Impact of Multi-leaf Collimator Parameters on Head and Neck Plan Quality and Delivery: A Comparison between Halcyon™ and Truebeam® Treatment Delivery Systems원문보기
Li, Taoran
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Scheuermann, Ryan
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Lin, Alexander
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Teo, Boon-Keng Kevin
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Zou, Wei
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Swisher-McClure, Samuel
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Alonso-Basanta, Michelle
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Lukens, John N
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Fotouhi Ghiam, Alireza
(Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA)
,
Kennedy, Chris
(D)
,
Kim, Michele M
,
Mihailidis, Dimitris
,
Metz, James M
,
Dong, Lei
PurposeA new dual-layer multi-leaf collimator (MLC) system with several improved characteristics was introduced with the Varian Halcyon™ treatment platform. This study evaluated this new MLC’s impact on head and neck plan quality and delivery efficiency.MethodsNine patients were retrospectively stud...
PurposeA new dual-layer multi-leaf collimator (MLC) system with several improved characteristics was introduced with the Varian Halcyon™ treatment platform. This study evaluated this new MLC’s impact on head and neck plan quality and delivery efficiency.MethodsNine patients were retrospectively studied with Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. To compare plan quality between the Halcyon dual-layer MLC and Truebeam® MLC, all patients were replanned with the same prescription and target coverage following the institutional clinical protocol for both platforms and using both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetrically modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Organs-at-risk (OAR) dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics were compared along with total plan monitor units (MU). To evaluate delivery efficiency, actual beam-on time for five patients’ plans were recorded and compared. To evaluate the impact of MLC performance parameters on plan quality, virtual MLC models were generated by matching Truebeam MLC’s parameters to those of the Halcyon dual-layer MLC both individually and combined. OAR doses were then compared between these virtual MLCs, the Truebeam MLC, and the actual Halcyon MLC.ResultsOverall the Halcyon dual-layer MLC provided similar plan quality compared to Truebeam MLC for VMAT plans, and improved sparing for majority of the OARs when using IMRT. Paired comparison showed median dose differences in mean doses to the parotids, cochlea, esophagus, and larynx ranged from -0.83 Gy to 0.37 Gy for VMAT, and from -4.79 Gy to -0.04 Gy for IMRT, with negative values indicating improved performance by Halcyon. Despite a slight increase in plan MU, the Halcyon reduced the total beam-on time by 42.8 ± 8.5%. Virtual MLC simulations demonstrated that matching MLC transmission accounted for nearly half of the total dose difference between Halcyon and Truebeam IMRT plans.ConclusionWhen compared to the Truebeam, the Halcyon’s dual-layer MLC achieved similar plan quality using VMAT, and improved OAR sparing using IMRT, while providing nearly twice as fast treatment delivery. Reduction in MLC transmission is the dominating factor contributing to dosimetric differences in OAR sparing.
PurposeA new dual-layer multi-leaf collimator (MLC) system with several improved characteristics was introduced with the Varian Halcyon™ treatment platform. This study evaluated this new MLC’s impact on head and neck plan quality and delivery efficiency.MethodsNine patients were retrospectively studied with Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. To compare plan quality between the Halcyon dual-layer MLC and Truebeam® MLC, all patients were replanned with the same prescription and target coverage following the institutional clinical protocol for both platforms and using both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetrically modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Organs-at-risk (OAR) dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics were compared along with total plan monitor units (MU). To evaluate delivery efficiency, actual beam-on time for five patients’ plans were recorded and compared. To evaluate the impact of MLC performance parameters on plan quality, virtual MLC models were generated by matching Truebeam MLC’s parameters to those of the Halcyon dual-layer MLC both individually and combined. OAR doses were then compared between these virtual MLCs, the Truebeam MLC, and the actual Halcyon MLC.ResultsOverall the Halcyon dual-layer MLC provided similar plan quality compared to Truebeam MLC for VMAT plans, and improved sparing for majority of the OARs when using IMRT. Paired comparison showed median dose differences in mean doses to the parotids, cochlea, esophagus, and larynx ranged from -0.83 Gy to 0.37 Gy for VMAT, and from -4.79 Gy to -0.04 Gy for IMRT, with negative values indicating improved performance by Halcyon. Despite a slight increase in plan MU, the Halcyon reduced the total beam-on time by 42.8 ± 8.5%. Virtual MLC simulations demonstrated that matching MLC transmission accounted for nearly half of the total dose difference between Halcyon and Truebeam IMRT plans.ConclusionWhen compared to the Truebeam, the Halcyon’s dual-layer MLC achieved similar plan quality using VMAT, and improved OAR sparing using IMRT, while providing nearly twice as fast treatment delivery. Reduction in MLC transmission is the dominating factor contributing to dosimetric differences in OAR sparing.
1 Effect of MLC leaf width on the planning and delivery of SMLC IMRT using the CORVUS inverse treatment planning system Med Phys Burmeister J McDermott PN Bossenberger T Ben‐Josef E Levin K Forman JD 3187 3193 31 2004 15651601
2 Impact of collimator leaf width and treatment technique on stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy plans for intra- and extracranial lesions Radiat Oncol Wu QJ Wang Z Kirkpatrick JP 3 4 2009 19159471
3 Effect of multileaf collimator leaf width on physical dose distributions in the treatment of CNS and head and neck neoplasms with intensity modulated radiation therapy Med Phys Fiveash JB Murshed H Duan J Hyatt M Caranto J Bonner JA Popple RA 1116 1119 29 2002 12094981
4 MLC leaf width impact on the clinical dose distribution: a Monte Carlo approach Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Leal A Sánchez-Doblado F Arráns R Capote R Lagares JI Pavón EC Roselló J 1548 1559 59 2004 15275743
5 Intensity modulated radiation therapy with multileaf collimators of different leaf widths: a comparison of achievable dose distributions Radiother Oncol Nill S Tücking T Münter MW Oelfke U 106 111 75 2005 15878108
6 Dosimetric advantage and clinical implication of a micro-multileaf collimator in the treatment of prostate with intensity-modulated radiotherapy Med Dosim Wang L Hoban P Paskalev K 97 103 30 2005 15922176
7 Stereotactic IMRT for prostate cancer: dosimetric impact of multileaf collimator leaf width in the treatment of prostate cancer with IMRT J Appl Clin Med Phys Wang L Movsas B Jacob R 29 41 5 2004 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15738911
8 Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for mesothelioma: impact of multileaf collimator leaf width and pencil beam size on planning quality and delivery efficiency Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Zhu XR Prado K Liu HH 1525 1534 62 2005 16029815
9 Influence of the linac design on intensity-modulated radiotherapy of head-and-neck plans Phys Med Biol Topolnjak R van der Heide UA Meijer GJ van Asselen B Raaijmakers CPJ Lagendijk JJW 169 182 52 2007 17183134
10 Volumetric modulated arc therapy of head-and-neck cancer on a fast-rotating O-ring linac: plan quality and delivery time comparison with a C-arm linac Radiother Oncol Michiels S Poels K Crijns W 479 484 128 2018 29739713
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.