SU-E-T-24: A Dose Volume Comparison in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Using Flattened and Un-Flattened Photon Beams

Purpose: Aim of this study is to compare the dose volume characteristics of 6X FFF (flattening Free Filter) Arc and 6X FB (flattened Beam) arc photon plans in SBRT technique. Methods: Eight patients who received linear Accelearator-based SBRT were retrospectively included in this study. A dose of 50 Gy was given to the target in five fractions. Same data set was used to generate plans for both FFF and FB. ITV was generated using maximum intensity projection and critical structures were derived using average intensity projection. PTV obtained by giving 0.5cm margin to ITV. Results: While both modalities can provide satisfactory target dose coverage, the dose to PTV was more heterogeneous in FFF than 6X FB plans in all cases. The doses in all plans were well below institutional constraints for both modalities. Comparing the results of Homogeneity Index(HI), Conformity Index(CI), PTV-D80% volume, D50% volume and D20% volume (Table-1 ) for both techniques, found all the indices are within limits of RTOG guidelines but the 6X FFF is superior in sparing normal tissues in compare with FB. In all cases studied, more treatment time was required for FB treatment delivery for a given prescription. The results indicate that for large dose delivery FFF is preferable as volumetric parameters like HI and CI are better and dose can be delivered in a short span of time. Conclusion: Both Flattened and Unflattened beam SBRT systems can provide adequate dose coverage for target tumor. While the unflattened beams deliver less normal tissue dose than Flattened beams in all cases. The magnitude of differences in normal tissue dose between both modalities was due to beam characterization of the beams. Flattened beam requires more Monitor Units to deliver similar target prescription to the tumor than unflattened beam SBRT systems. The results of this study may provide a general guideline for patient and treatment modality selection based on volumetric, tumor control and normal tissue sparing considerations