In this work, we develop a total body irradiation technique that utilizes arc delivery, a buildup spoiler, and inverse optimized multileaf collimator (MLC) motion to shield organs at risk. The current treatment beam model is verified to confirm its applicability at extended source‐to‐surface distance (SSD). The delivery involves 7–8 volumetric modulated arc therapy arcs delivered to the patient in the supine and prone positions. The patient is positioned at a 90° couch angle on a custom bed with a 1 cm acrylic spoiler to increase surface dose. Single‐step optimization using a patient CT scan provides enhanced dose homogeneity and limits organ at risk dose. Dosimetric data of 109 TBI patients treated with this technique is presented along with the clinical workflow. Treatment planning system (TPS) verification measurements were performed at an extended SSD of 175 cm. Measurements included: a 4‐point absolute depth‐dose curve, profiles at 1.5, 5, and 10 cm depth, absolute point‐dose measurements of an treatment field, 2D Gafchromic® films at four locations, and measurements of surface dose at multiple locations of a Alderson phantom. The results of the patient DVH parameters were: Body‐5 mm D98 95.3 ± 1.5%, Body‐5 mm D2 114.0 ± 3.6%, MLD 102.8 ± 2.1%. Differences between measured and calculated absolute depth‐dose values were all <2%. Profiles at extended SSD had a maximum point difference of 1.3%. Gamma pass rates of 2D films were greater than 90% at 5%/1 mm. Surface dose measurements with film confirmed surface dose values of >90% of the prescription dose. In conclusion, the inverse optimized delivery method presented in the paper has been used to deliver homogenous dose to over 100 patients. The method provides superior patient comfort utilizing a commercial TPS. In addition, the ability to easily shield organs at risk is available through the use of MLCs.

In this work, the feasibility of using flattening filter free (FFF) beams in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) total body irradiation (TBI) treatment planning to decrease protracted beam‐on times for these treatments was investigated. In addition, a methodology was developed to generate standardized VMAT TBI treatment plans based on patient physical dimensions to eliminate plan optimization time. A planning study cohort of 47 TBI patients previously treated with optimized VMAT ARC 6 MV beams was retrospectively examined. These patients were sorted into six categories depending on height and anteroposterior (AP) width at the umbilicus. Using Varian Eclipse, clinical 40 cm × 10 cm open field arcs were substituted with 6 MV FFF. Mid‐plane lateral dose profiles in conjunction with relative arc output factors (RAOF) yielded how far a given multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf must move in order to achieve a mid‐plane 100% isodose for a specific control point. Linear interpolation gave the dynamic MLC aperture for the entire arc for each patient AP width category, which was subsequently applied through Python scripting. All FFF VMAT TBI plans were then evaluated by two radiation oncologists and deemed clinically acceptable. The FFF and clinical VMAT TBI plans had similar Body–5 mm D98% distributions, but overall the FFF plans had statistically significantly increased or broader Body–5 mm D2% and mean lung dose distributions. These differences are not considered clinically significant. Median beam‐on times for the FFF and clinical VMAT TBI plans were 11.07 and 18.06 min, respectively, and planning time for the FFF VMAT TBI plans was reduced by 34.1 min. In conclusion, use of FFF beams in VMAT TBI treatment planning resulted in dose homogeneity similar to our current VMAT TBI technique. Clinical dosimetric criteria were achieved for a majority of patients while planning and calculated beam‐on times were reduced, offering the possibility of improved patient experience.

No abstract