The objective of this article is to evaluate the dosimetric efficacy of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in comparison to dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) for very small volume (≤1 cc) and small volume (≤3 cc) tumours for flattened (FF) and unflattened (FFF) 6 MV beams.

A total of 21 patients who were treated with single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery, using either VMAT, DCAT or 3DCRT, were included in this study. The volume categorisation was seven patients each in <1, 1–2 and 2–3 cc volume. The treatment was planned with 6 MV FF and FFF beams using three different techniques: VMAT/Rapid Arc (RA) (RA_FF and RA_FFF), dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCA_FF and DCA_FFF) and 3DCRT (Static_FF and Static_FFF). Plans were evaluated for target coverage (V100%), conformity index, homogeneity index, dose gradient for 50% dose fall-off, total MU and MU/dose ratio [intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) factor], normal brain receiving >12 Gy dose, dose to the organ at risk (OAR), beam ON time and dose received by 12 cc of the brain.

The average target coverage for all plans, all tumour volumes (TVs) and delivery techniques is 96·4 ± 4·5 (range 95·7 ± 6·1–97·5 ± 2·9%). The conformity index averaged over all volume ranges <1, 2, 3 cc> varies between 0·55 ± 0·08 and 0·68 ± 0·04 with minimum and maximum being exhibited by DCA_FFF for 1 cc and Static_FFF/RA_FFF for 3 cc tumours, respectively. Mean IMRT factor averaged over all volume ranges for RA_FF, DCA_FF and Static_FF are 3·5 ± 0·8, 2·0 ± 0·2 and 2·0 ± 0·2, respectively; 50% dose fall-off gradient varies in the range of 0·33–0·42, 0·35–0·40 and 0·38–0·45 for 1, 2 and 3 cc tumours, respectively.

This study establishes the equivalence between the FF and FFF beam models and different delivery techniques for stereotactic radiosurgery in small TVs in the range of ≤1 to ≤3 cc. Dose conformity, heterogeneity, dose fall-off characteristics and OAR doses show no or very little variation. FFF could offer only limited time advantage due to excess dose rate over an FF beam.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) has emerged as one of the most favourable techniques for radiotherapy treatment in recent years because of its conformal dose distribution to the planning target volume (PTV), lower doses to adjacent normal organs at risk (OARs) and faster and easier dose delivery. A typical conventional VMAT protocol for low-intermediate risk prostate cancer uses a flattened 6 MV photon beam to deliver 78 Gy in 39 fractions, however, a recent Radiation Therapy Oncology Group study investigated prostate cancer radiotherapy with a hypofractionated dose scheme of 36·25 Gy in 5 fractions. One advantage of flattening filter-free (FFF) beams in radiotherapy is the higher doses in the central region on the dose profile and much higher dose delivery rates.

This paper reports the investigation of preclinical studies for implementing FFF beams in hypofractionated VMAT for prostate cancer radiotherapy. All treatment planning were accomplished using Varian EclipseTM treatment planning system version 11 and delivered on Varian Truebeam linear accelerators. The studies compared the biological-effective dose–volume histograms and dose–volume histograms of PTV and OARs for 20 patients using conventional and hypofractionated dose schemes. The study also evaluated the 6 and 10 MV FFF by comparing 6 and 10 MV VMAT plans with the FFF beams. The treatment time was investigated using plans with 6 MV beams and doses of 2, 4, 5, 6, 7·25 Gy/fraction and plans with 10 MV FFF with a dose of 7·25 Gy/fraction. We also investigated an angular monitor unit (MU) quantity (MU/deg) and its threshold value for RapidArcTM plans, beyond which FFF beams can be considered superior to flattened beams in terms of treatment time increased caused by higher dose per fraction.

The results show that the hypofractionated plans resulted in greater biological equivalent doses to PTV and lower doses to OARs. The 10 MV FFF plans have statistically lower mean doses to all the OARs, whereas PTV homogeneity index remains the same compared with other beam energies. The mean body integral dose for the 20 patients is 8·7% lower using 10 MV FFF compared with 6 MV FFF mainly because of the higher energy and less required MUs with the 10 MV FFF beam. The hypofractionated scheme with 10 MV FFF plan has the same treatment time as that of the 6 MV plan at 2 Gy/fraction, as the higher dose delivery rates at 10 MV FFF can compensate for the higher prescribed dose per fraction without the need of extra treatment time.

In this study, we observed that the 10 MV FFF beam is better for hypofractionated prostate cancer VMAT plan delivery. The threshold value of MU/deg is found to be 2·083 MU/deg based on our machine configurations.