneous dose distribution with comparable OAR sparing and higher dose falloff outside the target volume than IMRT, which provides an edge to reduce the risk of secondary malignancies for HNC over IMRT.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.30 no.1_2
• /
• pp.9-16
• /
• 2018

Purpose : Brain Stereotactic Radiosurgery can treat non-invasive diseases with high rates of complications due to surgical operations. However, brain stereotactic radiosurgery may be accompanied by radiation induced side effects such as fractionation radiation therapy because it uses radiation. The effects of Coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy(C-VMAT) and Non-Coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy(NC-VMAT) on surrounding normal tissues were analyzed in order to reduce the side effects caused fractionation radiation therapy such as head and neck. But, brain stereotactic radiosurgery these contents were not analyzed. In this study, we evaluated the usefulness of NC-VMAT by comparing and analyzing C-VMAT and NC-VMAT in patients who underwent brain stereotactic radiosurgery. Methods and materials : With C-VMAT and NC-VMAT, 13 treatment plans for brain stereotactic radiosurgery were established. The Planning Target Volume ranged from a minimum of 0.78 cc to a maximum of 12.26 cc, Prescription doses were prescribed between 15 and 24 Gy. Treatment machine was TrueBeam STx (Varian Medical Systems, USA). The energy used in the treatment plan was 6 MV Flattening Filter Free (6FFF) X-ray. The C-VMAT treatment plan used a half 2 arc or full 2 arc treatment plan, and the NC-VMAT treatment plan used 3 to 7 Arc 40 to 190 degrees. The angle of the couch was planned to be 3-7 angles. Results : The mean value of the maximum dose was $105.1{\pm}1.37%$ in C-VMAT and $105.8{\pm}1.71%$ in NC-VMAT. Conformity index of C-VMAT was $1.08{\pm}0.08$ and homogeneity index was $1.03{\pm}0.01$. Conformity index of NC-VMAT was $1.17{\pm}0.1$ and homogeneity index was $1.04{\pm}0.01$. $V_2$, $V_8$, $V_{12}$, $V_{18}$, $V_{24}$ of the brain were $176{\pm}149.36cc$, $31.50{\pm}25.03cc$, $16.53{\pm}12.63cc$, $8.60{\pm}6.87cc$ and $4.03{\pm}3.43cc$ in the C-VMAT and $135.55{\pm}115.93cc$, $24.34{\pm}17.68cc$, $14.74{\pm}10.97cc$, $8.55{\pm}6.79cc$, $4.23{\pm}3.48cc$. Conclusions : The maximum dose, conformity index, and homogeneity index showed no significant difference between C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. $V_2$ to $V_{18}$ of the brain showed a difference of at least 0.5 % to 48 %. $V_{19}$ to $V_{24}$ of the brain showed a difference of at least 0.4 % to 4.8 %. When we compare the mean value of $V_{12}$ that Radione-crosis begins to generate, NC-VMAT has about 12.2 % less amount than C-VMAT. These results suggest that if NC-VMAT is used, the volume of $V_2$ to $V_{18}$ can be reduced, which can reduce Radionecrosis.