Encrypted login | home

Program Information

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) Beam Angle Optimization in Pulsed Partial Brain Irradiation (PPBI) for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma

no image available
J Zhou

J Zhou1*, Y Wang2 , X Ding3 , J Liang4 , D Yan5 , B Marples6 , J Dilworth7 , (1) William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI, (2) University of Wisconsin - La Crosse, Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan, (3) Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, MI, (4) Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, MI, (5) Beaumont Health Systeml, Royal Oak, Michigan, (6) Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan, (7) Beaumont Health System, Royal Oak, Michigan


SU-F-T-382 (Sunday, July 31, 2016) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall

Purpose: To optimize VMAT beam parameters in PPBI to minimize treatment time. We investigate the coverage and organs at risk (OR) avoidance capability of shorter arcs with shorter treatment times.

Methods: We evaluated the treatment plans for eleven previously treated PPBI patients. Each patient received 46Gy (2Gyx23) to the initial target and an additional 14Gy (2Gyx7) as a sequential boost. Each daily 2-Gy fraction was delivered as ten 0.2-Gy pulses separated by 3-minute intervals using VMAT. Each pulse was delivered using the same arc and covered at least 95% of the PTV with at least 95% of the prescription dose. To optimize the VMAT beam angle, an initial 360° full-arc VMAT plan was implemented. Beam control points and their corresponding dose rates were exported. A curve of the product of control point and dose rate was plotted against treatment beam angle. The optimum angle range was determined from this relationship. We chose the minimum continuous angle range that covered 85% of the area under the curve. Planning parameters, including treatment time for each pulse (T-pulse), PTV coverage, maximum dose (Dmax), homogeneity index (HI=D5/D95), R50 (50%IDL/PTV), and Dmax to ORs, were compared.

Results: Mean PTV volume was 364.1±181.5cc. Mean T-pulse of partial-arc beams was 34.3±10.6s, vs. 63.0±1.7s (p<0.001) for that of full-arc beams. No significant differences were found for PTV V95, Dmax and R50, 99.4%±1.2% vs. 99.7%±0.5% (p=0.066), 108.0%±1.2% vs. 107.5%±1.1% (p=0.107), 2.95±0.38 vs. 2.87±0.35 (p=0.165), for the plans with partial-arc and full-arc beams, respectively. However, plans using full-arc do provide better PTV V100 and HI, 96.0%±3.0% vs. 97.2%±2.0% (p=0.025) and 1.06±0.03 vs. 1.04±0.01 (p=0.009). No significant difference was found on Dmax to ORs.

Conclusion: PPBI with optimized partial-arc plans are clinically comparable to full-arc plans, while treatment time be significantly reduced, average saving of 287s for a 10-pulse treatment.

Contact Email: