Stereotactic radiosurgery for limited brain metastasis using three different techniques: helical tomotherapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and cone-based LINAC radiosurgery

• Published in: Radiation oncology journal Vol. 40; no. 4; pp. 232 - 241
• Main Authors: Jia-Mahasap, Bongkot, Madla, Chakri, Sripan, Patumrat, Chitapanarux, Imjai, Tharavichitkul, Ekkasit, Chakrabandhu, Somvilai, Klunklin, Pitchayaponne, Onchan, Wimrak
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Korea (South) The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology 01.12.2022
• Subjects: Original; Cone-based linac radiosurgery; Stereotactic radiosurgery; Helical tomotherapy; Volumetric modulated arc therapy
• DOI: 10.3857/roj.2022.00136
• ISSN: 2234-1900

Specific radiation delivered to tumors by stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become widely used in the treatment of brain metastasis. This study aimed to compare radiation therapy planning and its parameters from SRS using three different modalities: helical tomotherapy (HT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and cone-based linac radiosurgery (Cone-based). Each contouring dataset of patents who experienced one to four brain metastasis received SRS in our center was re-planned to create radiation therapy planning in all three treatment systems (HT, VMAT, and Cone-based). The parameters of conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), CI50, and gradient index (CGI) were analyzed to compare the effects of the three techniques. Decision score analysis was used to evaluate the performance on dosimetric and organs-at-risk parameters among the different techniques by applying the Cone-based technique as a benchmark. A total of 21 patients with 39 lesions were included in this study. The results from the decision score analysis demonstrated statistically identical CI, CI50, and CGI values between Cone-based and VMAT for single lesions. For multiple lesions, VMAT also provided better CI when compared to Cone-based technique while HT exhibited the poorest dosimetric parameters. Moreover, VMAT exhibited the lowest BrainV5Gy value and displayed the shortest beam-on time calculation. We have conducted a comprehensive comparison of SRS planning approaches. The Cone-based technique revealed the highest HI value, while VMAT provided the best estimated beam-on time value. HT displayed a feasible SRS modality for single lesions, but not for multiple lesions.