A dosimetrically motivated pathfinding approach for non-isocentric dynamic trajectory radiotherapy

Gian Guyer,Jenny Bertholet,Silvan Mueller,Chengchen Zhu,Werner Volken,Daniel M Aebersold,Peter Manser,Michael K Fix
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ad75e1
2024-08-30
Abstract:Non-isocentric dynamic trajectory radiotherapy (DTRT) involves dynamic table translations in synchrony with intensity modulation and dynamic gantry, table, and/or collimator rotation. This work aims to develop and evaluate a novel dosimetrically motivated path determination technique for non-isocentric DTRT.

Approach: The path determination considers all available beam directions, given on a user-specified grid of gantry angle, table angle, and longitudinal, vertical, and lateral table position. Additionally, the source-to-target distance of all beam directions can be extended by moving the table away from the gantry along the central beam axis to increase the collision-free space. The path determination uses a column generation algorithm to iteratively add beam directions to paths until a user-defined total path length is reached. A subsequent direct aperture optimization of the intensity modulation along the paths creates deliverable plans.

Non-isocentric DTRT plans using the path determination and using a manual path setup were created for a craniospinal and a spinal irradiation case. Furthermore, VMAT, isocentric DTRT, and non-isocentric DTRT plans are created for a breast, head and neck (H&N), and esophagus case. Additionally, a HyperArc plan is created or the H&N case. The plans are compared in terms of the dosimetric treatment plan quality and estimated delivery time.

Main results: For the craniospinal and spinal irradiation case, using path determination results in dose distributions with improved conformity but a slightly worse target homogeneity compared to manual path setup.

The non-isocentric DTRT plans maintained target coverage while reducing the mean dose to organs-at-risk on average by 1.7Gy (breast), 1.0Gy (H&N), and 1.6Gy (esophagus) compared to the VMAT plans and by 0.8Gy (breast), 0.6Gy (H&N), and 0.8Gy (esophagus) compared to the isocentric DTRT plans. 

Significance: A general dosimetrically motivated path determination applicable to non-isocentric DTRT plans is successfully developed, further advancing the treatment planning for non-isocentric DTRT.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?