Premium
SU‐E‐T‐812: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy‐Total Body Irradiation (VMAT‐TBI) V.s. Conventional Extended SSD‐TBI (cTBI): A Dosimetric Comparisom
Author(s) -
Ouyang L,
Folkerts M,
Lee H,
Ramirez E,
Timmerman R,
Abdulrahman R,
Jiang S,
Gu X
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4925176
Subject(s) - isocenter , total body irradiation , nuclear medicine , medicine , radiation treatment planning , dosimetry , torso , radiation therapy , imaging phantom , radiology , surgery , chemotherapy , anatomy , cyclophosphamide
Purpose: To perform a dosimetric evaluation on a new developed volumetric modulated arc therapy based total body irradiation (VMAT‐TBI). Methods: Three patients were CT scanned with an indexed rotatable body frame to get whole body CT images. Concatenated CT images were imported in Pinnacle treatment planning system and whole body and lung were contoured as PTV and organ at risk, respectively. Treatment plans were generated by matching multiple isocenter volumetric modulated arc (VMAT) fields of the upper body and multiple isocenter parallel‐opposed fields of the lower body. For each plan, 1200 cGy in 8 fractions was prescribed to the whole body volume and the lung dose was constrained to a mean dose of 750 cGy. Such a two‐level dose plan was achieved by inverse planning of the torso VMAT fields. For comparison, conventional standing TBI (cTBI) plans were generated on the same whole body CT images at an extended SSD (550cm).The shape of compensators and lung blocks are simulated using body segments and lung contours Compensation was calculated based on the patient CT images, in mimic of the standing TBI treatment. The whole body dose distribution of cTBI plans were calculated with a home‐developed GPU Monte Carlo dose engine. Calculated cTBI dose distribution was prescribed to the mid‐body point at umbilical level. Results: The VMAT‐TBI treatment plans of three patients’ plans achieved 80.2%±5.0% coverage of the total body volume within ±10% of the prescription dose, while cTBI treatment plans achieved 72.2%±4.0% coverage of the total body volume. The averaged mean lung dose of all three patients is lower for VMAT‐TBI (7.48 cGy) than for cTBI (8.96 cGy). Conclusion: The proposed patient comfort‐oriented VMAT‐TBI technique provides for a uniform dose distribution within the total body while reducing the dose to the lungs.