Program Information

Alternative VMAT Technique Reduces Total Monitor Units for Lung SBRT

L Happersett

L Happersett*, J Mechalakos , L Kuo , P Zhang , A Rimner , Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY

Presentations

SU-E-T-31 Sunday 3:00PM - 6:00PM Room: Exhibit Hall

Purpose:
To investigate an alternative approach to VMAT optimization for hypofractionation lung treatment which increases average aperture opening and results in lower total Monitor Units (MU) without significantly sacrificing plan quality.

Methods:
Benchmark Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (bVMAT) plans were generated for 10 lung Stereotactic Body radiotherapy (SBRT) cases using Eclipse Version 11.0.42 (Varian Medical Systems) without a maximum MU constraint. Prescriptions ranged from 40 to 54Gy in 3 to 5 fractions. AAA dose calculation and PRO fluence based optimization was utilized. Two comparison VMAT plans were generated for each case, one that forced an initial “open” mlc aperture conformal to the tumor as a starting condition (oVMAT) with similar optimization parameters and arc geometries, and one that repeated the bVMAT optimization but added a maximum MU constraint (muVMAT). All plans used two arcs with lengths between 168 to 230 degrees. PTV D 95% and Dmean, lung V20 Gy, chest wall V30 Gy, average aperture opening and MU’s were compared. Statistical significance was evaluated using Wilcoxon signed rank test.

Results:
Average PTV D(95), PTV mean and lung V20Gy over all plans was 99.2 ± 1.7%, 103.3 ± 0.6% and 7.8 ± 2.4% respectively. The average chest wall V30Gy was 61 ± 61 cc and ranged between 0 to 166 cc . There were no significant differences between the three techniques for the dosimetric quantities. MUs were reduced by 11 ±11% (p<0.01) and 25 ± 5% (p<0.01) and the average aperture size was increased by 13.7 ± 14% (p=0.02) and 35.8 ± 10% (p<0.01) with muVMAT and oVMAT, respectively, compared to bVMAT.

Conclusion:
oVMAT and muVMAT techniques were both able to increase average aperture size and reduce total MU compared to the benchmark VMAT plan, but the magnitude of the changes observed for oVMAT was larger.


Contact Email: