Abstract
PURPOSE: A new development on the RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) allows a plan to be planned by imposing a constraint on the leaf sequencing: all leaves move in the same direction before moving again in the opposite direction to create a succession of sliding windows (SWs). The study aims to investigate this new leaf sequencing, coupled with standard optimization (SO) and multi-criteria optimization (MCO) and to compare it with the standard sequencing (STD). METHODS: Sixty plans were replanned for 10 head and neck cancer patients (two dose levels simultaneously SIB, 56 and 70 Gy in 35 fractions). All plans were compared, and a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed. Pre-processing QA and metrics of multileaf collimator (MLC) complexity were studied. RESULTS: All methodologies met the dose requirements for the planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs). SO demonstrates significantly best results for homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), and target coverage (TC). SO-SW gives best results for PTVs (D(98%) and D(2%) ) but the differences between techniques are less than 1%. Only the D(2%,PTV-56 Gy) is higher with both MCO methods. MCO-STD offer the best sparing OARs (parotids, spinal cord, larynx, oral cavity). The gamma passing rates (GPRs) with 3%/3 mm criteria between the measured and calculated dose distributions are higher than 95%, slightly lowest with SW. The number of monitor units (MUs) and MLC metrics are higher in SW show a higher modulation. CONCLUSIONS: All plans are feasible for the treatment. A clear advantage of SO-SW is that the treatment plan is more straightforward to planning by the user due to the more advanced modulation. MCO stands out for its ease of use and will allow a less experienced user to offer a better plan than in SO. In addition, MCO-STD will reduce the dose to the OARs while maintaining good TC.