• Nienke A Hoffmans-Holtzer, Daan Hoffmans, Max Dahele, Ben J Slotman, and Wilko F A R Verbakel.
• Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
• Strahlenther Onkol. 2015 Mar 1; 191 (3): 272-80.

PurposeThe purpose of this work was to investigate whether adapting gantry and collimator angles can compensate for roll and pitch setup errors during volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery.MethodsPreviously delivered clinical plans for locally advanced head-and-neck (H&N) cancer (n = 5), localized prostate cancer (n = 2), and whole brain with simultaneous integrated boost to 5 metastases (WB + 5M, n = 1) were used for this study. Known rigid rotations were introduced in the planning CT scans. To compensate for these, in-house software was used to adapt gantry and collimator angles in the plan. Doses to planning target volumes (PTV) and critical organs at risk (OAR) were calculated with and without compensation and compared with the original clinical plan. Measurements in the sagittal plane in a polystyrene phantom using radiochromic film were compared by gamma (γ) evaluation for 2 H&N cancer patients.ResultsFor H&N plans, the introduction of 2°-roll and 3°-pitch rotations reduced mean PTV coverage from 98.7 to 96.3%. This improved to 98.1% with gantry and collimator compensation. For prostate plans respective figures were 98.4, 97.5, and 98.4%. For WB + 5M, compensation worked less well, especially for smaller volumes and volumes farther from the isocenter. Mean comparative γ evaluation (3%, 1 mm) between original and pitched plans resulted in 86% γ < 1. The corrected plan restored the mean comparison to 96% γ < 1.ConclusionPreliminary data suggest that adapting gantry and collimator angles is a promising way to correct roll and pitch set-up errors of < 3° during VMAT for H&N and prostate cancer.

20 keywords...

hide…