Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2016 Mar 1:11:33.
doi: 10.1186/s13014-016-0603-0.

Re-irradiating spinal column metastases using IMRT and VMAT with and without flattening filter - a treatment planning study

Barbara Dobler  1 , Amine Khemissi  2 , Tina Obermeier  3 , Matthias G Hautmann  4 , Zaira Katsilieri  5 , Oliver Kölbl  6
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Re-irradiating spinal column metastases using IMRT and VMAT with and without flattening filter - a treatment planning study

Barbara Dobler et al. Radiat Oncol. .

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the potential of the flattening filter free (FFF) mode of a linear accelerator for intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for patients with in-field recurrence of vertebral metastases.

Methods: An Elekta Synergy Linac with Agility™ head is used to simulate the treatment of ten patients with locally recurrent spinal column metastases. Four plans were generated for each patient treating the vertebrae sparing the spinal cord: Dual arc VMAT and nine field step and shoot IMRT each with and without flattening filter. Plan quality was assessed considering target coverage and sparing of the spinal cord and normal tissue. All plans were verified by a 2D-ionisation-chamber-array, peripheral doses were measured and compared to calculations. Delivery times were measured and compared. The Wilcoxon test was used for statistical analysis with a significance level of 0.05.

Results: Target coverage, homogeneity index and conformity index were comparable for both flat and flattening filter free beams. The volume of the spinal cord receiving the allowed maximum dose to keep the risk of radiation myelopathy at 0 % was at the same time significantly reduced to below the clinically relevant 1 ccm using FFF mode. In addition the mean dose deposited in the surrounding healthy tissue was significantly reduced in the FFF mode. All four techniques showed equally good gamma scores for plan verification. FFF plans required considerably more MU per fraction dose. Regardless of the large number of MU, out-of-field point dose was significantly lower for FFF plans, with an average reduction of 33 % and mean delivery time was significantly reduced by 22 % using FFF beams. When compared to IMRT FF, VMAT FFF offered even a reduction of 71 % in delivery time and 45 % in peripheral dose.

Conclusions: FFF plans showed a significant improvement in sparing of normal tissue and the spinal cord, keeping target coverage and homogeneity comparable. In addition, delivery times were significantly reduced for FFF treatments, minimizing intrafractional motion as well as strain for the patient. Shortest delivery times were achieved using VMAT FFF. For radiotherapy of spinal column metastases VMAT FFF may therefore be considered the preferable treatment option for the combination of Elekta Synergy Linacs and Oncentra® External Beam v4.5 treatment planning system.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Measurement setup at the linac. The 2D-ionisationchamber-array MatriXX EvolutionTM was set up between slabs of RW3 and centered at the isocenter of the linac. The setup was extended cranially by additional slabs of RW3 of the same height with a 0.3 ccm ionisation chamber positioned 31 cm cranially of the isocenter
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Comparison of dose distributions. Comparison of dose distributions in one transversal slice for a representative case. Top IMRT, bottom VMAT, left FF, right FFF
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Comparison of dose volume histograms. Comparison of dose volume histograms for the case of Fig. 2
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Georg D, Knoos T, McClean B. Current status and future perspective of flattening filter free photon beams. Med Phys. 2011;38(3):1280–93. doi: 10.1118/1.3554643. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kragl G, Baier F, Lutz S, Albrich D, Dalaryd M, Kroupa B, et al. Flattening filter free beams in SBRT and IMRT: dosimetric assessment of peripheral doses. Z Med Phys. 2011;21(2):91–101. doi: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2010.07.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jank J, Kragl G, Georg D. Impact of a flattening filter free linear accelerator on structural shielding design. Z Med Phys. 2014;24(1):38–48. doi: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2013.05.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ponisch F, Titt U, Vassiliev ON, Kry SF, Mohan R. Properties of unflattened photon beams shaped by a multileaf collimator. Med Phys. 2006;33(6):1738–46. doi: 10.1118/1.2201149. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Titt U, Vassiliev ON, Ponisch F, Dong L, Liu H, Mohan R. A flattening filter free photon treatment concept evaluation with Monte Carlo. Med Phys. 2006;33(6):1595–602. doi: 10.1118/1.2198327. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources