Logo image
An Evaluation of HyperArc Treatment Planning and Workflow for Two Distinct Use Cases
Thesis   Open access

An Evaluation of HyperArc Treatment Planning and Workflow for Two Distinct Use Cases

William Schalley
Master of Science (MS), Creighton University
2026

Abstract

Head and Neck Hippocampus HyperArc
While Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) has become the standard ofcare for complex radiotherapy treatment planning, manual optimization remains a highly complex and time consuming process. HyperArc addresses these limitations as a highly automated, specialized extension of modern VMAT. Utilizing a single isocenter technique and pre-optimized, non-coplanar arc trajectories, HyperArc stan-dardizes the planning workflow to maximize target dose conformity while minimizing exposure to surrounding organs at risk. Based on these geometric and automated ad-vantages, we hypothesized that HyperArc would yield superior dosimetric outcomes compared to VMAT in two complex clinical scenarios: multilevel head and neck can-cer, and whole-brain radiotherapy with hippocampal sparing. To evaluate this, a comparative dosimetric analysis was performed across twopatient cohorts. In the multilevel head and neck cohort (n=2), VMAT was found to be superior at maintaining standard clinical goals, achieving 56 out of 64 goals compared to 51 for HyperArc. Conversely, in the whole brain with hippocampal sparing cohort (n=4), HyperArc successfully outperformed VMAT, meeting 28 out of 29 clinical objectives versus VMAT’s 20 out of 29. A subsequent follow-up analysis of the whole brain with hippocampus sparing cohort revealed that, upon normaliza-tion, dose gradients within the hippocampal region were dosimetrically comparable between the two modalities 1,154.8 cGy for HyperArc vs. 1183.35 cGy for VMAT.Ultimately, however, HyperArc provided an improved, standardized workflow that significantly increased planning e!ciency and reproducibility. Specifically, HyperArc required an average of fewer optimization objectives at 8.25 compared to VMAT’s 22.75, which minimizes manual planner intervention. HyperArc for this set of plans also used fewer monitor units at 733.4 MU compared to 834.4 MU for VMAT; this translates to a faster treatment delivery times and can ultimately reduce scatter.
pdf
Schalley_W_2026_MS6.03 MBDownloadView
Open Access

Metrics

1 Record Views

Details

Logo image