Dosimetric evaluation of four-dimensional dose distributions of CyberKnife and volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy in stereotactic body lung radiotherapy

Mark Ka Heng Chan*, Dora L W Kwong, Gilbert M L Law, Eric Tam, Anthony Tong, Venus Lee, Sherry C Y Ng

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

33 Citations (Scopus)
13 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Advanced image-guided stereotatic body lung radiotherapy techniques using volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) with four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography (4D CBCT) and CyberKnife with real-time target tracking have been clinically implemented by different authors. However, dosimetric comparisons between these techniques are lacking. In this study, 4D CT scans of 14 patients were used to create VMAT and CyberKnife treatment plans using 4D dose calculations. The GTV and the organs at risk (OARs) were defined on the end-exhale images for CyberKnife planning and were then deformed to the midventilation images (MidV) for VMAT optimization. Direct 4D Monte Carlo dose optimizations were performed for CyberKnife (4D(CK)). Four-dimensional dose calculations were also applied to VMAT plans to generate the 4D dose distributions (4D(VMAT)) on the exhale images for direct comparisons with the 4D(CK) plans. 4D(CK) and 4D(VMAT) showed comparable target conformity (1.31 ± 0.13 vs. 1.39 ± 0.24, p = 0.05). GTV mean doses were significantly higher with 4D(CK). Statistical differences of dose volume metrics were not observed in the majority of OARs studied, except for esophagus, with 4D(VMAT) yielding marginally higher D1% than 4D(CK). The normal tissue volumes receiving 80%, 50%, and 30% of the prescription dose (V80%, V50%, and V30%) were higher with 4D(VMAT), whereas 4D(CK) yielded slightly higher V10% in posterior lesions than 4D(VMAT). VMAT resulted in much less monitor units and therefore greater delivery efficiency than CyberKnife. In general, it was possible to produce dosimetrically acceptable plans with both techniques. The selection of treatment modality should consider the dosimetric results as well as the patient's tolerance of the treatment process specific to the SBRT technique.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)136-149
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of applied clinical medical physics
Volume14
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 8-Jul-2013
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/diagnostic imaging
  • Computer Systems
  • Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography
  • Humans
  • Lung Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
  • Organs at Risk
  • Radiosurgery
  • Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/statistics & numerical data
  • Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated

Cite this