Local control rates in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung metastases associated with the biologically effective dose

AimTo evaluate dose differences in lung metastases treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and the correlation with local control, regarding the dose algorithm, target volume and tissue density.BackgroundSeveral studies showed excellent local control rates in SBRT for lung metastases, with different fractionation schemes depending on the tumour location or size. These results depend on the dose distributions received by the lesions in terms of the tissue heterogeneity corrections performed by the dose algorithms.Materials and methodsForty-seven lung metastases treated with SBRT, using intrafraction control and respiratory gating with internal fiducial markers as surrogates (ExacTrac, BrainLAB AG), were calculated using Pencil Beam (PB) and Monte Carlo (MC) (iPlan, BrainLAB AG).Dose differences between both algorithms were obtained for the dose received by 99% (D_99%) and 50% (D_50%) of the planning treatment volume (PTV). The biologically effective dose delivered to 99% (BED_99%) and 50% (BED_50%) of the PTV were estimated from the MC results. Local control was evaluated after 24 months of median follow-up (range: 3–52 months).ResultsThe greatest variations (40.0% in ΔD_99% and 38.4% in ΔD_50%) were found for the lower volume and density cases. The BED_99% and BED_50% were strongly correlated with observed local control rates: 100% and 61.5% for BED_99% > 85 Gy and <85 Gy (p < 0.0001), respectively, and 100% and 58.3% for BED_50% > 100 Gy and <100 Gy (p < 0.0001), respectively.ConclusionsLung metastases treated with SBRT, with delivered BED_99% > 85 Gy and BED_50% > 100 Gy, present better local control rates than those treated with lower BED values (p = 0.001).     

Analysis of a volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) single phase prostate template as a class solution

AimTo assess a class solution template for volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for prostate cancer using plan analysis software.BackgroundVMAT is a development of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with potential advantages for the delivery of radiotherapy (RT) in prostate cancer. Class solutions are increasingly used for facilitating RT planning. Plan analysis software provides an objective tool for evaluating class solutions.Materials and methodsThe class solution for VMAT was based on the current static field IMRT template. The plans of 77 prostate cancer patients were evaluated using a set of in-house plan quality metrics (scores) (PlanIQ™, Sun Nuclear Corporation). The metrics compared the class solution for VMAT planning with the IMRT template and the delivered clinical plan (CP). Eight metrics were associated with target coverage and ten with organs-at-risk (OAR). Individual metrics were summed and the combined scores were subjected to non-parametric analysis. The low-dose wash for both static IMRT and VMAT plans were evaluated using 40 Gy and 25 Gy isodose volumes.ResultsVMAT plans were of equal or better quality than the IMRT template and CP for target coverage (combined score) and OAR combined score. The 40 Gy isodose volume was marginally higher with VMAT than IMRT (4.9%) but lower than CP (−6.6%)(P = 0.0074). The 25 Gy volume was significantly lower with VMAT than both IMRT (−32.7%) and CP (−34.4%)(P < 0.00001).ConclusionsAutomated VMAT planning for prostate cancer is feasible and the plans are equal to or better than the current IMRT class solution and the delivered clinical plan.     

A comparison of a moderately hypofractionated IMRT planning technique used in a randomised UK external beam radiotherapy trial with an in-house technique for localised prostate cancer

AimTo compare the radiotherapy technique used in a randomised trial with VMAT and an in-house technique for prostate cancer.BackgroundTechniques are evolving with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) commonly used. The CHHiP trial used a 3 PTV forward planned IMRT technique (FP_CH). Our centre has adopted a simpler two PTV technique with locally calculated margins.Materials and methods25 patients treated with FP_CH to 60 Gy in 20 fractions were re-planned with VMAT (VMAT_CH) and a two PTV protocol (VMAT_60/52 and VMAT_60/48). Target coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), monitor units (MU) and dose to the rectum, bladder, hips and penile bulb were compared.ResultsPTV coverage was high for all techniques. VMAT_CH plans had better CI than FP_CH (p ≤  0.05). VMAT_60/52/48 plans had better CI than VMAT_CH. FP_CH had better HI and fewer MU than VMAT (p ≤  0.05). More favourable rectum doses were found for VMAT _CH than FP_CH (V_48.6, V_52.8, V₅₇, p ≤  0.05) with less difference for bladder (p ≥  0.05). Comparing VMAT_CH to VMAT_60/52/48 showed little differences for the bladder and rectum but VMAT_CH had larger penile bulb doses (V_40.8, V_48.6, mean, D_2, p ≤  0.05). Femoral head doses (V_40.8) were similarly low for all techniques (p = ≥ 0.05).ConclusionVMAT produced more conformal plans with smaller rectum doses compared to FP_CH albeit worse HI and more MU. VMAT_60/52 and VMAT_60/48 plans had similar rectal and bladder doses to VMAT_CH but better CI and penile bulb doses which may reduce toxicity.     

Dosimetric comparison of RapidPlan and manually optimized plans in volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

PurposeThis study evaluated whether RapidPlan based plans (RP plans) created by a single optimization, are usable in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for patients with prostate cancer.MethodsWe used 51 previously administered VMAT plans to train a RP model. Thirty RP plans were created by a single optimization without planner intervention during optimization. Differences between RP plans and clinical manual optimization (CMO) plans created by an experienced planner for the same patients were analyzed (Wilcoxon tests) in terms of homogeneity index (HI), conformation number (CN), D_95%, and D_2% to planning target volume (PTV), mean dose, V_50Gy, V_70Gy, V_75Gy, and V_78Gy to rectum and bladder, monitor unit (MU), and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) sequence complexity.ResultsRP and CMO values for PTV D_95%, PTV D_2%, HI, and CN were significantly similar (p < 0.05 for all). RP mean dose, V_50Gy, and V_70Gy to rectum were superior or comparable to CMO values; RP V_75Gy and V_78Gy were higher than in CMO plans (p < 0.05). RP bladder dose-volume parameter values (except V_78Gy) were lower than in CMO plans (p < 0.05). MU values were RP: 730 ± 55 MU and CMO: 580 ± 37 MU (p < 0.05); and MLC sequence complexity scores were RP: 0.25 ± 0.02 and CMO: 0.35 ± 0.03 (p < 0.05).ConclusionsRP plans created by a single optimization were clinically acceptable in VMAT for patient with prostate cancer. Our simple model could reduce optimization time, independently of planner’s skill and knowledge.     

Advanced optimization methods for whole pelvic and local prostate external beam therapy

PurposeRadiation treatment planning inherently involves multiple conflicting planning goals, which makes it a suitable application for multicriteria optimization (MCO). This study investigates a MCO algorithm for VMAT planning (VMAT–MCO) for prostate cancer treatments including pelvic lymph nodes and uses standard inverse VMAT optimization (sVMAT) and Tomotherapy planning as benchmarks.MethodsFor each of ten prostate cancer patients, a two stage plan was generated, consisting of a stage 1 plan delivering 22 Gy to the prostate, and a stage 2 plan delivering 50.4 Gy to the lymph nodes and 56 Gy to the prostate with a simultaneous integrated boost. The single plans were generated by three planning techniques (VMAT–MCO, sVMAT, Tomotherapy) and subsequently compared with respect to plan quality and planning time efficiency.ResultsPlan quality was similar for all techniques, but sVMAT showed slightly better rectum (on average D_mean −7%) and bowel sparing (D_mean −17%) compared to VMAT–MCO in the whole pelvic treatments. Tomotherapy plans exhibited higher bladder dose (D_mean +42%) in stage 1 and lower rectum dose (D_mean −6%) in stage 2 than VMAT–MCO. Compared to manual planning, the planning time with MCO was reduced up to 12 and 38 min for stage 1 and 2 plans, respectively.ConclusionMCO can generate highly conformal prostate VMAT plans with minimal workload in the settings of prostate-only treatments and prostate plus lymph nodes irradiation. In the whole pelvic plan manual VMAT optimization led to slightly improved OAR sparing over VMAT–MCO, whereas for the primary prostate treatment plan quality was equal.     

A new split arc VMAT technique for lymph node positive breast cancer

PurposeTo investigate different volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) field designs for lymph node positive breast cancer patients when compared to conventional static fields and standard VMAT designs.MethodsNineteen breast cancer patients with lymph node involvement (eleven left and eight right sided) were retrospectively analyzed with different arc designs. Proposed split arc designs with total rotations of 2 × 190° and 2 × 240° were compared to conventional field in field (FinF) and previously published non-split arc techniques with the same amount of total rotations.ResultsAll VMAT plans were superior in dose conformity, when compared to the FinF plans. Split arc design decreased significantly ipsilateral lung dose and heart V5Gy for both left and right sided cases, when compared to non-split VMAT designs. For left sided cases no significant differences were seen in contralateral lung mean dose or V5Gy between different VMAT designs. For right sided cases the contralateral lung dose V5Gy was significantly higher in split VMAT group, when compared to non-split VMAT designs. The contralateral breast dose V5Gy increased significantly for split VMAT plans for both sides, when compared to non-split VMAT designs or FinF plans.ConclusionsThe proposed split VMAT technique was shown to be superior to previously published non-split VMAT and conventional FinF techniques significantly reducing dose to the ipsilateral lung and heart. However, this came with the expense of an increase in the dose to the contralateral breast and for right-sided cases to the contralateral lung.     

Stereotactic body radiation therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma: Optimal treatment strategies based on liver segmentation and functional hepatic reserve

AimTo discuss current dosage for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and suggest alternative treatment strategies according to liver segmentation as defined by the Couinaud classification.BackgroundSBRT is a safe and effective alternative treatment for HCC patients who are unable to undergo liver ablation/resection. However, the SBRT fractionation schemes and treatment planning strategies are not well established.Materials and methodsIn this article, the latest developments and key findings from research studies exploring the efficacy of SBRT fractionation schemes for treatment of HCC are reviewed. Patients’ characteristics, fractionation schemes, treatment outcomes and toxicities were compiled. Special attention was focused on SBRT fractionation approaches that take into consideration liver segmentation according to the Couinaud classification and functional hepatic reserve based on Child–Pugh (CP) liver cirrhosis classification.ResultsThe most common SBRT fractionation schemes for HCC were 3 × 10–20 Gy, 4–6 × 8–10 Gy, and 10 × 5–5.5 Gy. Based on previous SBRT studies, and in consideration of tumor size and CP classification, we proposed 3 × 15–25 Gy for patients with tumor size <3 cm and adequate liver reserve (CP-A score 5), 5 × 10–12 Gy for patients with tumor sizes between 3 and 5 cm or inadequate liver reserve (CP-A score 6), and 10 × 5–5.5 Gy for patients with tumor size >5 cm or CP-B score.ConclusionsTreatment schemes in SBRT for HCC vary according to liver segmentation and functional hepatic reserve. Further prospective studies may be necessary to identify the optimal dose of SBRT for HCC.     

Characterization of robust optimization for VMAT plan for liver cancer

PurposeWe investigated the feasibility of robust optimization for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver cancer in comparison with planning target volume (PTV)-based optimized plans. Treatment plan quality, robustness, complexity, and accuracy of dose delivery were assessed.MethodsTen liver cancer patients were selected for this study. PTV-based optimized plans with an 8-mm PTV margin and robust optimized plans with an 8-mm setup uncertainty were generated. Plan perturbed doses were evaluated using a setup error of 8 mm in all directions from the isocenter. The dosimetric comparison parameters were clinical target volume (CTV) doses (D_98%, D_50%, and D_2%), liver doses, and monitor unit (MU). Plan complexity was evaluated using the modulation complexity score for VMAT (MCSv).ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two optimizations with respect to CTV doses and MUs. Robust optimized plans had a higher liver dose than did PTV-based optimized plans. Plan perturbed dose evaluations showed that doses to the CTV for the robust optimized plans had small variations. Robust optimized plans were less complex than PTV-based optimized plans. Robust optimized plans had statistically significant fewer leaf position errors than did PTV-based optimized plans.ConclusionsComparison of treatment plan quality, robustness, and plan complexity of both optimizations showed that robust optimization could be feasibile for VMAT of liver cancer.     

Sparing dysphagia/aspiration related structures using novel hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy

PurposeStudies using split field IMRT to spare dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS) have raised concern regarding dose uncertainty at matchline. This study explores the utility of hybrid VMAT in sparing the DARS and assesses matchline dose uncertainty in postoperative oral cavity cancer patients and compares it with VMAT.Methods & materialsTen postoperative oral cavity cancer patients were planned with h-VMAT and VMAT using the same planning CT dataset. PTV and DARS were contoured using standard delineation guidelines. In h-VMAT 80% of the neck dose was planned using AP/PA technique and then VMAT optimization was done for the total PTV by keeping the corresponding AP/PA plan as the base dose. Planning goal for PTV was V_95% ≥ 95% and for DARS, adequate sparing. Plans and dose volume histograms were analyzed using dosimetric indices. Absolute point and portal dose measurements were done for h-VMAT plans to verify dose at the matchline.ResultsCoverage in both the techniques was comparable. Significant differences were observed in mean doses to DARS (Larynx: 24.36 ± 2.51 versus 16.88 ± 2.41 Gy; p < 0.0006, Pharyngeal constrictors: 25.16 ± 2.41 versus 21.2 ± 2.1 Gy; p < 0.005, Esophageal inlet: 18.71 ± 2 versus 12.06 ± 0.79 Gy; p < 0.0002) favoring h-VMAT. Total MU in both the techniques was comparable. Average percentage variations in point dose measurements in h-VMAT done at +3.5 and −3.5 positions were (1.47 ± 1.48 and 2.28 ± 1.35%) respectively. Average gamma agreement for portal dose measured was 97.07%.Conclusionh-VMAT achieves better sparing of DARS with no matchline dose uncertainty. Since these patients have swallowing dysfunction post-operatively, attempts should be made to spare these critical structures as much as possible.     

In silico comparison of photons versus carbon ions in single fraction therapy of lung cancer

PurposeStereotactic body image guided radiation therapy (SBRT) shows good results for lung cancer treatment. Better normal tissue sparing might be achieved with scanned carbon ion therapy (PT). Therefore an in silico trial was conducted to find potential advantages of and patients suited for PT.MethodsFor 19 patients treated with SBRT, PT plans were calculated on 4D-CTs with simulated breathing motion. Prescribed single fraction dose was 24 Gy and OAR constraints used for photon planning were respected. Motion was mitigated by rescanning and range-adapted ITVs. Doses were compared to the original SBRT plans.ResultsCTV coverage was the same in SBRT and PT. The field-specific PTV including range margins for PT was 1.5 (median, 25–75% 1.3–2.1) times larger than for SBRT. Nevertheless, maximum point dose and mean dose in OARs were higher in SBRT by 2.8 (1.6–3.7) Gy and 0.7 (0.3–1.6) Gy, respectively. Patients with a CTV >2.5 cc or with multiple lung lesions showed larger differences in OAR doses in favor of PT.ConclusionsPatients receive less dose in critical OARs such as heart, spinal cord, esophagus, trachea and aorta with PT, while maintaining the same target coverage. Patients with multiple or larger lesions are particularly suited for PT.     

Utilization of cone-beam CT for offline evaluation of target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment

AimTo assess target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment and to assess possibility of safety margin reduction.BackgroundImplementation of IGRT should influence safety margins. Utilization of cone-beam CT provides current 3D anatomic information directly in irradiation position. Such information enables reconstruction of the actual dose distribution.Materials and methodsSeventeen prostate patients were treated with daily bony anatomy image-guidance. Cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans were acquired once a week immediately after bony anatomy alignment. After the prostate, seminal vesicles, rectum and bladder were contoured, the delivered dose distribution was reconstructed. Target dose coverage was evaluated by the proportion of the CTV encompassed by the 95% isodose. Original plans employed a 1 cm safety margin. Alternative plans assuming a smaller 7 mm margin between CTV and PTV were evaluated in the same way. Rectal and bladder volumes were compared with the initial ones. Rectal and bladder volumes irradiated with doses higher than 75 Gy, 70 Gy, 60 Gy, 50 Gy and 40 Gy were analyzed.ResultsIn 12% of reconstructed plans the prostate coverage was not sufficient. The prostate underdosage was observed in 5 patients. Coverage of seminal vesicles was not satisfactory in 3% of plans. Most of the target underdosage corresponded to excessive rectal or bladder filling. Evaluation of alternative plans assuming a smaller 7 mm margin revealed 22% and 11% of plans where prostate and seminal vesicles coverage, respectively, was compromised. These were distributed over 8 and 7 patients, respectively.ConclusionSufficient dose coverage of target volumes was not achieved for all patients. Reducing of safety margin is not acceptable. Initial rectal and bladder volumes cannot be considered representative for subsequent treatment.     

Quantification of residual dose estimation error on log file-based patient dose calculation

PurposeThe log file-based patient dose estimation includes a residual dose estimation error caused by leaf miscalibration, which cannot be reflected on the estimated dose. The purpose of this study is to determine this residual dose estimation error.Methods and materialsModified log files for seven head-and-neck and prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans simulating leaf miscalibration were generated by shifting both leaf banks (systematic leaf gap errors: ±2.0, ±1.0, and ±0.5 mm in opposite directions and systematic leaf shifts: ±1.0 mm in the same direction) using MATLAB-based (MathWorks, Natick, MA) in-house software. The generated modified and non-modified log files were imported back into the treatment planning system and recalculated. Subsequently, the generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) was quantified for the definition of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risks.ResultsFor MLC leaves calibrated within ±0.5 mm, the quantified residual dose estimation errors that obtained from the slope of the linear regression of gEUD changes between non- and modified log file doses per leaf gap are in head-and-neck plans 1.32 ± 0.27% and 0.82 ± 0.17 Gy for PTV and spinal cord, respectively, and in prostate plans 1.22 ± 0.36%, 0.95 ± 0.14 Gy, and 0.45 ± 0.08 Gy for PTV, rectum, and bladder, respectively.ConclusionsIn this work, we determine the residual dose estimation errors for VMAT delivery using the log file-based patient dose calculation according to the MLC calibration accuracy.     

Multi-institutional comparison of simulated treatment delivery errors in ssIMRT,manually planned VMAT and autoplan-VMAT plans for nasopharyngeal radiotherapy

PurposeTo quantify the impact of simulated errors for nasopharynx radiotherapy across multiple institutions and planning techniques (auto-plan generated Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (ap-VMAT), manually planned VMAT (mp-VMAT) and manually planned step and shoot Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (mp-ssIMRT)).MethodsTen patients were retrospectively planned with VMAT according to three institution’s protocols. Within one institution two further treatment plans were generated using differing treatment planning techniques. This resulted in mp-ssIMRT, mp-VMAT, and ap-VMAT plans. Introduced treatment errors included Multi Leaf Collimator (MLC) shifts, MLC field size (MLCfs), gantry and collimator errors. A change of more than 5% in most selected dose metrics was considered to have potential clinical impact. The original patient plan total Monitor Units (MUs) were correlated to the total number of dose metrics exceeded.ResultsThe impact of different errors was consistent, with ap-VMAT plans (two institutions) showing larger dose deviations than mp-VMAT created plans (one institution). Across all institutions’ VMAT plans the significant errors included; ±5° for the collimator angle, ±5 mm for the MLC shift and +1, ±2 and ±5 mm for the MLC field size. The total number of dose metrics exceeding tolerance was positively correlated to the VMAT total plan MUs (r = 0.51, p < 0.001), across all institutions and techniques.ConclusionsDifferences in VMAT robustness to simulated errors across institutions occurred due to planning method differences. Whilst ap-VMAT was most sensitive to MLC errors, it also produced the best quality treatment plans. Mp-ssIMRT was most robust to errors. Higher VMAT treatment plan complexity led to less robust plans.     

Evaluation of the target dose coverage of stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancer using helical tomotherapy: A dynamic phantom study

AimTo evaluate the target dose coverage for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using helical tomotherapy (HT) with the internal tumor volume (ITV) margin settings adjusted according to the degree of tumor motion.BackgroundLung SBRT with HT may cause a dosimetric error when the target motion is large.Materials and methodsTwo lung SBRT plans were created using a tomotherapy planning station. Using these original plans, five plans with different ITV margins (4.0–20.0 mm for superior-inferior [SI] dimension) were generated. To evaluate the effects of respiratory motion on HT, an original dynamic motion phantom was developed. The respiratory wave of a healthy volunteer was used for dynamic motion as the typical tumor respiratory motion. Five patterns of motion amplitude that corresponded to five ITV margin sizes and three breathing cycles of 7, 14, and 28 breaths per minute were used. We evaluated the target dose change between a static delivery and a dynamic delivery with each motion pattern.ResultsThe target dose difference increased as the tumor size decreased and as the tumor motion increased. Although a target dose difference of <5 % was observed at ≤10 mm of tumor motion for each condition, a maximum difference of -9.94 % ± 7.10 % was observed in cases of small tumors with 20 mm of tumor motion under slow respiration.ConclusionsMinimizing respiratory movement is recommended as much as possible for lung SBRT with HT, especially for cases involving small tumors.     

Volumetric modulated arc therapy in prostate cancer patients with metallic hip prostheses in a UK centre

AimThis study aimed to investigate whether IMRT using VMAT is a viable and safe solution in dose escalated RT in these patients.BackgroundAn increasing number of prostate cancer patients are elderly and have hip prostheses. These implants pose challenges in radiotherapy treatment planning. Although intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is commonly used, there is a lack of clinical studies documenting its efficacy and toxicities in this subgroup of patients.Materials and methodsThe data from 23 patients with hip prostheses and non-metastatic prostate cancer treated with VMAT (volumetric modulated arc therapy) between 2009 and 2011, were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline characteristics, treatment details and outcome data were collected on all patients. The median follow up was 40.9 months. MRI-CT image fusion was performed and the treatment plans were created using RapidArc™ (RA) techniques utilizing 1 or 2 arcs and 10 MV photon beams.Results96% of patients were treated with a dose of 72 Gy/32 fractions over 44 days. 21/23 plans met the PTV targets. The mean homogeneity index was 1.07. 20/23 plans met all OAR constraints (rectum, bladder). Two plans deviated from rectal constraints, four from bladder constraints; all were classed as minor deviations. One patient experienced late grade 3 genitourinary toxicity. Three other patients experienced late grade 2 or lower gastrointestinal toxicity. One patient had biochemical failure and one had a non-prostate cancer related death.ConclusionsVMAT provides an elegant solution to deliver dose escalated RT in patients with unilateral and bilateral hip replacements with minimal acute and late toxicities.