Zhu, Ronald X.

Background/Objectives: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for skull base reirradiation is particularly challenging, as patients have already received substantial radiation doses to the region, and nearby normal organs may have approached their tolerance limit from prior treatments. In this study, we reviewed the characteristics and capabilities of four advanced external beam radiation delivery systems and four modern treatment planning systems and evaluated the treatment plan quality of each technique using skull base reirradiation patient cases. Methods: SBRT plans were generated for sixteen skull base reirradiation patients using four modalities: the GK plan for the Elekta Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion/ICON, the CyberKnife (CK) plan for the Accuray CyberKnife, the intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plan for the Hitachi ProBeat-FR proton therapy machine, and the volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan for the Varian TrueBeam STx. These plans were evaluated and compared using two novel gradient indices in addition to traditional dosimetry metrics for targets and organs at risk (OARs). The steepest border gradient quantified the percent prescription dose fall-off per millimeter at the boundary between the target and adjacent critical structures. This gradient index highlighted the system’s ability to spare nearby critical OARs. The volume gradient assessed the extent of dose spread outside the target toward the patient’s body. Results: All plans achieved comparable target coverage and conformity, while IMPT and VMAT demonstrated significantly better uniformity. The GK plans exhibited the highest border gradient, up to 20.9%/mm, followed by small-spot-size IMPT plans and CK plans. Additionally, IMPT plans showed the benefit of reduced dose spread in low-dose regions and the lowest maximum and mean doses to the brainstem and carotid artery. Conclusions: The advanced external beam radiotherapy modalities evaluated in this study are well-suited for SBRT in skull base reirradiation, which demands precise targeting of tumors with highly conformal doses and steep dose gradients to protect nearby normal structures.

The objective of this study was to evaluate and understand the systematic error between the planned three‐dimensional (3D) dose and the delivered dose to patient in scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors. Single‐field and multifield optimized scanning beam proton therapy plans were generated for ten patients with stage II‐III lung cancer with a mix of tumor motion and size. 3D doses in CT datasets for different respiratory phases and the time‐weighted average CT, as well as the four‐dimensional (4D) doses were computed for both plans. The 3D and 4D dose differences for the targets and different organs at risk were compared using dose‐volume histogram (DVH) and voxel‐based techniques, and correlated with the extent of tumor motion. The gross tumor volume (GTV) dose was maintained in all 3D and 4D doses, using the internal GTV override technique. The DVH and voxel‐based techniques are highly correlated. The mean dose error and the standard deviation of dose error for all target volumes were both less than 1.5% for all but one patient. However, the point dose difference between the 3D and 4D doses was up to 6% for the GTV and greater than 10% for the clinical and planning target volumes. Changes in the 4D and 3D doses were not correlated with tumor motion. The planning technique (single‐field or multifield optimized) did not affect the observed systematic error. In conclusion, the dose error in 3D dose calculation varies from patient to patient and does not correlate with lung tumor motion. Therefore, patient‐specific evaluation of the 4D dose is important for scanning beam proton therapy for lung tumors.PACS number: 87.55.D