Premium
SU‐F‐T‐649: Dosimetric Evaluation of Non‐Coplanar Arc Therapy Using a Novel Rotating Gamma Ray System
Author(s) -
Eldib A,
Chibani O,
Mora G,
Jin L,
Fan J,
Li J,
Veltchev I,
Ma C
Publication year - 2016
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 - 10.1118/1.4956834
Subject(s) - isocenter , imaging phantom , cyberknife , nuclear medicine , physics , optics , collimator , dosimetry , sagittal plane , ionization chamber , radiation treatment planning , radiosurgery , monte carlo method , radiation therapy , medicine , mathematics , radiology , ionization , ion , statistics , quantum mechanics
Purpose: Stereotactic intra and extra‐cranial body radiation therapy has evolved with advances in treatment accuracy, effective radiation dose, and parameters necessary to maximize machine capabilities. Novel gamma systems with a ring type gantry were developed having the ability to perform oblique arcs. The aim of this study is to explore the dosimetric advantages of this new system. Methods: The rotating Gamma system is named CybeRay (Cyber Medical Corp., Xian, China). It has a treatment head of 16 cobalt‐60 sources focused to the isocenter, which can rotate 360° on the ring gantry and swing 35° in the superior direction. Treatment plans were generated utilizing our in‐house Monte Carlo treatment planning system. A cylindrical phantom was modeled with 2mm voxel size. Dose inside the cylindrical phantom was calculated for coplanar and non‐coplanar arcs. Dosimetric differences between CybeRay cobalt beams and CyberKnife 6MV beams were compared in a lung phantom and for previously treated SBRT patients. Results: The full width at half maxima of cross profiles in the S‐I direction for the coplanar setup matched the cone sizes, while for the non‐coplanar setup, FWHM was larger by 2mm for a 10mm cone and about 5mm for larger cones. In the coronal and sagittal view, coplanar beams showed elliptical shaped isodose lines, while non‐coplanar beams showed circular isodose lines. Thus proper selection of the oblique angle and cone size can aid optimal dose matching to the target volume. Comparing a single 5mm cone from CybeRay to that from CyberKnife showed similar penumbra in a lung phantom but CybeRay had significant lower doses beyond lung tissues. Comparable treatment plans were obtained with CybeRay as that from CyberKnife.ConclusionThe noncoplanar multiple source arrangement of CybeRay will be of great clinical benefits for stereotactic intra and extra‐cranial radiation therapy.