Impact of machines on plan quality: Volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy

S. Clemente, M. Cozzolino, C. Oliviero, A. Fiorentino, C. Chiumento, V. Fusco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of different machines on plan quality using both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Materials and methods: Eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx were selected at random. Plans were computed for IMRT and VMAT Smart Arc, using Pinnacle TPS for an Elekta (IMRT-E, VMAT-E) and Varian linac (IMRT-V, VMAT-V). A three-dose level prescription was used to deliver 70, 63 and 58.1 Gy to regions of macroscopic, microscopic high- and low-risk disease, respectively. All doses were given in 35 fractions. Comparisons were performed on dose-volume histogram data, monitor units (MU), and delivery time. Results: VMAT-E plans resulted slightly MU efficient (-24 % p <0.05) compared to VMAT-V while IMRT-V shortened delivery time (-19 % p <0.05) compared to IMRT-E. All the delivery techniques resulted in equivalent target coverage in terms of D98 % and D2 %. For VMAT technique, a significant improvement of 7 % in homogeneity index (HI) for PTV58.1 was observed for Varian machine. A slight improvement in OARs sparing was observed with Elekta machine both for IMRT and VMAT techniques. Conclusion: Similar plan quality was observed for Elekta and Varian linacs, significant differences were observed in delivery efficiency, as MU number and delivery times, in favor of Elekta and Varian, respectively.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)141-146
Number of pages6
JournalClinical and Translational Oncology
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2014

Fingerprint

Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy
Radiotherapy
Oropharynx
Prescriptions
Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Keywords

  • IMRT
  • Varian and Elekta linacs
  • VMAT

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Impact of machines on plan quality : Volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy. / Clemente, S.; Cozzolino, M.; Oliviero, C.; Fiorentino, A.; Chiumento, C.; Fusco, V.

In: Clinical and Translational Oncology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 02.2014, p. 141-146.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Clemente, S. ; Cozzolino, M. ; Oliviero, C. ; Fiorentino, A. ; Chiumento, C. ; Fusco, V. / Impact of machines on plan quality : Volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy. In: Clinical and Translational Oncology. 2014 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 141-146.
@article{987e1481bd8f46e5a6194ff9301880a3,
title = "Impact of machines on plan quality: Volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate the impact of different machines on plan quality using both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Materials and methods: Eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx were selected at random. Plans were computed for IMRT and VMAT Smart Arc, using Pinnacle TPS for an Elekta (IMRT-E, VMAT-E) and Varian linac (IMRT-V, VMAT-V). A three-dose level prescription was used to deliver 70, 63 and 58.1 Gy to regions of macroscopic, microscopic high- and low-risk disease, respectively. All doses were given in 35 fractions. Comparisons were performed on dose-volume histogram data, monitor units (MU), and delivery time. Results: VMAT-E plans resulted slightly MU efficient (-24 {\%} p <0.05) compared to VMAT-V while IMRT-V shortened delivery time (-19 {\%} p <0.05) compared to IMRT-E. All the delivery techniques resulted in equivalent target coverage in terms of D98 {\%} and D2 {\%}. For VMAT technique, a significant improvement of 7 {\%} in homogeneity index (HI) for PTV58.1 was observed for Varian machine. A slight improvement in OARs sparing was observed with Elekta machine both for IMRT and VMAT techniques. Conclusion: Similar plan quality was observed for Elekta and Varian linacs, significant differences were observed in delivery efficiency, as MU number and delivery times, in favor of Elekta and Varian, respectively.",
keywords = "IMRT, Varian and Elekta linacs, VMAT",
author = "S. Clemente and M. Cozzolino and C. Oliviero and A. Fiorentino and C. Chiumento and V. Fusco",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1007/s12094-013-1049-6",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "141--146",
journal = "Clinical and Translational Oncology",
issn = "1699-048X",
publisher = "Springer-Verlag Italia",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Impact of machines on plan quality

T2 - Volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy

AU - Clemente, S.

AU - Cozzolino, M.

AU - Oliviero, C.

AU - Fiorentino, A.

AU - Chiumento, C.

AU - Fusco, V.

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the impact of different machines on plan quality using both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Materials and methods: Eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx were selected at random. Plans were computed for IMRT and VMAT Smart Arc, using Pinnacle TPS for an Elekta (IMRT-E, VMAT-E) and Varian linac (IMRT-V, VMAT-V). A three-dose level prescription was used to deliver 70, 63 and 58.1 Gy to regions of macroscopic, microscopic high- and low-risk disease, respectively. All doses were given in 35 fractions. Comparisons were performed on dose-volume histogram data, monitor units (MU), and delivery time. Results: VMAT-E plans resulted slightly MU efficient (-24 % p <0.05) compared to VMAT-V while IMRT-V shortened delivery time (-19 % p <0.05) compared to IMRT-E. All the delivery techniques resulted in equivalent target coverage in terms of D98 % and D2 %. For VMAT technique, a significant improvement of 7 % in homogeneity index (HI) for PTV58.1 was observed for Varian machine. A slight improvement in OARs sparing was observed with Elekta machine both for IMRT and VMAT techniques. Conclusion: Similar plan quality was observed for Elekta and Varian linacs, significant differences were observed in delivery efficiency, as MU number and delivery times, in favor of Elekta and Varian, respectively.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate the impact of different machines on plan quality using both intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. Materials and methods: Eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx were selected at random. Plans were computed for IMRT and VMAT Smart Arc, using Pinnacle TPS for an Elekta (IMRT-E, VMAT-E) and Varian linac (IMRT-V, VMAT-V). A three-dose level prescription was used to deliver 70, 63 and 58.1 Gy to regions of macroscopic, microscopic high- and low-risk disease, respectively. All doses were given in 35 fractions. Comparisons were performed on dose-volume histogram data, monitor units (MU), and delivery time. Results: VMAT-E plans resulted slightly MU efficient (-24 % p <0.05) compared to VMAT-V while IMRT-V shortened delivery time (-19 % p <0.05) compared to IMRT-E. All the delivery techniques resulted in equivalent target coverage in terms of D98 % and D2 %. For VMAT technique, a significant improvement of 7 % in homogeneity index (HI) for PTV58.1 was observed for Varian machine. A slight improvement in OARs sparing was observed with Elekta machine both for IMRT and VMAT techniques. Conclusion: Similar plan quality was observed for Elekta and Varian linacs, significant differences were observed in delivery efficiency, as MU number and delivery times, in favor of Elekta and Varian, respectively.

KW - IMRT

KW - Varian and Elekta linacs

KW - VMAT

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84893718050&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84893718050&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12094-013-1049-6

DO - 10.1007/s12094-013-1049-6

M3 - Article

C2 - 23645162

AN - SCOPUS:84893718050

VL - 16

SP - 141

EP - 146

JO - Clinical and Translational Oncology

JF - Clinical and Translational Oncology

SN - 1699-048X

IS - 2

ER -