McGrath, S.D., Matuszak, M.M., Yan, D., Kestin, L.L., Martinez, A.A. and Grills, I.S. (2010) Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Delivery of Hypofractionated Stereotactic Lung Radiotherapy: A Dosimetric and Treatment Efficiency Analysis. Radiation Oncology, 95, 153-157.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2009.12.039

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Partial and Full Arc Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in Lung Cancer Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy with Different Definitions of Internal Target Volume Based on 4D CT

  AUTHORS: Wu Wang, Didi Chen, Ce Han, Xiaomin Zheng, Yongqiang Zhou, Changfei Gong, Congying Xie, Xiance Jin

  KEYWORDS: Lung Cancer, Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy, Four Dimensional Computed Tomography, Internal Target Volume, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy

  JOURNAL NAME: International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology, Vol.7 No.4, November 9, 2018

  ABSTRACT: Purpose: To investigate the feasibility of partial arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), as well the volumetric and dosimetric effects of different internal target volume (ITV) definitions with 4D CT. Methods: Fourteen patients with primary and metastatic lung cancer underwent SBRT were enrolled. Full and partial arc VMAT plans were generated with four different ITVs: ITVall, ITVMIP, ITVAIP and ITV2phases, representing ITVs generated from all 10 respiratory phases, maximum intensity projection (MIP), average intensity projection (AIP), and 2 extreme respiratory phases. Volumetric and dosimetric differences, as well as MU and delivery time were investigated. Results: Partial arc VMAT irradiated more dose at 2 cm away from planning target volume (PTV) (P = 0.002), however, it achieved better protection on mean lung dose , lung V5, spinal cord, heart and esophagus compared with full arc VMAT. The average MU and delivery time of partial arc VMAT were 240 and 1.6 min less than those of full arc VMAT. There were no significant differences on target coverage and organ at risks (OARs) sparing among four ITVs. The average percent volume differences of ITVMIP, ITVAIP and ITV2phases to ITVall were 8.6%, 13.4%, and 25.2%, respectively. Conclusions: Although partial arc VMAT delivered more dose 2 cm out of PTV, it decreases the dose to lung, spinal cord, and esophagus, as well decreased the total MU and delivery time compared with full arc VMAT without sacrificing target coverage. Partial arc VMAT was feasible and more efficient for lung SBRT.