Abstract
Purpose:
Dosimetrically compare CyberKnife (CK) and linac‐based (LB) stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans for lumbar spine.
Methods:
Ten patient plans with lumbar spine tumors treated with CK were selected and retrospectively optimized using three techniques: CK, volumetric modulated arc (VMAT, three arcs), and 9‐field‐intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). For the LB plans, the target volume was expanded by 1mm to accommodate additional uncertainty in patient positioning. All plans were optimized to a prescription dose of 27Gy in 3 fractions covering 90% of the PTV. If the dose constraints to the cauda equina (cauda) were not met, the prescription dose was lowered to 24Gy. Parameters evaluated included Paddick Conformity‐Index (CI) and Gradient‐Index (GI). A two‐tailed paired t‐test was used to establish statistically significant differences in cauda doses.
Results:
Target volumes for LB plans were on average 38% larger. In terms of the indices, the closer the index values to unity the steeper the dose falloff and the higher the dose conformity to the target. The results showed that LB plans were in general statistically superior to CK plans. The IMRT plan showed the best average gradient index of 2.995, with VMAT and CK GI values of 3.699 and 5.476, respectively. Similarly, the same trend occurs with the average CI results: 0.821, 0.814, and 0.758, corresponding to IMRT, VMAT, and CK. Notably, in one CK plan the target dose was reduced to 24Gy to meet cauda constraints. Additionally, there was a statistically significant dose difference for the cauda between the CK and LB plans.
Conclusion:
This study demonstrates that LB plans for lumbar spine SBRT can be as effective or even better than CK plans. Despite the expansion of the target volume, the LB plans did not demonstrate dosimetric inferiority. The LB plans Resultin 2‐to‐3 fold decrease of treatment time.
