Dosimetric comparison of HyperArc and InCise MLC‐based CyberKnife plans in treating single and multiple brain metastases

Background and purpose This study aimed to compare the dosimetric attributes of two multi‐leaf collimator based techniques, HyperArc and Incise CyberKnife, in the treatment of brain metastases. Material and methods 17 cases of brain metastases were selected including 6 patients of single lesion and 11 patients of multiple lesions. Treatment plans of HyperArc and CyberKnife were designed in Eclipse 15.5 and Precision 1.0, respectively, and transferred to Velocity 3.2 for comparison. Results HyperArc plans provided superior Conformity Index (0.91 ± 0.06 vs. 0.77 ± 0.07, p < 0.01) with reduced dose distribution in organs at risk ( D max , p < 0.05) and lower normal tissue exposure (V4Gy–V20Gy, p < 0.05) in contrast to CyberKnife plans, although the Gradient Indexes were similar. CyberKnife plans showed higher Homogeneity Index (1.54 ± 0.17 vs. 1.39 ± 0.09, p < 0.05) and increased D 2% and D 50% in the target ( p < 0.05). Additionally, HyperArc plans had significantly fewer Monitor Units (MUs) and beam‐on time ( p < 0.01). Conclusion HyperArc plans demonstrated superior performance compared with MLC‐based CyberKnife plans in terms of conformity and the sparing of critical organs and normal tissues, although no significant difference in GI outcomes was noted. Conversely, CyberKnife plans achieved a higher target dose and HI. The study suggests that HyperArc is more efficient and particularly suitable for treating larger lesions in brain metastases.