Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) for patients with intracranial tumours are delivered using a dedicated platform or a conventional linear accelerator with a flattening filter-free beam.

This study compares treatment plans with intracranial tumours. A total of 29 patients were treated on CyberKnife and planned using the Accuray Precision. The same structure sets ws then exported to Varian Eclipse, and plans were made using a 6 MV FFF beam. Both plans were compared for parameters of target coverage, homogeneity index (HI), new conformity index (nCI), gradient index, selectivity index (SI), volumetric and OAR doses.

The treatment plans made for CyberKnife exhibit better results in terms of nCI (1·168 ± 0·08 versus 1·173 ± 0·077), SI (0·885 ± 0·05 versus 0·877 ± 0·05) and GI (3·64 ± 0·5 versus 4·45 ± 1·25), while HI values are better for TrueBeam. For OAR doses, in 65·5% and 72% of treatment plans, brainstem and optic pathways received lower doses on CyberKnife, respectively. In terms of dose spillage, Truebeam plans are better for very low doses (V5%), while for V10%, V20% and V50% CyberKnife plans are better.

CyberKnife is a better modality for the delivery of SRS/SRT to intracranial tumours except for dose homogeneity where TrueBeam offered better results.

Variation in delineation of target volumes/organs at risk (OARs) is well recognised in radiotherapy and may be reduced by several methods including teaching. We evaluated the impact of teaching on contouring variation for thoracic/pelvic stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) during a virtual contouring workshop.

Target volume/OAR contours produced by workshop participants for three cases were evaluated against reference contours using DICE similarity coefficient (DSC) and line domain error (LDE) metrics. Pre- and post-workshop DSC results were compared using Wilcoxon signed ranks test to determine the impact of teaching during the workshop.

Of 50 workshop participants, paired pre- and post-workshop contours were available for 21 (42%), 20 (40%) and 22 (44%) participants for primary lung cancer, pelvic bone metastasis and pelvic node metastasis cases, respectively. Statistically significant improvements post-workshop in median DSC and LDE results were observed for 6 (50%) and 7 (58%) of 12 structures, respectively, although the magnitude of DSC/LDE improvement was modest in most cases. An increase in median DSC post-workshop ≥0·05 was only observed for GTVbone, IGTVlung and SacralPlex, and reduction in median LDE > 1 mm was only observed for GTVbone, CTVbone and SacralPlex. Post-workshop, median DSC values were >0·7 for 75% of structures. For 92% of the structures, post-workshop contours were considered to be acceptable or within acceptable variation following review by the workshop faculty.

This study has demonstrated that virtual SABR contouring training is feasible and was associated with some improvements in contouring variation for multiple target volumes/OARs.

To study the simplified sphericity index (SSI) of planning target volume (PTV) and correlate it with the gradient index (GI) for stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)/stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) treatment of brain metastasis.

A collection of fifteen brain metastasis cases previously treated with SRS/SRT by volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique was included in the analysis. All the previous plan data from Monaco 6.2.1.0 TPS were used for re-planning and computation of SSI and GI. Pearson’s correlation analysis was performed by using OriginPro 8.5 software, and the outcomes were tabulated.

The statistical analysis and linear fitting of data show a negative linear correlation between SSI and GI, taking SSI as the independent variable and GI as the dependent variable. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was found to be -0.91563 with a p-value of 0.0000124 showing strong statistical significance.

It is observed that the GI of the PTV improves as the SSI increases, that is, when the target volume approaches a perfect sphere. Calculating the SSI of the target before planning may help in predicting the GI which may guide making crucial decisions regarding PTV dose prescription and acceptance criteria for organs-at-risk dose tolerance.

The purpose of this study was to estimate technical treatment accuracy in fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (fSRS) using the Extend™ system (ES) of Gamma Knife (GK).

The fSRS with GK relies on a re-locatable ES where the reference treatment position is estimated using repositioning check tool (RCT). A patient surveillance unit (PSU) monitors the head and neck movement of the patient during treatment and imaging. The quality assurance test of RCT was performed to evaluate a standard error (SE) associated with a measurement tool called digital probe. A ‘4-mm collimator shot’ dose plan for a head–neck phantom was investigated using EBT3 films. CT and MR distortion measurement studies were combined to evaluate SEimaging. The combined uncertainty from all measurements was evaluated using statistical methods, and the resultant treatment accuracy was investigated for the ES.

Four sets of RCT measurements and 20 observations of associated digital probe showed SERCT of ±0·0186 mm and SEdigital probe of ±0·0002 mm. The mean positional shift of 0·2752 mm (σ = 0·0696 mm) was observed for 20 treatment settings of the phantom. The differences between radiological and predefined isocentres were 0·4650 and 0·4270 mm for two independent experiments. SEimaging and SEdiode  tool were evaluated as ±0·1055 and ±0·0096 mm, respectively. An expanded uncertainty of ±0·2371 mm (at 95% confidence level) was observed with our system.

The combined result of the positional shift and expanded uncertainty showed close agreement with film investigations.

Peer review is an essential quality assurance component of radiation therapy planning. A growing body of literature has demonstrated substantial rates of suggested plan changes resulting from peer review. There remains a paucity of data on the impact of peer review rounds for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We therefore aim to evaluate the outcomes of peer review in this specific patient cohort.

We conducted a retrospective review of all SBRT cases that underwent peer review from July 2015 to June 2018 at a single institution. Weekly peer review rounds are grouped according to cancer subsite and attended by radiation oncologists, medical physicists and medical radiation technologists. We prospectively compiled ‘learning moments’, defined as cases with suggested changes or where an educational discussion occurred beyond routine management, and critical errors, defined as errors which could alter clinical outcomes, recorded prospectively during peer review. Plan changes implemented after peer review were documented.

Nine hundred thirty-four SBRT cases were included. The most common treatment sites were lung (518, 55%), liver (196, 21%) and spine (119, 13%). Learning moments were identified in 161 cases (17%) and translated into plan changes in 28 cases (3%). Two critical errors (0.2%) were identified: an inadequate planning target volume margin and an incorrect image set used for contouring. There was a statistically significantly higher rate of learning moments for lower-volume SBRT sites (defined as ≤30 cases/year) versus higher-volume SBRT sites (29% vs 16%, respectively; p = 0.001).

Peer review for SBRT cases revealed a low rate of critical errors, but did result in implemented plan changes in 3% of cases, and either educational discussion or suggestions of plan changes in 17% of cases. All SBRT sites appear to benefit from peer review, though lower-volume sites may require particular attention.

The objective of this article is to evaluate the dosimetric efficacy of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in comparison to dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) for very small volume (≤1 cc) and small volume (≤3 cc) tumours for flattened (FF) and unflattened (FFF) 6 MV beams.

A total of 21 patients who were treated with single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery, using either VMAT, DCAT or 3DCRT, were included in this study. The volume categorisation was seven patients each in <1, 1–2 and 2–3 cc volume. The treatment was planned with 6 MV FF and FFF beams using three different techniques: VMAT/Rapid Arc (RA) (RA_FF and RA_FFF), dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCA_FF and DCA_FFF) and 3DCRT (Static_FF and Static_FFF). Plans were evaluated for target coverage (V100%), conformity index, homogeneity index, dose gradient for 50% dose fall-off, total MU and MU/dose ratio [intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) factor], normal brain receiving >12 Gy dose, dose to the organ at risk (OAR), beam ON time and dose received by 12 cc of the brain.

The average target coverage for all plans, all tumour volumes (TVs) and delivery techniques is 96·4 ± 4·5 (range 95·7 ± 6·1–97·5 ± 2·9%). The conformity index averaged over all volume ranges <1, 2, 3 cc> varies between 0·55 ± 0·08 and 0·68 ± 0·04 with minimum and maximum being exhibited by DCA_FFF for 1 cc and Static_FFF/RA_FFF for 3 cc tumours, respectively. Mean IMRT factor averaged over all volume ranges for RA_FF, DCA_FF and Static_FF are 3·5 ± 0·8, 2·0 ± 0·2 and 2·0 ± 0·2, respectively; 50% dose fall-off gradient varies in the range of 0·33–0·42, 0·35–0·40 and 0·38–0·45 for 1, 2 and 3 cc tumours, respectively.

This study establishes the equivalence between the FF and FFF beam models and different delivery techniques for stereotactic radiosurgery in small TVs in the range of ≤1 to ≤3 cc. Dose conformity, heterogeneity, dose fall-off characteristics and OAR doses show no or very little variation. FFF could offer only limited time advantage due to excess dose rate over an FF beam.

We compare the accuracy of the off-axis Winston–Lutz (WL) test in two versions of ExacTracTM: version 6.0 (ETv6) and Dynamic (ETD) in the same linac (TrueBeam STx®).

An upgraded of the ExacTracTM system was done in our institution. It was designed as an off-axis WL test before the update for comparison purposes. A head 3D-printed phantom based on a patient’s computed tomography images was used. Nine metallic fiducials were inserted and distributed on the phantom. Each target (fiducial) was designed an off-axis WL test with eight different gantry/collimator/table combinations. The phantom was placed using two different ETv6 and ETD in the same linac, and cone-beam computed tomography and electronic portal imaging device (EPID) images were acquired. The 2D deviation between the centre of the fiducial and the radiation field was found and compared with the original digital reconstructed radiography (DRR) by the profiles.

The phantom allows the definition of a procedure to determine off-axis deviations in radiosurgery treatments. The displacements calculated from the WL test showed acceptable values for both versions taking into account 3D displacement tolerances of 1 mm. These values were reached with rigorous quality assurance (QA) linac tests performed routinely that include mechanical, MV/kV and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) tests. However, ETD indicated more accurate values for all the targets no matter the distance to the isocentre (3D displacements < 0·5 mm).

In terms of the IGRT correction without set-up displacements, ETD is up to twice as accurate as the ETv6, showing 3D displacements up to 0·5 mm in all targets.

A small number of studies have confirmed the advantage of generalised equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) optimisation for some standard clinical scenarios; however, its performance with complicated stereotactic treatments is yet to be explored. Therefore, this study compared two planning optimisation methods, gEUD and Physical dose, in stereotactic treatments for several complex anatomical locations.

Thirty patients were selected, ten each for sites of brain, lung and spine. Two stereotactic plans were generated for each case using the gEUD objective and Physical objective cost functions. Within each of the three sites, dosimetric indices for conformity, gradient and homogeneity, along with parameters of monitor units and dose–volume histograms (DVHs), were compared for statistical significance. Additionally, patient-specific quality assurance was conducted using portal dosimetry, and the gamma passing rate between the two plans was evaluated.

Optimisation was better with a gEUD objective as compared with Physical objective, notably sparing critical organs. Overall, the differences in mean values for six critical organs at risk favoured gEUD-based over Physical-based plans (all six 2-tailed p-values were < 0·0002). Furthermore, all differences in mean values for DVH parameters favoured gEUD-based plans: GTVmean, GTVmax, PTVD100V, homogeneity index, gradient index and monitor unit (treatment time) (each 2-tailed p < 0·05).

gEUD optimisation in stereotactic treatment plans has a clear and general statistical advantage over Physical dose optimisation.

We sought to retrospectively report our outcomes using post-operative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)/stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in place of whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) following resection of brain metastases from our hospital-based community practice.

A retrospective review of 23 patients who underwent post-operative SRS at our single institution from 2013 to 2017 was undertaken. Patient records, treatment plans and diagnostic images were reviewed. Local failure, distant intracranial failure and overall survival were studied. Categorical variables were analyzed using Fisher’s exact tests. Continuous variables were analyzed using Mann–Whitney tests. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate survival times.

16 (70%) were single-fraction SRS, whereas the remaining 7 patients received a five-fraction treatment course. The median single-fraction dose was 16 Gy (range, 16–18). The median total dose for fractionated treatments was 25 Gy (range, 25–35). Overall survival at 6 and 12 months was 95 and 67%, respectively. Comparison of SRS versus SRT local control rates at 6 and 12 months revealed control rates of 92 and 78% versus 29 and 14%, respectively. Every patient with dural/pial involvement at the time of surgery had distant intracranial failure at the 12-month follow-up.

Single-fraction frameless SRS proved to be an effective modality with excellent local control rates. However, the five-fraction SRT course was associated with an increased rate of local recurrence. Dural/pial involvement may portend a high risk for distant intracranial disease; therefore, it may be prudent to consider alternative approaches in these cases.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a treatment option for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer who are medically inoperable or decline surgery. Here we compare the outcome of patients with centrally located lung tumours who underwent either single fraction (SF)- or five-fraction (FF-) SBRT at a single institution over 5 years.

Between January 2009 and October 2014, patients with centrally located lung tumours who underwent SBRT were included in this study. Data were retrospectively collected using an institutional review board-approved database. For analysis, the Kaplan–Meier method and competing risks method were used.

In total, 11 patients received 26–30 Gy in 1 fraction, whereas 31 patients received 50–60 Gy (median 55 Gy) in 5 fractions. After a median follow-up of 12 months for SF-SBRT and 17 months for FF-SBRT groups (p=0·64), 1-year overall survival rates were 82 and 87%, respectively. SF- and FF-SBRT groups showed no significant difference in grade 3+ toxicity (p=0·28). The only grade 4 toxicity (n=1) was reported in the SF-SBRT group. All toxicities occurred >12 months after the SBRT.

SF- and FF-SBRT have comparable overall survival. SF-SBRT may have some utility for patients unable to have multi-fraction SBRT.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of flattened and flattening filter-free (FFF) beam 6 MV photon beam for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy by using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique in deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) and free breathing condition.

Eight liver metastasis patients (one to three metastasis lesions) were simulated in breath hold and free breathing condition. VMAT-based treatment plans were created for a prescription dose of 50 Gy in 10 fractions, using a 230° coplaner arc and 60° non-coplanar arc for both DIBH and free breathing study set. Treatment plans were evaluated for planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage, conformity and hot spots. Parallel and serial organs at risk were compared for average and maximum dose, respectively. Dose spillages were evaluated for different isodose volumes from 5 to 80%.

Mean D98% (dose received by 98% target volume) for FFF in DIBH, flattened beam in DIBH, FFF in free breathing and flatten beam in free breathing dataset were 48·9, 47·81, 48·5 and 48·3 Gy, respectively. D98% was not statistically different between FFF and flatten beam (p = 0·34 and 0·69 for DIBH and free breathing condition). PTV V105% (volume receiving 105% dose) for the same set were 3·76, 0·25, 1·2 and 0·4%, respectively. Mean heterogeneity index for all study sets and beam models varies between 1·05 and 1·07. Paddik conformity index using unflattened and flattened beam in DIBH at 98% prescription dose were 0·91 and 0·79, respectively. Maximum variation of isodose volume was observed for I-5%, which was ranging between 2288·8 and 2427·2 cm3. Increase in isodose value shows a diminishing difference in isodose volumes between different techniques. DIBH yields a significant reduction in the chest wall dose compared with free breathing condition. Average monitor units for FFF beam in DIBH, flattened beam in DIBH, FFF beam in free breathing CT dataset and flattened beam in free breathing CT dataset were 1318·6 ± 265·1, 1940·3 ± 287·6, 1343·3 ± 238·1 and 2192·5 ± 252·6 MU.

DIBH and FFF is a good combination to reduce the treatment time and to achieve better tumour conformity. No other dosimetric gain was observed for FFF in either DIBH or free breathing condition.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is widely used for the treatment of stage-I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patient-specific motion correlated with 4DCT could be essential for hypofractionated SBRT. All patients undergoing SBRT do not require motion management during the dose delivery. The objective of this study was to evaluate which patient may benefit from Gated SBRT.

Treatment planning of 20 patients of stage-I NSCLC was analysed. Conventional and 4DCT scans were taken. Internal target volume as well as planning target volume (ITV and PTV) were determined in the CT data sets. PTVall phases created using 4DCT data sets and PTV15mm created using conventional CT data were compared. Also, ITVall phases were compared with ITV created from maximum intensity projections (ITVMIP). Suitability of patients for motion management-based treatment delivery was also evaluated.

The average ITVMIP to ITVall phases ratio is 1·06 indicating good agreement between them. Based on the ratio of intensity projections, 9 out of 17 patients were found suitable for our existing gated treatment.

4D CT is the main requirement in SBRT to identify the patients who can benefit from motion management during the dose delivery.

Lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada and the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in both men and women in North America. Surgery is usually the primary treatment option for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, for patients who may not be suitable candidates for surgery, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an alternative method of treatment. SBRT has proven to be an effective technique for treating NSCLC patients by focally administering high radiation dose to the tumour with acceptable risk of toxicity to surrounding healthy tissues. The goal of this comprehensive retrospective dosimetric study is to compare the dosimetric parameters between three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) lung SBRT treatment plans for two prescription doses.

We retrospectively analysed and compared lung SBRT treatment plans of 263 patients treated with either a 3DCRT non-coplanar or with 2–3 VMAT arcs technique at 48 Gy in 4 fractions (48 Gy/4) or 50 Gy in 5 fractions (50 Gy/5) prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV), typically encompassing the 80% isodose volume. All patients were treated on either a Varian 21EX or TrueBeam linear accelerator using 6-MV or 10-MV photon beams.

The mean PTV V95% and V100% for treatment plans at 48 Gy/4 are 99·4 ± 0·6% and 96·0 ± 1·0%, respectively, for 3DCRT and 99·7 ± 0·4% and 96·4 ± 3·4%, respectively, for VMAT. The corresponding mean PTV V95% and V100% at 50 Gy/5 are 99·0 ± 1·4% and 95·5 ± 2·5% for 3DCRT and 99·5 ± 0·8% and 96·1 ± 1·6% for VMAT. The CIRI and HI5/95 for the PTV at 48 Gy/4 are 1·1 ± 0·1 and 1·2 ± 0·0 for 3DCRT and 1·0 ± 0·1 and 1·2 ± 0·0 for VMAT. The corresponding CIRI and HI5/95 at 50 Gy/5 are 1·1 ± 0·1 and 1·3 ± 0·1 for 3DCRT and 1·0 ± 0·1 and 1·2 ± 0·0 for VMAT. The mean R50% and D2cm at 48 Gy/4 are 5·0 ± 0·8 and 61·2 ± 7·0% for 3DCRT and 4·9 ± 0·8 and 57·8 ± 7·9% for VMAT. The corresponding R50% and D2cm at 50 Gy/5 are 4·7 ± 0·5 and 65·5 ± 9·4% for 3DCRT and 4·7 ± 0·7 and 60·0 ± 7·2% for VMAT.

The use of 3DCRT or VMAT technique for lung SBRT is an efficient and reliable method for achieving dose conformity, rapid dose fall-off and minimising doses to the organs at risk. The VMAT technique resulted in improved dose conformity, rapid dose fall-off from the PTV compared to 3DCRT, although the magnitude may not be clinically significant.

The aim of the current study was to (i) to calculate organ equivalent dose (OED) and (ii) to estimate excess absolute risks (EARs), lifetime attributable risks (LARs) and relative risks (RRs) from stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for lung cancer to in-field, close to field, and out of field structures.

A total of five patients with T1, T2 (≤4 cm), N0, M0 medically inoperable non-small cell lung cancer were selected for treatment planning. Patient selection criteria were based on RTOG 0236. Five treatment deliveries were investigated: (i) three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), (ii) intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), (iii) intensity-modulated radiotherapy with flattening filter free beam (IMRTF), (iv) volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and (v) volumetric modulated arc therapy with flattening filter free arcs (VMATF). Delineated normal structures included chest wall, left and right lung, trachea, small and large airways, spinal cord, oesophagus and involved ribs. All plans were prescribed to 60 Gy in five fractions to primary planning target volume (PTV) volume so that ≥98% of the PTV received ≥98% of the prescription dose and internal tumour volume received 100% of the prescription dose. The OED for all delineated normal structures was calculated using differential dose volume histograms. Using risk models, the age-dependent LAR’s and RR were calculated. Additionally, the secondary cancer risk for organs inside primary radiation was analysed using sarcoma and carcinoma risk models.

For all patients, the mean V20 volumes from the SABR plans were 4·1% (3DRT), 11·8% (IMRT), and 12·7% (VMAT), respectively. The EAR (combining all organs EAR) for all the organs studied, ranged from 8·5 to 10·6/10,000 persons/year for VMATF and 3DCRT, respectively. The EAR (combining all organs EAR) for all the organs studied, ranged from 8·5 to 10·6/10,000 persons/year for VMATF and 3DCRT, respectively. The absolute EAR difference between IMRT and IMRTF was low ranging from 0·2 to 0·4/10,000 persons-year, whereas delivery difference (IMRT and VMAT) had a significant impact on EAR with absolute difference ranging from 0·5 to 1·0/10,000 persons-year for IMRT and VMAT and 1·1–1·5/10,000 persons-year for IMRTF, VMATF, respectively. The LAR data showed a strong dependence on age at exposure and the LAR decreased as a function of age at exposure. The absolute attributable risk of bone sarcoma was lower with the VMAT plan and was significantly higher with the 3DCRT plan.

From a clinical perspective, it should be concluded that all five solutions investigated in the study can offer high quality of patient treatments and only estimates of radiation-induced malignancies can truly differentiate among them. The results suggested it would be reasonable to use the cumulative LAR difference when needed to select between treatment techniques. In conclusion, the LAR of radiation-induced secondary cancer was significantly lower when using VMATF than when using IMRT for SABR lung patients. VMATF would be the right choice for the treatment of SABR lung patients in terms of LAR. However, more work is required for the specific estimation and long-term validation and updating of the models behind LAR estimation.

Treatment of metachronous second primary non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in patients already treated with definitive radiotherapy is a matter of debate, since most patients are excluded from surgical treatment, which remains a therapeutic standard for patients with isolated lung masses. Salvage chemotherapy or immunotherapy alone offers a low probability of disease control. The option of re-irradiation often remains the only viable, but the risks of severe acute or late toxicities affecting the surrounding normal tissues make this a real clinical challenge.

From January 2015 to April 2018, five patients (male/female: 4/1; age 54–81 years, median 68) with previously irradiated NSCLC presented with a second primary lung tumour.

A partial response was seen in four patients, one complete responses in the fifth. The toxicity was low: two patients experienced a grade 2 asymptomatic radiation pneumonitis after 6 and 12 months from the end of stereotactic body radiation therapy, resolved with cortisone therapy. No acute or late oesophageal or cardiac toxicity was found.

In this work, we present our initial experience about the use of stereotactic radiotherapy technique in already irradiated patients. We reported a local disease control in all cases with an acceptable toxicity.

The aim of this work is to report on the tumour control probability (TCP) of a UK cohort of lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy patients (n = 198) for a range of dose and fractionations common in the UK.

TCP values for 3 (54 Gy), 5 (55 and 60 Gy) and 8 (50 Gy) fraction (#) schemes were calculated with the linear-quadratic Marsden TCP model using the Biosuite software.

TCP values of 100% were computed for the 3 # and for 5 # (α/β = 10 Gy) cohorts; reduced to 99% (range 97–100) for the 5 # cohort only when an α/β of 20 Gy was used. The average TCP value for the 50 Gy in 8 # regime was 97% (range 92–99, α/β = 10 Gy) and 64% (range 48–79, α/β = 20 Gy). Statistical significant differences were observed between the α/β of 10 Gy versus 20 Gy groups and between all data grouped by fraction.

TCPs achievable with current planning techniques in the UK have been presented. The ultra-conservative 50 Gy in 8 # scheme returns a significantly lower TCP than the other regimes.

CyberKnife is the most advanced form of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) system that uses a robotic arm to deliver highly focused beams of radiation; however, a limitation is that it only irradiates from ceiling to floor direction. In patients with posterior lungs tumour who are positioned supine, normal lung tissue may suffer undesirable radiation injuries. This study compares the treatment planning between the prone set-up and the supine set-up for lung cancer in CyberKnife SBRT to decrease normal lung dose to avoid radiation side effects.

A human phantom was used to generate 108 plans (54 for prone and 54 for supine) using the CyberKnife planning platform. The supine and prone plans were compared in terms of the dosimetric characteristics, delivery efficiency and plan efficiency.

For posterior targets, the area of low-dose exposure to normal lungs was smaller in the prone set-up than in the supine set-up. V10 of the lungs was 7·53% and 10·47% (p < 0·001) in the anterior region, and 10·78% and 8·03% (p < 0·001) in the posterior region in the supine and prone set-up plans, respectively.

The comparison between the prone set-up and the supine set-up was investigated with regard to target coverage and dose to organs at risk. Our results may be deployed in CyberKnife treatment planning to monitor normal tissue dose by considering patient positioning. This may assist in the design of better treatment plans and prevention of symptomatic radiation pneumonitis in lung cancer patients.

Deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) is a method of motion management used in stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) for lung tumours. An external gating block marker can be used as a tumour motion surrogate, however, inter-fraction gross target volume (GTV) displacement within DIBH occurs. This study measured this displacement during a reproducible breath hold regime. In addition, factors such as position of the gating block marker were analysed.

A total of 121 cone beam computed tomography scans (CBCTs) from 22 patients who received DIBH SABR were retrospectively evaluated and the magnitude of inter-fraction GTV displacement was calculated for each fraction. This data was analysed to assess if any correlation existed between tumour displacement and variation in the gating block marker position on the patient, the amplitude of breath hold (BH) at computed tomography (CT), the amplitude of BH at treatment and the tumour location.

The measured tumour displacement was applied to the original planning CT to evaluate the dosimetric effect on surrounding organs at risk (OARs) using cumulative dose volume histograms (DVHs).

BH amplitude was reproducible within 0·13±0·1 cm (mean±standard deviation). The magnitude of tumour displacement within BH ranged from 0 to 1·52 cm (0·41±0·28 cm). Displacement in the superior-inferior, anterior-posterior and left-right planes were 0·31±0·26 cm, 0·16±0·18 cm and 0·07±0·12 cm, respectively. No statistically significant correlation was detected between tumour displacement within DIBH and the factors investigated. The range of variation in OAR dose was −7·0 to +3·6 Gy with one statistically significant increase in OAR dose observed (oesophagus mean dose increasing by 0·16 Gy).

Reproducible BH was achievable across a range of patients. Inter-fraction GTV displacement measured 0·41±0·28 cm. Due to this low level of motion, the correction of soft tissue moves did not adversely affect OAR dose.

To compare the dosimetric outcomes of linear accelerator-based stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) techniques—static conformal field (SCF), static conformal arc (SCA) and dynamic conformal arc (DCA), for treating pituitary adenoma and craniopharyngioma.

Computer image sets of 20 patients with pituitary adenoma or craniopharyngioma and treated with post-operative SRT were selected for this study. For each dataset, three SRT plans, with SCF, SCA and DCA techniques were generated using Brain LAB, iPlan RT V.4.5.3, TPS software. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), quality of coverage of the target, dose–volume histograms for the target and organs at risk (OARs) and the time taken to deliver treatment was compared across three sets of plan.

There were 12 patients with pituitary adenoma and eight with craniopharyngioma. The CI and HI were comparable across three techniques. The quality of coverage was superior in DCA technique. OARs were better spared in SCF and DCA techniques. Time taken to deliver treatment was least in SCF technique.

The linac-based SRT techniques SCF, SCA and DCA are efficient in delivering highly conformal and homogenous dose to the target in pituitary adenoma and craniopharyngioma. Among these three techniques, SCF and DCA had acceptable quality of coverage. The dose received by OARs was least in the SCF technique.