Helical tomotherapy with dynamic running-start-stop delivery compared to conventional tomotherapy delivery.

PURPOSE Despite superior target dose uniformity, helical tomotherapy(®) (HT) may involve a trade-off between longitudinal dose conformity and beam-on time (BOT), due to the limitation of only three available jaw sizes with the conventional HT (1.0, 2.5, and 5.0 cm). The recently introduced dynamic running-start-stop (RSS) delivery allows smaller jaw opening at the superior and inferior ends of the target when a sharp penumbra is needed. This study compared the dosimetric performance of RSS delivery with the fixed jaw HT delivery. METHODS Twenty patient cases were selected and deidentified prior to treatment planning, including 16 common clinical cases (brain, head and neck (HN), lung, and prostate) and four special cases of whole brain with hippocampus avoidance (WBHA) that require a high degree of dose modulation. HT plans were generated for common clinical cases using the fixed 2.5 cm jaw width (HT2.5) and WBHA cases using 1.0 cm (HT1.0). The jaw widths for RSS were preset with a larger size (RSS5.0 vs HT2.5 and RSS2.5 vs HT1.0). Both delivery techniques were planned based on identical contours, prescriptions, and planning objectives. Dose indices for targets and critical organs were compared using dose-volume histograms, BOT, and monitor units. RESULTS The average BOT was reduced from 4.8 min with HT2.5 to 2.5 min with RSS5.0. Target dose homogeneity with RSS5.0 was shown comparable to HT2.5 for common clinical sites. Superior normal tissue sparing was observed in RSS5.0 for optic nerves and optic chiasm in brain and HN cases. RSS5.0 demonstrated improved dose sparing for cord and esophagus in lung cases, as well as penile bulb in prostate cases. The mean body dose was comparable for both techniques. For the WBHA cases, the target homogeneity was significantly degraded in RSS2.5 without distinct dose sparing for hippocampus, compared to HT1.0. CONCLUSIONS Compared to the fixed jaw HT delivery, RSS combined with a larger jaw width provides faster treatment delivery and improved cranial-caudal target dose conformity. The target coverage achieved by RSS with a large jaw width is comparable to the fixed jaw HT delivery for common cancer sites, but may deteriorate for cases where complex geometry is present in the middle part of the target.

[1]  J. Debus,et al.  Tomotherapy Radiosurgery for Arteriovenous Malformations — Current Possibilities and Future Options with Helical Tomotherapy Dynamic Jaws? , 2013, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[2]  B G Clark,et al.  Monte Carlo calculation of VMAT and helical tomotherapy dose distributions for lung stereotactic treatments with intra-fraction motion , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  Thomas Lacornerie,et al.  A dosimetric comparison of tomotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy in the treatment of high-risk prostate cancer with pelvic nodal radiation therapy. , 2013, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  K. Herfarth,et al.  Accelerated large volume irradiation with dynamic Jaw/Dynamic Couch Helical Tomotherapy , 2012, Radiation Oncology.

[5]  Jeff Z. Y. Chen,et al.  Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy, RapidArc, and a novel IMRT & Arc technique for esophageal carcinoma. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[6]  Y Chen,et al.  Monte Carlo-based simulation of dynamic jaws tomotherapy. , 2011, Medical physics.

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

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

[9]  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.

[10]  Ke Sheng,et al.  Comparison of Elekta VMAT with helical tomotherapy and fixed field IMRT: plan quality, delivery efficiency and accuracy. , 2010, Medical physics.

[11]  Weiguo Lu,et al.  Dynamic jaws and dynamic couch in helical tomotherapy. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  Y. Rong,et al.  Hypofractionated Breast and Chest Wall Irradiation Using Simultaneous in-field Boost IMRT Delivered via Helical Tomotherapy , 2008, Technology in cancer research & treatment.

[13]  T R Mackie,et al.  History of tomotherapy , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.