SU‐F‐T‐435: Helical Tomotherapy for Craniospinal Irradiation: What We Have Learned from a Multi‐Institutional Study

Abstract

Purpose: To report cranio‐spinal irradiation (CSI) planning experience, compare dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency with Tomotherapy from different institutions, and to investigate effect of planning parameters on plan quality and treatment time. Methods: Clinical helical tomotherapy IMRT plans for thirty‐nine CSI cases from three academic institutions were retrospectively evaluated. The planning parameters: field width (FW), pitch, modulation factor (MF), and achieved dosimetric endpoints were cross‐compared. A fraction‐dose‐delivery‐timing index (FDTI), defined as treatment time per fraction dose per PTV length, was utilized to evaluate plan delivery efficiency. A lower FDTI indicates higher delivery efficiency. We studied the correlation between planning quality, treatment time and planning parameters by grouping the plans under specific planning parameters. Additionally, we created new plans using 5cm jaw for a subset of plans that used 2.5cm jaw to exam if treatment efficiency can be improved without sacrificing plan quality. Results: There were significant dosimetric differences for organ at risks (OARs) among different institutions (A,B,C). Using the lowest average MF (1.9±0.4) and 5cm field width, C had the highest lung, heart, kidney, liver mean doses and maximum doses for lens. Using the same field width of 5cm, but higher MF (2.6±0.6), B had lower doses to the OARs in the thorax and abdomen area. Most of A's plans were planned with 2.5cm jaw, the plans yielded better PTV coverage, higher OAR doses and slightly shorter FDTI compared to institution B. The replanned 5cm jaw plans achieved comparable PTV coverage and OARs sparing, while saving up to 44.7% treatment time. Conclusion: Plan quality and delivery efficiency could vary significantly in CSI planning on Tomotheapy due to choice of different planning parameters. CSI plans using a 5cm jaw, with proper selection of pitch and MF, can achieve comparable/ better plan quality with shorter delivery time compared to 2.5cm jaw plans.