ObjectivesThe purpose of this study is to independently compare the performance of the inverse planning algorithm utilized in Gamma Knife (GK) Lightning Treatment Planning System (TPS) to manual forward planning, between experienced and inexperienced users, for different types of targets.Materials and MethodsForty patients treated with GK stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for pituitary adenoma (PA), vestibular schwannoma (VS), post-operative brain metastases (pBM), and intact brain metastases (iBM) were randomly selected, ten for each site. Three inversely optimized plans were generated for each case by two experienced planners (OptExp1 and OptExp2) and a novice planner (OptNov) using GK Lightning TPS. For each treatment site, the Gradient Index (GI), the Paddick Conformity Index (PCI), the prescription percentage, the scaled beam-on time (sBOT), the number of shots used, and dosimetric metrics to OARs were compared first between the inversely optimized plans and the manually generated clinical plans, and then among the inversely optimized plans. Statistical analyses were performed using the Student’s t-test and the ANOVA followed by the post-hoc Tukey tests.ResultsThe GI for the inversely optimized plans significantly outperformed the clinical plans for all sites. PCIs were similar between the inversely optimized and clinical plans for PA and VS, but were significantly improved in the inversely optimized plans for iBM and pBM. There were no significant differences in the sBOT between the inversely optimized and clinical plans, except for the PA cases. No significant differences were observed in dosimetric metrics, except for lower brain V12Gy and PTV D98% in the inversely optimized plans for iBM. There were no noticeable differences in plan qualities among the inversely optimized plans created by the novice and experienced planners.ConclusionInverse planning in GK Lightning TPS produces GK SRS plans at least equivalent in plan quality and similar in sBOT compared to manual forward planning in this independent validation study. The automatic workflow of inversed planning ensures a consistent plan quality regardless of a planner’s experience.

Background To evaluate plan quality using volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and step‐and‐shoot intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (SS‐IMRT) techniques and for patients treated for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Methods Treatment plans for patients treated definitively for stages I‐IVb, OPSCC between December 2009 and August 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Dosimetric endpoints of involved organs‐at‐risk (OARs) were retrieved from clinical plans. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scores of acute toxicities were compared. Results Two‐hundred twenty‐two patients were identified with 134 and 88 receiving SS‐IMRT and VMAT with median follow‐up time of 23.0 and 7.9 months, respectively. The dosimetric endpoints of the OARs were significantly improved in VMAT cohort, which translated into significantly lower rates of grade 2 or higher acute dysphagia and xerostomia. Conclusion Improvements in stages I‐IVb, oropharyngeal cancer plan quality are associated with reduced grade ≥ 2 acute dysphagia and xerostomia.

Volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans may require more control points (or segments) than some of fixed‐beam IMRT plans that are created with a limited number of segments. Increasing number of control points in a VMAT plan for a given prescription dose could create a large portion of the total number of segments with small number monitor units (MUs) per segment. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of the small number MU/segment on the delivery accuracy of VMAT delivered with various dose rates. Ten patient datasets were planned for hippocampus sparing for whole brain irradiation. For each dataset, two VMAT plans were created with maximum dose rates of 600 MU/min (the maximum field size of 21×40 cm2) and 1000 MU/min (the maximum field size of 15×15 cm2) for a daily dose of 3 Gy. Without reoptimization, the daily dose of these plans was purposely reduced to 1.5 Gy and 1.0 Gy while keeping the same total dose. Using the two dose rates and three different daily doses, six VMAT plans for each dataset were delivered to a physical phantom to investigate how the changes of dose rate and daily doses impact on delivery accuracy. Using the gamma index, we directly compared the delivered planar dose profiles with the reduced daily doses (1.5 Gy and 1.0 Gy) to the delivered planar dose at 3 Gy daily dose, delivered at dose rate of 600 MU/min and 1000 MU/min, respectively. The average numbers of segments with MU/segment≤1 were 35±8, 87±6 for VMAT‐600 1.5 Gy, VMAT‐600 1 Gy plans, and 30±7 and 42±6 for VMAT‐1000 1.5 Gy and VMAT‐1000 1 Gy plans, respectively. When delivered at 600 MU/min dose rate, the average gamma index passing rates (1%/1 mm criteria) of comparing delivered 1.5 Gy VMAT planar dose profiles to 3.0 Gy VMAT delivered planar dose profiles was 98.28%±1.66%, and the average gamma index passing rate of comparing delivered 1.0 Gy VMAT planar dose to 3.0 Gy VMAT delivered planar dose was 83.75%±4.86%. If using 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria, the gamma index passing rates were greater than 97% for both 1.5 Gy VMAT and 1.0 Gy VMAT delivered planar doses. At 1000 MU/min dose rate, the average gamma index passing rates were 96.59%±2.70% for 1.5 Gy VMAT planar dose profiles and 79.37%±9.96% for 1.0 Gy VMAT planar dose profiles when compared to the 3.0 Gy VMAT planar delivered dose profile. When using 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria, the gamma index passing rates were greater than 93% for both 1.5 Gy VMAT and 1.0 Gy VMAT planar delivered dose. Under a stricter gamma index criterion (1%/1 mm), significant differences in delivered planar dose profiles at different daily doses were detected, indicating that the known communication delay between the MU console and MLC console may affect VMAT delivery accuracy.PACS number(s): 87.56.bd, 87.55.‐x

Background/Purpose Frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) requires dedicated systems to monitor patient motion in order to avoid inaccurate radiation delivery due to involuntary shifts. The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy and sensitivity of two distinct motion monitoring systems used for frameless SRS. Methods A surface image-guided system known as optical surface monitoring system (OSMS), and a fiducial marker-based system known as high definition motion management (HDMM) as part of the latest Gamma Knife Icon® were compared. A 3D printer-based cranial motion phantom was developed to evaluate the accuracy and sensitivity of these two systems in terms of: (1) the capability to recognize predefined shifts up to 3 cm, and (2) the capability to recognize predefined speeds up to 3 cm/s. The performance of OSMS, in terms of different reference surfaces, was also evaluated. Results Translational motion could be accurately detected by both systems, with an accuracy of 0.3 mm for displacement up to 1 cm, and 0.5 mm for larger displacements. The reference surface selection had an impact on OSMS performance, with flat surface resulting in less accuracy. HDMM was in general more sensitive when compared with OSMS in capturing the motion, due to its faster frame rate, but a delay in response was observed with faster speeds. Both systems were less sensitive in detection of superior-inferior motion when compared to lateral or vertical displacement directions. Conclusion Translational motion can be accurately and sensitively detected by OSMS and HDMM real-time monitoring systems. However, performance variations were observed along different motion directions, as well as amongst the selection of reference images. Caution is needed when using real-time monitoring systems for frameless SRS treatment.