<p>This paper presents a clinical comparison of the target dose, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), and plan quality between volumetric modulated conformal arc therapy (VMAT) against dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) techniques to facilitate clinical decision-making in multiple brain metastases (MBM) treatment. A total of 11 cases having 33 lesions were recruited at the Union Oncology Centre, Union Hospital, Hong Kong SAR. With CT images available, all plans were optimized using both HyperArc (HA) and Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Metastases (Elements MBM). Target coverage, normal tissue sparing, and dose distribution were compared pairwise between VMAT and DCAT. Results showed that the plans generated using both techniques achieved adequate target coverage to meet up with the oncologist’s prescription. With similar levels of NTCP, the normal brain received low doses of radiation using both techniques and the risk of brain necrosis was kept equally low. This indicated that VMAT and DCAT produced similar high-quality treatment plans with low risks of brain necrosis. Meanwhile, VMAT showed better homogeneity which could potentially be more useful for large targets, while DCAT showed better target conformity especially for targets smaller than 1&#xa0;cc. In general, both HA and Elements MBM demonstrated ability to generate high-quality clinical plans.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Dosimetric and radiobiological evaluation of stereotactic radiosurgery using volumetric modulated arc therapy and dynamic conformal arc therapy for multiple brain metastases

  • Chen-Jun Jiang,
  • Yick-Wing Ho,
  • Ka-Hei Lok,
  • Yeow-Yuen Lu,
  • Chun-Ran Zhu,
  • Harry Chi-Yuen Cheng

摘要

This paper presents a clinical comparison of the target dose, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), and plan quality between volumetric modulated conformal arc therapy (VMAT) against dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) techniques to facilitate clinical decision-making in multiple brain metastases (MBM) treatment. A total of 11 cases having 33 lesions were recruited at the Union Oncology Centre, Union Hospital, Hong Kong SAR. With CT images available, all plans were optimized using both HyperArc (HA) and Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Metastases (Elements MBM). Target coverage, normal tissue sparing, and dose distribution were compared pairwise between VMAT and DCAT. Results showed that the plans generated using both techniques achieved adequate target coverage to meet up with the oncologist’s prescription. With similar levels of NTCP, the normal brain received low doses of radiation using both techniques and the risk of brain necrosis was kept equally low. This indicated that VMAT and DCAT produced similar high-quality treatment plans with low risks of brain necrosis. Meanwhile, VMAT showed better homogeneity which could potentially be more useful for large targets, while DCAT showed better target conformity especially for targets smaller than 1 cc. In general, both HA and Elements MBM demonstrated ability to generate high-quality clinical plans.