Back to abstracts

ABSTRACT

  • 1Rantlhwatlhwa N,
  • 2Sonwabile S
  • 1School of Physics, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg
  • 2Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University

Background

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) is a sophisticated radiotherapy technique that enables precise dose delivery while minimizing exposure to normal tissues. It integrates a dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC), variable dose rates, and adjustable gantry speeds to optimize treatment delivery. This study aimed to investigate the influence of selected planning parameters—specifically control points, arc number, and collimator angles—on plan quality and efficiency for localized prostate cancer using the Monaco Treatment Planning System (TPS).

Method

Standard VMAT prostate treatment plans were systematically modified to assess the dosimetric effects of varying control point density, number of arcs, and collimator angles. The evaluation metrics included dose-volume histograms, dose homogeneity index (DHI), conformity index (CI), and organ-at-risk (OAR) dose exposure. Plan efficiency was assessed by examining monitor unit (MU) usage relative to dosimetric benefit.

Result

Increased control points and additional arcs improved planning target volume (PTV) coverage up to a threshold, beyond which benefits plateaued and MU usage increased. A two-arc configuration achieved the best balance between target coverage and MU efficiency. Collimator angles between 40° and 60° offered optimal PTV coverage. For OAR sparing, collimator angles of 60°–80° reduced bladder dose, 70°–90° minimized rectal exposure, and 0°–30° reduced femur dose. However, larger angles (>70°) increased modulation complexity and reduced overall treatment efficiency without significant dosimetric gain.

Conclusion

Optimized VMAT planning for localized prostate cancer involves balancing PTV coverage, OAR sparing, and MU efficiency. A two-arc configuration with 100–150 control points offers optimal dosimetric outcomes without excessive MU use. Collimator angles of 60°–80° are generally optimal, though angle selection may be adjusted based on patient-specific anatomical considerations. Plans incorporating more than two arcs or excessively large collimator angles should be used cautiously, as they offer minimal benefit and may compromise treatment efficiency or target coverage.
Author Image

PRESENTING AUTHOR

Mr. N Rantlhwatlhwa, Honors In Physics

Senior Lecture/Head of Department, Segako Makgatho Health Sciences University

M. Nkagiseng Rantlhwatlhwa is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in Medical Physics. His academic and clinical training covers key areas including radiotherapy physics, diagnostic radiology, nuclear medicine, radiobiology, and radiation protection. Over the past 18 months, his primary focus has been on radiotherapy research, where he continues to develop expertise and contribute to ongoing advancements in cancer treatment technologies.
Back to abstracts