PO-1626 Dosimetric comparison: VMAT based CSI in Ring gantry Halcyon and Cantilever linear accelerator

Sarkar, B.; Biswal, Subhra Singhdha; Shahid, T.; Gaži, M.; Bhattacharya, Jayanta; Ghosh, Tanmay; Chowdhury, S. Roy; De, Arundhati; Mitra, Sugata; ANUJA, MISHRA; Mandal, Sanjoy; George, K. P.; Soren, P.; Mukherjee, Monika; Biswas, L.N.; Akhtar, Javeed; Chatterjee, P.; Indira, G.; Sekhar, PC; Samanta, Avik; Raj, R.; Goswami, S.; Paul, A.C.; Sengupta, S.; Bhaskar, R.; Pradhan, A.S.; Manikandan, A.; Appunu, K.

doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(21)08077-4

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After initial internal evaluation of treatment planning and quality assurance tests, the first CSI patient was treated in Halcyon in November 2020. Until August 2022, we have treated 11 CSI patients 18 . VMAT-based CSI treatment plans using Halcyon were clinically acceptable in all dosimetric parameters.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative dosimetric analysis of volumetric modulated arc therapy based craniospinal irradiation plans between Halcyon ring gantry and TrueBeam C-arm linear accelerator

Sarkar¹,

Biswal²,

Shahid³

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluates the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dosimetric comparison between Halcyon ring gantry and TrueBeam c-arm linear accelerators for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) of the neuro-axis. 25 patients, who received treatment for medulloblastoma and primitive neuro-ectodermal tumors between 2018 and 2021, were planned for VMAT in True Beam (TB), and Halcyon (HAL) linear accelerators using 6 MV unflattened (FFF) photon beams (HALFFF and TBFFF). Dose-volume statistics for the target and organs at risk (OARs) and the total number of monitoring units (MUs) in the treatment plans were compared which included dose received by 95% PTV volume (V95%), volume receiving ≥ 107% dose, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (PI), MU and dose spillage (D10%, D30%, D50%, D70%, D90%). In all 26 OARs were considered of which five were serial and the remaining were parallel structures. For the former, the dose received by 0.2 cm3, volume = D0.2 cm3) were evaluated and for the latter mean dose were evaluated. Both arms were statistically compared with paired sample t-test with a significant value of ≤ 0.05. 11 patients received treatment with the Halcyon and the rest 14 in the TrueBeam C-arm linear accelerator. Patients in the low- and intermediate-risk category (n = 13) received 23.4 Gy in 13 fractions. The remaining patients were in the high-risk category and received 35 Gy in 21 fractions or 36 Gy in 20 fractions. For HALFFF and TBFFF, PTVV95% were 97.5 ± 0.8% and 97.4 ± 0.9% respectively (p = 0.371) while the V107% were 0.6 ± 0.4% and 0.5 ± 0.5 respectively (p = 0.504). However, the number of monitoring units showed statistical significance (p < 0.001) with values of 1331.9 ± 243.4 MU and 1089 ± 206.7 MU respectively for the HAL and TB plans. The differences in spillage dose were also statistically significant, favouring HAL plans at D30% (p = 0.002), D50% (p < 0.001), D70% (p = 0.039), and D90% (p = 0.01) level except for D10% (p = 0.090). Conformity index also showed statistical significance with PI_HAL = 0.9 ± 0.02 and PI_TB = 0.89 ± 0.03 (p = 0.029). For 10 of the 21 parallel structures, the mean dose differences were statistically significant in favouring of HAL plans. Halcyon based VMAT CSI plans are dosimetrically superior in terms of organ dose, especially for the large organs, and offer lower spillage doses than the TrueBeam plans. Plans generated by both linear accelerators are suitable for the patients’ treatments.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%