Vol 27, No 1 (2022)
Research paper
Published online: 2022-01-19

open access

Page views 4970
Article views/downloads 282
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Dosimetric sensitivity of leaf width on volumetric modulated arc therapy plan quality: an objective approach

Ghulam Murtaza1, Muhammad Shamshad2, Munir Ahmed3, Shahid Mehmood4, Ehsan Ullah Khan5
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2022;27(1):76-85.

Abstract

Background: Several authors investigated a dosimetric impact of leaf width on radiotherapy plan quality subjectively, and concluded that thinner leaf-width multileaf collimators (MLC) are beneficial because of their better coverage of clinically relevant structures.

Study aimed to investigate the dosimetric effect of MLC leaf width on volumetric modulated arc therapy plan quality by objective approach.

Materials and methods: Twelve of each prostate and head-and-neck patients were planned for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments for MLC leaf widths of 4 mm and 10 mm. Three different VMAT schemes single-arc, dual-arc and two combined independent single-arcs were optimized. Dose volume histogram and Isodose distribution were used for quantitative and qualitative comparison of the treatment plan, respectively. Dose-volume-indices of the planning target volume, organs at risk and number of delivered monitor units were compared. The 4 mm leaf width being reference over 10 mm and results were noted as statistically significant if p ≤ 0.05 using student t-test.

Results: All VMAT schemes for both tumor sites showed a gain in target coverage, similar organs at risk doses and higher monitor units to be delivered, when changing leaf width from 10 mm to 4 mm. The p-values were significant for majority of head-and-neck dose indices. 

Conclusion: The thinner-leaf MLCs, owing to their better spatial resolution, result in an overall gain for target coverage, while maintaining permissible doses to the organs at risk.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Collaborative Working Group. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy: current status and issues of interest. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys . 2001; 51(4): 880–914.
  2. Hong TS, Ritter MA, Tomé WA, et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy: emerging cancer treatment technology. Br J Cancer. 2005; 92(10): 1819–1824.
  3. Otto K. Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 2008; 35(1): 310–317.
  4. Wu Q, Mohan R, Stein J, et al. The impact of leaf width of MLC on intensity-modulated 3DCRT of prostate. Med Phys. 1996; 23: 1170.
  5. Bortfeld T, Oelfke U, Nill S. What is the optimum leaf width of a multileaf collimator? Med Phys. 2000; 27(11): 2494–2502.
  6. Cho B, Cho B. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy: a review with a physics perspective. Radiat Oncol J. 2018; 36(1): 1–10.
  7. Fiveash JB, Murshed H, Duan J, et al. Effect of multileaf collimator leaf width on physical dose distributions in the treatment of CNS and head and neck neoplasms with intensity modulated radiation therapy. Med Phys. 2002; 29(6): 1116–1119.
  8. Burmeister J, McDermott PN, Bossenberger T, et al. Effect of MLC leaf width on the planning and delivery of SMLC IMRT using the CORVUS inverse treatment planning system. Med Phys. 2004; 31(12): 3187–3193.
  9. Leal A, Sánchez-Doblado F, Arráns R, et al. MLC leaf width impact on the clinical dose distribution: a Monte Carlo approach. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 59(5): 1548–1559.
  10. Nill S, Tücking T, Münter MW, et al. Intensity modulated radiation therapy with multileaf collimators of different leaf widths: a comparison of achievable dose distributions. Radiother Oncol. 2005; 75(1): 106–111.
  11. Jin JY, Yin FF, Ryu S, et al. Dosimetric study using different leaf-width MLCs for treatment planning of dynamic conformal arcs and intensity-modulated radiosurgery. Med Phys. 2005; 32(2): 405–411.
  12. Chang J, Yenice KM, Jiang K, et al. Effect of MLC leaf width and PTV margin on the treatment planning of intensity-modulated stereotactic radiosurgery (IMSRS) or radiotherapy (IMSRT). Med Dosim. 2009; 34(2): 110–116.
  13. Wu QJ, Wang Z, Kirkpatrick JP, et al. Impact of collimator leaf width and treatment technique on stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy plans for intra- and extracranial lesions. Radiat Oncol. 2009; 4: 3.
  14. Hong CS, Ju SG, Kim M, et al. Dosimetric effects of multileaf collimator leaf width on intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Med Phys. 2014; 41(2): 021712.
  15. van Kesteren Z, Janssen TM, Damen E, et al. The dosimetric impact of leaf interdigitation and leaf width on VMAT treatment planning in Pinnacle: comparing Pareto fronts. Phys Med Biol. 2012; 57(10): 2943–2952.
  16. Lafond C, Chajon E, Devillers A, et al. Impact of MLC leaf width on volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning for head and neck cancers. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013; 14(6): 4074.
  17. Chae SM, Lee GiW, Son SH. The effect of multileaf collimator leaf width on the radiosurgery planning for spine lesion treatment in terms of the modulated techniques and target complexity. Radiat Oncol. 2014; 9: 72.
  18. Serna A, Puchades V, Mata F, et al. Influence of multi-leaf collimator leaf width in radiosurgery via volumetric modulated arc therapy and 3D dynamic conformal arc therapy. Phys Med. 2015; 31(3): 293–296.
  19. Park JM, Park SoY, Kim JH, et al. The effect of extremely narrow MLC leaf width on the plan quality of VMAT for prostate cancer. Radiat Oncol. 2016 ; 11(85).
  20. Amoush A, Long H, Subedi L, et al. Dosimetric effect of multileaf collimator leaf width on volumetric modulated arc stereotactic radiotherapy for spine tumors. Med Dosim. 2017; 42(2): 111–115.
  21. Orlandini LC, Betti M, Fulcheri C, et al. Dosimetric impact of different multileaf collimators on prostate intensity modulated treatment planning. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2015; 20(5): 358–364.
  22. Grégoire V, Levendag P, Ang KK, et al. CT-based delineation of lymph node levels and related CTVs in the node-negative neck: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, NCIC,RTOG consensus guidelines. Radiother Oncol. 2003; 69(3): 227–236.
  23. Patel I, Glendinning AG, Kirby MC. Dosimetric characteristics of the Elekta Beam Modulator. Phys Med Biol. 2005; 50(23): 5479–5492.
  24. Carosi A, Ingrosso G, Ponti E, et al. Dosimetric effect of Elekta Beam modulator micromultileaf in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Med Dosim. 2014; 39(2): 180–184.
  25. Murtaza G, Cora S, Khan EU. Validation of the relative insensitivity of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan quality to gantry space resolution. J Radiat Res. 2017; 58(4): 579–590.
  26. Murtaza G, Mehmood S, Rasul S, et al. Dosimetric effect of limited aperture multileaf collimator on VMAT plan quality: A study of prostate and head-and-neck cancers. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2018; 23(3): 189–198.
  27. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements Report 83.. Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon-Beam Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). J ICRU. 2010; 10(1): 1–3.
  28. Marks LB, Yorke ED, Jackson A, et al. Use of normal tissue complication probability models in the clinic. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 76(3 Suppl): S10–S19.
  29. Qi P, Xia P. Relationship of segment area and monitor unit efficiency in aperture-based IMRT optimization. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013; 14(3): 4056.
  30. Nankali S, Worm ES, Hansen R, et al. Geometric and dosimetric comparison of four intrafraction motion adaptation strategies for stereotactic liver radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2018; 63(14): 145010.
  31. Petrelli F, Comito T, Barni S, et al. SBRT for CRC liver metastases. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for colorectal cancer liver metastases: A systematic review. Radiother Oncol. 2018; 129(3): 427–434.
  32. Poulsen PR, Murtaza G, Worm ES, et al. Simulated multileaf collimator tracking for stereotactic liver radiotherapy guided by kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring: Dosimetric gain and target overdose trends. Radiother Oncol. 2020; 144: 93–100.



Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy