Converting Treatment Plans From Helical Tomotherapy to L-Shape Linac: Clinical Workflow and Dosimetric Evaluation

This work evaluated a commercial fallback planning workflow designed to provide cross-platform treatment planning and delivery. A total of 27 helical tomotherapy intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans covering 4 anatomical sites were selected, including 7 brain, 5 unilateral head and neck, 5 bilateral head and neck, 5 pelvis, and 5 prostate cases. All helical tomotherapy plans were converted to 7-field/9-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated radiotherapy plans through fallback dose-mimicking algorithm using a 6-MV beam model. The planning target volume (PTV) coverage (D 1, D 99, and homogeneity index) and organs at risk dose constraints were evaluated and compared. Overall, all 3 techniques resulted in relatively inferior target dose coverage compared to helical tomotherapy plans, with higher homogeneity index and maximum dose. The organs at risk dose ratio of fallback to helical tomotherapy plans covered a wide spectrum, from 0.87 to 1.11 on average for all sites, with fallback plans being superior for brain, pelvis, and prostate sites. The quality of fallback plans depends on the delivery technique, field numbers, and angles, as well as user selection of structures for organs at risk. In actual clinical scenario, fallback plans would typically be needed for 1 to 5 fractions of a treatment course in the event of machine breakdown. Our results suggested that <1% dose variance can be introduced in target coverage and/or organs at risk from fallback plans. The presented clinical workflow showed that the fallback plan generation typically takes 10 to 20 minutes per case. Fallback planning provides an expeditious and effective strategy for transferring patients cross platforms, and minimizing the untold risk of a patient missing treatment(s).

[1]  J. Langendijk,et al.  Postoperative strategies after primary surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. , 2010, Oral oncology.

[2]  Mingli Chen,et al.  Dynamic tomotherapy delivery. , 2011, Medical Physics (Lancaster).

[3]  L. Dawson,et al.  Quality of life after parotid-sparing IMRT for head-and-neck cancer: a prospective longitudinal study. , 2003, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  Jan J W Lagendijk,et al.  Comparing step-and-shoot IMRT with dynamic helical tomotherapy IMRT plans for head-and-neck cancer. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  Suresh Senan,et al.  Volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy vs. conventional IMRT in head-and-neck cancer: a comparative planning and dosimetric study. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  J. Debus,et al.  Lung and liver SBRT using helical tomotherapy — a dosimetric comparison of fixed jaw and dynamic jaw delivery , 2014, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[7]  T. Rockwell Mackie,et al.  Helical Tomotherapy: An Innovative Technology and Approach to Radiation Therapy , 2002, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[8]  J. Welsh,et al.  Dosimetric and clinical review of helical tomotherapy , 2011, Expert review of anticancer therapy.

[9]  W. Lu,et al.  Helical tomotherapy with dynamic running-start-stop delivery compared to conventional tomotherapy delivery. , 2014, Medical physics.

[10]  C C Ling,et al.  Clinical experience with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in prostate cancer. , 2000, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[11]  S. Morrill,et al.  Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning , 2017, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[12]  J O Deasy,et al.  Tomotherapy: a new concept for the delivery of dynamic conformal radiotherapy. , 1993, Medical physics.

[13]  Cedric X. Yu,et al.  Helical tomotherapy versus single-arc intensity-modulated arc therapy: a collaborative dosimetric comparison between two institutions. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  J. M. Taylor,et al.  The hazard of accelerated tumor clonogen repopulation during radiotherapy. , 1988, Acta oncologica.

[15]  Quan Chen,et al.  Dosimetric Evaluation of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, and Helical Tomotherapy for Hippocampal-Avoidance Whole Brain Radiotherapy , 2015, PloS one.

[16]  Lisa Barbera,et al.  Does delay in starting treatment affect the outcomes of radiotherapy? A systematic review. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.