Enhancing Delivery Efficiency on the MR-Linac: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Prostate SBRT using VMAT

Long treatment sessions are a limitation within MRIgART. This work aims for significantly enhancing the delivery efficiency on the MR-linac by introducing dedicated optimization and delivery techniques for VMAT. VMAT plan and delivery quality during MRIgART is compared to step-and-shoot IMRT for prostate SBRT.PURPOSELong treatment sessions are a limitation within MRIgART. This work aims for significantly enhancing the delivery efficiency on the MR-linac by introducing dedicated optimization and delivery techniques for VMAT. VMAT plan and delivery quality during MRIgART is compared to step-and-shoot IMRT for prostate SBRT.Ten prostate patients previously treated on a 1.5T MR-linac were retrospectively replanned to 36.25 Gy in five fractions using step-and-shoot IMRT and the clinical Hyperion optimizer within Monaco (Hyp-IMRT), the same optimizer with a VMAT technique (Hyp-VMAT), and a research-based optimizer with VMAT (OFL+PGD-VMAT). The plans were then adapted onto each daily MRI dataset using two different optimization strategies to evaluate the ATP workflow: "optimize weights" (IMRT-Weights and VMAT-Weights) and "optimize shapes" (IMRT-Shapes and VMAT-Shapes). Treatment efficiency was evaluated by measuring optimization time, delivery time, and total time (optimization + delivery). Plan quality was assessed by evaluating OAR sparing. Ten patient plans were measured using a modified linac control system to assess delivery accuracy via a gamma analysis (2%/2mm). Delivery efficiency was calculated as average dose rate divided by maximum dose rate.METHODS AND MATERIALSTen prostate patients previously treated on a 1.5T MR-linac were retrospectively replanned to 36.25 Gy in five fractions using step-and-shoot IMRT and the clinical Hyperion optimizer within Monaco (Hyp-IMRT), the same optimizer with a VMAT technique (Hyp-VMAT), and a research-based optimizer with VMAT (OFL+PGD-VMAT). The plans were then adapted onto each daily MRI dataset using two different optimization strategies to evaluate the ATP workflow: "optimize weights" (IMRT-Weights and VMAT-Weights) and "optimize shapes" (IMRT-Shapes and VMAT-Shapes). Treatment efficiency was evaluated by measuring optimization time, delivery time, and total time (optimization + delivery). Plan quality was assessed by evaluating OAR sparing. Ten patient plans were measured using a modified linac control system to assess delivery accuracy via a gamma analysis (2%/2mm). Delivery efficiency was calculated as average d