Radiation Oncology (Feb 2021)

Dosimetric study between a single isocenter dynamic conformal arc therapy technique and Gamma Knife radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases treatment: impact of target volume geometrical characteristics

  • Michel Chea,
  • Karen Fezzani,
  • Julian Jacob,
  • Marguerite Cuttat,
  • Mathilde Croisé,
  • Jean-Marc Simon,
  • Loïc Feuvret,
  • Charles-Ambroise Valery,
  • Philippe Maingon,
  • Mohamed-Amine Benadjaoud,
  • Catherine Jenny

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-021-01766-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 1
pp. 1 – 16

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Purpose To compare linac-based mono-isocentric radiosurgery with Brainlab Elements Multiple Brain Mets (MBM) SRS and the Gamma Knife using a specific statistical method and to analyze the dosimetric impact of the target volume geometric characteristics. A dose fall-off analysis allowed to evaluate the Gradient Index relevancy for the dose spillage characterization. Material and methods Treatments were planned on twenty patients with three to nine brain metastases with MBM 2.0 and GammaPlan 11.0. Ninety-five metastases ranging from 0.02 to 9.61 cc were included. Paddick Index (PI), Gradient Index (GI), dose fall-off, volume of healthy brain receiving more than 12 Gy (V12Gy) and DVH were used for the plan comparison according to target volume, major axis diameter and Sphericity Index (SI). The multivariate regression approach allowed to analyze the impact of each geometric characteristic keeping all the others unchanged. A parallel study was led to evaluate the impact of the isodose line (IDL) prescription on the MBM plan quality. Results For mono-isocentric linac-based radiosurgery, the IDL around 70–75% was the best compromise found. For both techniques, the GI and the dose fall-off decreased with the target volume. In comparison, PI was slightly improved with MBM for targets 0.78. GI was improved with GP for targets 0.4 cc or SI 5 cc against 6.5 cc with GP. The presence of OAR close to the PTV had no impact on the dose fall off values. The dose fall-off was higher for volumes < 3.8 cc with GP which had the sharpest dose fall-off in the infero-superior direction up to 30%/mm. The mean beam-on time was 94 min with GP against 13 min with MBM. Conclusions The dose fall-off and the V12Gy were more relevant indicators than the GI for the low dose spillage assessment. Both evaluated techniques have comparable plan qualities with a slightly improved selectivity with MBM for smaller lesions but with a healthy tissues sparing slightly favorable to GP at the expense of a considerably longer irradiation time. However, a higher healthy tissue exposure must be considered for large volumes in MBM plans.

Keywords