Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a prevalent disease in Southern China. Radiation therapy remains the primary treatment modality for NPC due to its high radiation sensitivity. Conventional volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) can achieve excellent target volume coverage and superior conformal dose distributions while sparing organs at risk (OARs). However, VMAT may also produce substantial volume of low-dose region in the surrounding normal tissue. Our oncology centre has incorporated the concept of anterior cervical field with VMAT in clinical practice of NPC treatment planning. The purpose of this treatment-comparison case study is to demonstrate the lower neck OARs sparing ability of hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy (hybrid-VMAT) over conventional VMAT for NPC.

Four patients diagnosed with NPC of different clinical lymph node staging (N staging) were enrolled for this treatment-comparison case study. Planning target volumes and OARs were delineated with reference to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0225/0615. Additional OARs from lower neck region, including thyroid, trachea, cervical spine and pharyngeal constrictor muscles (PCMs), were also delineated. Two treatment techniques, hybrid-VMAT and VMAT, were created for each patient’s dataset.

Both treatment techniques produced adequate target coverage and reduced radiation dose to the OARs as suggested in RTOG 0225/0615. Hybrid-VMAT plans achieved superior dose reduction in larynx, oesophagus, middle PCM, inferior PCM, cervical spine and trachea comparing with VMAT plans. Hence, the clinical usability and functional outcome of hybrid-VMAT should be further investigated for NPC radiation therapy.

The purpose of the present study is to compare hybrid [three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy-volumetric-modulated arc therapy (3DCRT-VMAT)] and helical tomotherapy (HT) techniques in terms of both planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) in the plans we made in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients

Radiotherapy was planned for 15 locally advanced NSCLC patients with 2 different techniques. Large tumours with positive mediastinal lymph nodes were preferred. The prescription dose was determined as 60 Gy at 30 fractions.

Mean PTV volume was 602·5 cc (range: 265–1461). Mean total lung volume was 4264 cc (range: 1885–6803). Homogeneity index, Dmean, Dmax, D2 and V105 were found to be lower in HT, V100, total monitor units (MU) and total beam on time were found to be lower in the hybrid plan. Total lung Dmean was found to be 17 Gy in both techniques. V10 value was 42·85 in the hybrid plan and 48·67 in HT (p = 0·037). Heart Dmean was 14·5 Gy in the hybrid plan and 18·7 in HT (p < 0·001), and V30 values were 18·1 and 22·9, respectively (p = 0·009).

Suitable dose coverage and OAR doses can be provided with both techniques. Especially the opposite lung, heart and oesophagus doses can be kept lower with the hybrid plan, and lower MU and shorter beam on time can be provided.

Evaluating the improvements of placing the treatment isocentre at the boost centre of mass (CoM) in a hybrid treatment for breast cancer radiotherapy.

Twenty-two patients were planned in two isocentre locations with two forward intensity-modulated radiation therapy (fIMRT) tangentials to the breast and a volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to the boost. A simultaneous integrated boost technique was used. Breast Boost (BB) Vector was investigated as a criterion for selecting an appropriate isocentre placement. Various metrics for boost, breast and hybrid plans were analysed using analysis of variance statistics.

Comparing hybrid plans at the boost CoM vs. hybrid plans at the breast CoM, no significant differences were found. Analysis of relative variations of planning target volume (PTV) boost coverage vs. BB Vector indicated an upgrade in boost CoM isocentre strategy. Dose to organs at risk was comparable: V5Gy (26·24 vs. 25·69%, p = 0·8), V20Gy (14·66 vs. 14·58%, p = 0·959) and the mean dose (7·37 Gy vs. 7·26 Gy, p = 0·879) to ipsilateral lung; V5Gy (15·60 vs. 15·22%, p = 0·903), and the mean dose (4·91 Gy vs. 4·86 Gy, p = 0·950) to heart and dose to free breast of boost (46·71 Gy vs. 46·62 Gy, p = 0·408).

The hybrid fIMRT–VMAT technique centred at the boost CoM resulted equivalent to plans centred at the breast CoM, while benefiting from an enhancement in PTV boost coverage for patients with BB Vector superior to 5.