Main Session
Sep 28
PQA 01 - Radiation and Cancer Physics, Sarcoma and Cutaneous Tumors

2146 - Bilateral Breast Treatment in a Single Arc Using Novel Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy with Static-Angle Modulated Ports (STAMPs)

02:30pm - 04:00pm PT
Hall F
Screen: 10
POSTER

Presenter(s)

Taoran Li, PhD - University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA

T. Li1,2, L. Cozzi3, L. Rosa2, R. Clark2, P. Agarwal2, Y. Gao4, Y. Yang1, B. K. K. Teo1, A. Magliari2, H. Kalra2, F. J. Reynoso5, P. A. Kupelian6, and S. Beriwal7; 1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 2Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, 3Humanitas Cancer Center and Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy, 4Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 5Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Louis, MO, 6Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 7Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburg, PA

Purpose/Objective(s): Bilateral breast cancer presents planning challenges due to complex and expansive target geometries, and proximity to critical structures (heart, lungs, LAD, esophagus). Volumetric modulated arc therapy/VMAT is a novel method that integrates dynamic arc delivery with static angle modulated ports (STAMPs) using fast, GPU-accelerated optimization. We evaluated its performance for bilateral breast treatment planning and delivery.

Materials/Methods: 10 bilateral breast cases were retrospectively planned in treatment planning system using conventional VMAT (5–6 partial arcs) and RAD (one arc with six STAMPs). Planning targets included both breasts/chest walls and comprehensive regional nodes. Paired analyses compared dosimetric endpoints for targets and organs at risk (OARs): lung V5Gy, V10Gy, V20Gy; heart Dmean and D5%; esophagus D0.03 cm³; as well as target coverage (V95%) and volume of breast getting 105% (V105%). Planning efficiency (assessed via screen recording) and delivery metrics (monitor units and total delivery time) were also compared for 3 representative cases.

Results: DVH analysis showed that 90% of RAD endpoints met or exceeded clinical goals versus 70% for VMAT. Target coverage (V95%) and breast V105% was nearly identical. RAD substantially reduced lung V5Gy by an average of 10.8% (range +0.9% to +16.3%), with modest improvements in V10Gy (2.4%) and V20Gy (0.7%), indicating robust sparing of low-dose lung regions. Mean heart dose and D5% was similar between techniques. RAD significantly improved esophagus sparing by lowering D0.03 cm³ by ~5.4 Gy (range +2.5 to +8.5 Gy). For delivery efficiency, RAD decreased total MU by ~30% and reduced total delivery time by ~62% (from 5.5-6.3 min with VMAT to 2.1-2.5 min with RAD). Planning efficiency also markedly improved, from 33–45 minutes with VMAT to 9–22 minutes with RAD.

Conclusion: RAD offers improved dosimetry and efficiency. With substantially reduced lower lung low-dose exposure, reduced esophageal high-dose regions, comparable target coverage and homogeneity, and significantly faster planning and delivery, RAD is a preferred technology to conventional VMAT for bilateral breast cancer treatment.

Parameter

Unit

Clinical Goals

VMAT (mean ± SD)

RAD (mean ± SD)

Paired Difference (VMAT-RAD)

PTVp+PTVn V95%

%

> 90%

94 ± 1.5

94.3 ± 1.6

0.3 ± 0.7

Breast V105%

%

= 10.0%

3.3 ± 3.1

3.7± 4.8

-0.4 ± 6.9

Esophagus D0.03cm³

Gy

< 30.00 Gy

30.9 ± 1.2

25.5 ± 2.2

5.4 ± 2.1

Esophagus Dmean

Gy

< 10.00 Gy

10.6 ± 0.7

9.3 ± 0.8

1.4 ± 0.8

Heart D5%

Gy

< 25.00 Gy

8.9 ± 7.8

9.3 ± 7.9

-0.4 ± 1.2

Heart Dmean

Gy

= 5.00 Gy

4.5 ± 4.4

4.5 ± 4.5

-0.1 ± 0.6

LAD D0.03cm³

Gy

< 7.00 Gy

11.6 ± 7.3

10.6 ± 6.3

1.0 ± 2.6

Lungs V20Gy

%

= 30.0%

20.1 ± 2.5

19.4 ± 4.3

0.7 ± 3.4

Lungs V10Gy

%

= 50.0%

35.4 ± 3.8

33.0 ± 5.9

2.4 ± 5.6

Lungs V5Gy

%

= 65.0%

57.0 ± 5.0

45.8 ± 5.9

10.8 ± 4.4

Body D0.03cm³

%

= 107.0%

110.1 ± 1.0

109.2 ± 1.7

0.9 ± 1.3

Body V100%

cm³

1762 ± 680

1576 ± 805

187 ± 403

Planning Time

min

39.0 ± 6.0

16.0 ± 4.0

23.0 ± 5.0

Total MU

MU

2268 ± 335

1654 ± 229

615 ± 501

Delivery Time

min

6.3, 5.5, 5.6

2.0, 2.5, 2.1

4.3, 3.0, 3.5