» Articles » PMID: 36434707

Helical Versus Static Approaches to Delivering Tomotherapy to the Junctional Target for Patients Taller Than 135 cm Undergoing Total Body Irradiation

Overview
Journal Eur J Med Res
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2022 Nov 26
PMID 36434707
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Helical TomoTherapy is widely used for total body irradiation as a component of conditioning regimens before allogeneic bone-marrow transplantation. However, this technique limits the maximum length of a planning target volume to 135 cm. Therefore, patients taller than 135 cm require two planning computed tomography scans and treatment plans. The junctional target between these two treatment plans is thus a critical region for treatment planning and delivery. Here, we compare radiation coverage of the junctional target between helical and static approaches to treatment planning and delivery to determine which approach allows high quality irradiation planning and provides more robustness against patient movement.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 10 patients who underwent total body irradiation using a static four-field box planning approach and nine patients who underwent total body irradiation using a helical planning approach. All patients were taller than 135 cm. The junctional target volume was divided into 10 slices of 1 cm thickness (JT-JT) for analysis. Dosimetric parameters and dose-volume histograms were compared to assess the quality of coverage of the junctional target between the helical and static planning approaches.

Results: The D for the total junctional target was slightly higher than the prescribed dose for both helical and static approaches, with a mean of 108.12% for the helical group and 107.81% for the static group. The mean D was 98.44% ± 4.19% for the helical group and 96.20% ± 4.59% for the static group. The mean homogeneity index covering the entire junctional target volume was 1.20 ± 0.04 for the helical group and 1.21 ± 0.05 for the static group. The mean homogeneity index ranged from 1.08 ± 0.01 in JT to 1.22 ± 0.06 in JT for the helical group and from 1.06 ± 0.02 in JT to 1.19 ± 0.05 in JT for the static group. There were no significant differences in parameters between helical and static groups. However, the static approach provided robustness against up to 30 mm of lateral movement of the patient.

Conclusions: As long as TBI using helical TomoTherapy is limited to a maximum length of 135 cm, the junctional target must be addressed during treatment planning. Our analysis shows that the static four-field box approach is viable and offers higher robustness against lateral movement of the patient than the helical approach.

Citing Articles

A multi-institutional survey on technical variations in total body irradiation in Japan.

Kitagawa M, Notake R, Nakahara R, Hatanaka S, Saho T, Matsuda K Radiol Phys Technol. 2025; .

PMID: 40085418 DOI: 10.1007/s12194-025-00894-2.


Optimized Conformal Total Body Irradiation with VMAT Using a Linear-Accelerator-Based Radiosurgery Treatment System in Comparison to the Golden Standard Helical TomoTherapy.

Koksal M, Ozkan O, Holderried T, Heine A, Brossart P, Gawish A Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(17).

PMID: 37686498 PMC: 10486387. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174220.


Whole body irradiation with intensity-modulated helical tomotherapy prior to haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: analysis of organs at risk by dose and its effect on blood kinetics.

Koksal M, Baumert J, Jazmati D, Schoroth F, Garbe S, Koch D J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2023; 149(10):7007-7015.

PMID: 36856852 PMC: 10374741. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-023-04657-7.


Lung sparing and ribcage coverage in total body irradiation delivered by helical tomotherapy.

Koksal M, Baumert J, Schoroth F, Scafa D, Koch D, Leitzen C Eur J Med Res. 2022; 27(1):287.

PMID: 36496388 PMC: 9737733. DOI: 10.1186/s40001-022-00918-2.

References
1.
Wong J, Filippi A, Shbib Dabaja B, Yahalom J, Specht L . Total Body Irradiation: Guidelines from the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (ILROG). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018; 101(3):521-529. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.071. View

2.
Penagaricano J, Chao M, van Rhee F, Moros E, Corry P, Ratanatharathorn V . Clinical feasibility of TBI with helical tomotherapy. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2010; 46(7):929-35. DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2010.237. View

3.
Haraldsson A, Engellau J, Lenhoff S, Engelholm S, Back S, Engstrom P . Implementing safe and robust Total Marrow Irradiation using Helical Tomotherapy - A practical guide. Phys Med. 2019; 60:162-167. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.03.032. View

4.
Kataria T, Sharma K, Subramani V, Karrthick K, Bisht S . Homogeneity Index: An objective tool for assessment of conformal radiation treatments. J Med Phys. 2013; 37(4):207-13. PMC: 3532749. DOI: 10.4103/0971-6203.103606. View

5.
Moliner G, Izar F, Ferrand R, Bardies M, Ken S, Simon L . Virtual bolus for total body irradiation treated with helical tomotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015; 16(6):164–176. PMC: 5691005. DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i6.5580. View