journal article·2026-07-02Open access

Evaluation of Patient-Specific Quality Assurance Results to Optimise Automatic Flash Margin in Monte Carlo Algorithm for VMAT of the Breast and Chest Wall Irradiation

Cemile Ceylan, Sevim Sahin

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 13

Abstract

Background/Objectives: To evaluate the impact of automatic flash (AF) margin thickness on plan complexity and patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) outcomes in 4-partial-arc VMAT (4pVMAT) for breast and chest wall irradiation using the Monaco Monte Carlo treatment planning system. Methods: Twenty patients (11 left-sided, 9 right-sided) previously treated with 4pVMAT were retrospectively replanned with five AF thicknesses (AF0, AF3, AF5, AF10, AF15), yielding 100 plans on Elekta Versa HD/Agility MLC. Plan complexity was assessed via modulation factor (MF), total monitor units (MU), segment number, MU efficiency, and normalisation ratio. PSQA was performed using the IBA Matrixx Resolution detector, with gamma passing rates (GPRs) evaluated under 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm criteria. Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used with Bonferroni correction. Results: All five complexity metrics were statistically invariant across AF0–AF15 (Friedman p > 0.05; no pairwise comparison against AF10 reached significance). Mean GPR increased monotonically up to AF10—92.28 ± 4.83% (AF0) to 93.73 ± 4.55% (AF10) at 3%/3 mm—and plateaued at AF15. After Bonferroni correction, AF0 vs. AF10 (p = 0.0003) and AF3 vs. AF10 (p = 0.005) remained significant under the 3%/3 mm criterion. The proportion of plans meeting GPR ≥ 95% at 3%/3 mm rose from 25% (AF0) to 45% (AF10). Conclusions: AF thickness has no clinically meaningful effect on plan complexity but significantly affects delivery accuracy in 4pVMAT breast and chest wall irradiation. AF10 emerges as the optimal margin—maximising delivery accuracy at a plateau without increasing plan complexity—with AF5 as the practical lower bound and AF15 as the upper bound.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Breast Cancer Treatment Studies · Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques · Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Radiation Oncology, Medicalpark Istanbul Oncology Hospital, Istanbul 34758, Turkey

Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Health Sciences, Yeditepe University, Istanbul 34758, Turkey

Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Fenerbahce University, Istanbul 34758, Turkey

References (37)

Show source-provided references
1. Critical appraisal of the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy in the radiation therapy management of breast cancer10.1186/s13014-017-0935-4 ↗
2. Critical appraisal of the risk of secondary cancer induction from breast radiation therapy with volumetric modulated arc therapy relative to 3D conformal therapy10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.10.040 ↗
3. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT): A review of clinical outcomes—What is the clinical evidence for the most effective implementation?10.1259/bjr.20201289 ↗
4. Why is volumetric modulated arc therapy not considered the standard of care for locoregional radiation therapy for breast cancer patients?10.1016/j.adro.2025.101728 ↗
5. Tangent-based volumetric modulated arc therapy for advanced left breast cancer10.1186/s13014-018-1167-y ↗
6. Evaluation of 3D-CRT, IMRT and VMAT radiotherapy plans for left breast cancer based on clinical dosimetric study10.1016/j.compmedimag.2016.10.001 ↗
7. Comparative dosimetric study of h-IMRT and VMAT plans for breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery10.1016/j.tranon.2024.102012 ↗
8. Dosimetric comparison of four high performance techniques for irradiation of breast cancer patients10.1016/j.canrad.2020.09.001 ↗
9. Dosimetric comparison of preoperative single-fraction partial breast radiotherapy techniques: 3D CRT, noncoplanar IMRT, coplanar IMRT, and VMAT10.1120/jacmp.v16i1.5126 ↗
10. Inter- and intra-fraction motion during radiation therapy to the whole breast in the supine position: A systematic review10.1111/j.1754-9485.2012.02434.x ↗
11. Pseudo skin flash on VMAT in breast radiotherapy: Optimization of virtual bolus thickness and HU values10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.05.010 ↗
12. Planning strategies in volumetric modulated arc therapy for breast10.1118/1.3598442 ↗
13. Dosimetric trade-offs in breast treatment with VMAT technique10.1259/bjr.20160701 ↗
14. Tangential volumetric modulated arc therapy technique for left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy10.1186/s13014-015-0392-x ↗
15. Automatic skin flash optimization in breast and chestwall VMAT with static angle modulated ports: Effect of HU and flash margin size on plan quality and robustness10.1002/acm2.70036 ↗
16. ESTRO consensus guideline on target volume delineation for elective radiation therapy of early stage breast cancer10.1016/j.radonc.2014.11.030 ↗
17. Split-VMAT technique to control the deep inspiration breath hold time for breast cancer radiotherapy10.1186/s13014-021-01800-x ↗
18. Delineation of target volumes and organs at risk in adjuvant radiotherapy of early breast cancer: National guidelines and contouring atlas by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group10.3109/0284186X.2013.765064 ↗
19. Organ-sparing techniques and dose-volume constrains used in breast cancer radiation therapy—Results from European and Latin American surveys
20. Heart-sparing radiotherapy techniques in breast cancer patients: A recommendation of the breast cancer expert panel of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO)10.1007/s00066-019-01495-w ↗
21. Radiotherapy of breast cancer: 2025 update10.1016/j.canrad.2025.104767 ↗
22. Postmastectomy radiation therapy: An ASTRO/ASCO/SSO clinical practice guideline10.1016/j.prro.2025.05.001 ↗
23. Dose constraints for whole breast radiation therapy based on the quality assessment of treatment plans in the randomised Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG) HYPO trial
24. A dosimetric and radiobiological evaluation of VMAT following mastectomy for patients with left-sided breast cancer10.1186/s13014-021-01895-2 ↗
25. Dose constraints in breast cancer radiotherapy: A critical review10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110591 ↗
26. Radiation therapy for the whole breast: Executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline10.1016/j.prro.2018.01.012 ↗
27. A GATE/Geant4 Monte Carlo toolkit for surface dose calculation in VMAT breast cancer radiotherapy10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.04.012 ↗
28. Quantification of treatment plan deliverability in breast volumetric-modulated arc therapy with Agility multi-leaf collimator10.21873/invivo.13690 ↗
29. Pre-treatment verification of carcinoma breast VMAT plan based on mono-isocentric technique: Assessment of the combined fields feature of new 2D MatriXX arrays resolution
30. Safety and benefit of using a virtual bolus during treatment planning for breast cancer treated with arc therapy10.1002/acm2.12398 ↗
31. The effect of using virtual bolus on VMAT plan quality for left-sided breast cancer patients10.1016/j.apradiso.2022.110416 ↗
32. He, Y., Chen, S., Gao, X., Fu, L., Kang, Z., Liu, J., Shi, L., and Li, Y. (2023). Robustness of VMAT to setup errors in postmastectomy radiotherapy of left-sided breast cancer: Impact of bolus thickness. PLoS ONE, 18.10.1371/journal.pone.0280456 ↗
33. Comparing the robustness of different skin flash approaches using wide tangents, manual flash VMAT, and simulated organ motion robust optimization VMAT in breast and nodal radiotherapy10.1016/j.meddos.2022.04.004 ↗
34. Chan, R.C.K., Ng, C.K.C., Hung, R.H.M., Li, Y.T.Y., Tam, Y.T.Y., Wong, B.Y.L., Yu, J.C.K., and Leung, V.W.S. (2023). Comparative study of plan robustness for breast radiotherapy: Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans with robust optimization versus manual flash approach. Diagnostics, 13.10.3390/diagnostics13223395 ↗
35. Harmonization of breast cancer radiotherapy treatment planning in the Netherlands10.1016/j.tipsro.2021.06.004 ↗
36. Hypofractionated breast radiotherapy for 1 week versus 3 weeks (FAST-Forward): 5-year efficacy and late normal tissue effects results from a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised, phase 3 trial10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30932-6 ↗
37. Tolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement-based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No. 21810.1002/mp.12810 ↗