Dosimetric optimization for dynamic mixed beam arc therapy (DYMBARC)
Authors: Zhu Chengchen , Guyer Gian , Bertholet Jenny , Mueller Silvan , Loebner Hannes A. , Volken Werner , Arnold Julius , Aebersold Daniel M. , Stampanoni Marco F. M. , Fix Michael K. , Manser Peter 
Published: October 2024

Background

Non‐coplanarity and mixed beam modality could be combined to further enhance dosimetric treatment plan quality. We introduce dynamic mixed beam arc therapy (DYMBARC) as an innovative technique that combines non‐coplanar photon and electron arcs, dynamic gantry and collimator rotations, and intensity modulation with photon multileaf collimator (MLC). However, finding favorable beam directions for DYMBARC is challenging due to the large solution space, machine component constraints, and optimization parameters, posing a highly non‐convex optimization problem.

Purpose

To establish DYMBARC and solve the pathfinding challenge by employing direct aperture optimization (DAO) to determine the table angles and gantry angle ranges of photon and electron arcs for different clinically motivated cases.

Methods

The method starts by generating a grid of beam directions based on user‐defined resolutions along the gantry and table angle axes for each beam quality considered. Beam directions causing collisions or entering through the end of CT are excluded. For electrons, a fixed source‐to‐surface distance of 80 cm is used to reduce in‐air scatter. Electron beam energies with insufficient range to reach the target or beam directions impinging on the table before reaching the patient are excluded. The remaining beam directions form the pathfinding solution space. Promising photon and electron MLC‐defined apertures, with associated monitor unit (MU) weights, are iteratively added using a hybrid‐DAO algorithm. This algorithm combines column generation to add apertures and simulated annealing to further refine aperture shapes and weights. Apertures are added until the requested number of paths are formed and the user‐defined maximum total gantry angle range is reached. Paths are resampled to a finer gantry angle resolution and subject to DAO for simultaneous optimization of beam intensities along the photon/electron arcs. Subsequent final dose calculation and MU weight reoptimization result in a deliverable DYMBARC plan. DYMBARC plans are created for three clinically motivated cases (brain, breast, and pelvis) and compared to DYMBARC variants: colli‐DTRT (dynamic collimator trajectory radiotherapy) using non‐coplanar photon arcs; and Arc‐MBRT (mixed beam radiotherapy) using photons and electrons but restricted to coplanar setup. Additionally, a manually defined volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) setup serves as a reference clinical technique. Dose distributions, dose‐volume histograms, and dosimetric endpoints are evaluated. Dosimetric validation with radiochromic film measurements (gamma evaluation, 3% / 2 mm (global), 10% dose threshold) is performed on a TrueBeam system in developer mode for one case.

Results

While maintaining similar target coverage and homogeneity, DYMBARC reduced mean doses to organs‐at‐risk compared to VMAT by an average of 3.2, 0.5, and 2.9 Gy for the brain, breast, and pelvis cases, respectively. Similar or smaller mean dose reductions were observed for Arc‐MBRT or colli‐DTRT, compared to VMAT. Electron contributions to the mean planning target volume dose ranged from 2% to 34% for DYMBARC and from 11% to 40% for Arc‐MBRT. Measurement validation showed >99.7% gamma passing rate.

Conclusions

DYMBARC was successfully established using a dosimetrically optimized pathfinding approach, combining non‐coplanarity with mixed beam modality. DYMBARC facilitated the determination of photon and electron contributions on a case‐by‐case basis, enhancing more personalized treatment modalities.