Novel knowledge-based treatment planning model for hypofractionated radiotherapy of prostate cancer patients

PurposeTo demonstrate the strength of an innovative knowledge-based model-building method for radiotherapy planning using hypofractionated, multi-target prostate patients.Material and methodsAn initial RapidPlan model was trained using 48 patients who received 60 Gy to prostate (PTV60) and 44 Gy to pelvic nodes (PTV44) in 20 fractions. To improve the model's goodness-of-fit, an intermediate model was generated using the dose-volume histograms of best-spared organs-at-risk (OARs) of the initial model. Using the intermediate model and manual tweaking, all 48 cases were re-planned. The final model, trained using these re-plans, was validated on 50 additional patients. The validated final model was used to determine any planning advantage of using three arcs instead of two on 16 VMAT cases and tested on 25 additional cases to determine efficacy for single-PTV (PTV60-only) treatment planning.ResultsFor model validation, PTV V_95% of 99.9% was obtained by both clinical and knowledge-based planning. D_1% was lower for model plans: by 1.23 Gy (PTV60, CI = [1.00, 1.45]), and by 2.44 Gy (PTV44, CI = [1.72, 3.16]). OAR sparing was superior for knowledge-based planning: ΔD_mean = 3.70 Gy (bladder, CI = [2.83, 4.57]), and 3.22 Gy (rectum, CI = [2.48, 3.95]); ΔD_2% = 1.17 Gy (bowel bag, CI = [0.64, 1.69]), and 4.78 Gy (femoral heads, CI = [3.90, 5.66]). Using three arcs instead of two, improvements in OAR sparing and PTV coverage were statistically significant, but of magnitudes < 1 Gy. The model failed at reliable DVH predictions for single PTV plans.ConclusionsOur knowledge-based model delivers efficient, consistent plans with excellent PTV coverage and improved OAR sparing compared to clinical plans.     

Dosimetric study of a hybrid plan technique for external beam radiotherapy in patients with cervical cancer

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a hybrid technique which results from combining intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the treatment of cervical cancer patients. Plans made with the hybrid technique and pure IMRT and VMAT were retrospectively compared in 20 patients with cervical cancer at different stages. All plans were made using the same contours based on the original computed tomography (CT) scans. Conformity (CI) and homogeneity (HI) indices of the planning target volumes (PTVs) were calculated for each technique in order to evaluate plan quality. All techniques were compared in terms of dose to organs at risk (OARs), number of monitor units (MUs) and treatment time. It turned out that plans made with the hybrid technique had improved dose conformity and homogeneity compared to plans made only with IMRT and VMAT (p < 0.001). Regarding the OARs, the maximum dose (D_max) delivered to the bladder, rectum and femoral heads was lower for the hybrid plans compared to the IMRT and VMAT plans (p < 0.001). The volumes irradiated to doses of 50 Gy (V_50Gy) for rectum, bladder and bowel were lower for the hybrid plans (p < 0.001, p = 0.002). Furthermore, the treatment time and MU values for the hybrid plans were found to be between of the values for the IMRT and VMAT plans. It is concluded that, as compared to IMRT and VMAT plans, the hybrid plan technique allowed a better conformity and homogeneity for the dose distribution in the PTV and a dose reduction to the OARs.

     

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.     

Relations between doses cumulated in bone marrow and dose delivery techniques during radiation therapy of cervical and endometrial cancer

PurposeTo compare normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and average doses in the bone marrow (BM), obtained for five different radiotherapy delivery and planning strategies of cervical and endometrial cancer.Material/methods50 patients were taken to analysis. For each case, 3 different dose delivery techniques were used: 4-field, X15MV, 3DCRT; 7-field, X6MV, IMRT; and 2-arc, X6MV, VMAT. Two optimization scenarios were used for the IMRT and VMAT plans generation: with (+) and without (−) the inclusion of the BM as an optimized structure. Average doses and dose-volume histogram parameters for the PTV, BM, bladder, rectum, bowels and femoral heads were compared. In addition, the BM doses were analyzed with respect to the PTV and/or volume of the BM, and NTCP for the BM were computed.ResultsThe dose in PTV for evaluated plans was similar. The worst doses in organs at risk were obtained for 3DCRT. Using the BM during the optimization of IMRT and VMAT reduces an average dose in BM without increasing the doses in the bladder, rectum and bowels. Differences between doses in BM for IMRT(+) and VMAT(+) plans were similar while NTCP was lower for VMAT(+). A correlation between average dose in BM and the volume ratio of BM and PTV was found for each technique.ConclusionUsing the BM during the optimization of the IMRT and VMAT plans effectively reduces the dose in BM without increasing the dose in the bladder, rectum and bowels. The VMAT(+) plans were characterized by the lowest NTCP.     

Dose-escalated volumetric modulated arc therapy for total marrow irradiation: A feasibility dosimetric study with 4DCT planning and simultaneous integrated boost

PurposeTo evaluate the planning feasibility of dose-escalated total marrow irradiation (TMI) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the active bone marrow (ABM) using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and to assess the impact of using planning organs at risk (OAR) volumes (PRV) accounting for breathing motion in the optimization.MethodsFive patients underwent whole-body CT and thoraco-abdominal 4DCT. A planning target volume (PTV) including all bones and ABM was contoured on each whole-body CT. PRV of selected OAR (liver, heart, kidneys, lungs, spleen, stomach) were determined with 4DCT. Planning consisted of 9–10 full 6 MV photon VMAT arcs. Four plans were created for each patient with 12 Gy prescribed to the PTV, with or without an additional 4 Gy SIB to the ABM. Planning dose constraints were set on the OAR or on the PRV. Planning objective was a PTV D_mean < 110% of the prescribed dose, a PTV V_110% < 50%, and OAR D_mean ≤ 50–60%.ResultsPTV D_mean < 110% was accomplished for most plans (n = 18/20), while all achieved V_110%<50%. SIB plans succeeded to optimally cover the boost volume (median ABM D_mean = 16.3 Gy) and resulted in similar OAR sparing compared to plans without SIB (median OAR D_mean = 40–54% of the ABM prescribed dose). No statistically significant differences between plans optimized with constraints on OAR or PRV were found.ConclusionsAdding a 4 Gy SIB to the ABM for TMI is feasible with VMAT technique, and results in OAR sparing similar to plans without SIB. Setting dose constraints on PRV does not impair PTV dosimetric parameters.     

Determination of optimal planning target volume margins in patients with gynecological cancer

PurposeTo define optimal planning target volume (PTV) margins for intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) ± knee-heel support (KHS) in patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy.MethodsComputed tomography (CT) scans ± KHS of 10 patients were taken before and at 3rd and 5th week of treatment, fused and compared with initial IMRT plans.ResultsA PTV margin of 15 mm in anteroposterior (AP) and superoinferior (SI) directions and 5 mm in lateral directions were found to be adequate without any difference between ± KHS except for the SI shifts in CTV-primary at the 3rd week. Five mm margin for iliac CTV was found to be inadequate in 10–20% of patients in SI directions however when 7 mm margin was given for iliac PTV, it was found to be adequate. For presacral CTV, it was found that the most striking shift of the target volume was in the direction of AP. KHS caused significantly less volume of rectum and bladder in the treated volume.ConclusionsPTV margin of 15 mm in SI and AP, and 5 mm in lateral directions for CTV-primary were found to be adequate. A minimum of 7 mm PTV margin should be given to iliac CTV. The remarkable shifting in presacral CTV was believed to be due to the unforeseen hip malposition of obese patients. The KHS seems not to provide additional beneficial effect in decreasing the shifts both in CTV-primary and lymphatic, however it may have a beneficial effect of decreasing the OAR volume in PTV margins.     

Is the lack of respiratory gating prejudicial for left breast TomoDirect treatments?

Background and purposeTomoDirect (TD) can only operate in free-breathing. The purpose of this study is to compare TD with breath-hold 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques for left breast treatments, and to determine if the lack of respiratory gating is a handicap for cardiac sparing.Materials and methods15 patients treated for left breast had two computed tomography simulation, in free breathing (FB) and in deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH). Four treatments were planned: TD-FB, 3DCRT-FB, 3DCRT-DIBH and IMRT-DIBH. Dose to PTV, heart, lungs, right breast and patient were compared.ResultsA slightly lower cardiac mean dose is found for 3DCRT-DIBH than for TD-FB group (1.99 Gy Vs 2.89 Gy, p = 0.0462), while no statistical difference is found for heart V₂₀. TD-FB plans show the best PTV dose homogeneity (0.053, p < 0.001) and the lowest left lung mean dose (5.16 Gy, p < 0.001). No major differences are found for the other organs.ConclusionsTomoDirect and breath-hold 3DCRT are complementary techniques for left breast treatments: for a minority of patients, respiratory gating is mandatory to lower cardiac dose; for the remaining majority of patients, TomoDirect achieves better PTV homogeneity and reduced left lung dose, with cardiac dose equivalent to 3DCRT-DIBH.     

Potential interest of developing an integrated boost dose escalation for stereotactic irradiation of primary prostate cancer

IntroductionThe stereotactic irradiation is a new approach for low-risk prostate cancer. The aim of the present study was to evaluate a schema of stereotactic irradiation of the prostate with an integrated-boost into the tumor.Material and methodsThe prostate and the tumor were delineated by a radiologist on CT/MRI fusion. A 9-coplanar fields IMRT plan was optimized with three different dose levels: 1) 5 × 6.5 Gy to the PTV1 (plan 1), 2) 5 × 8 Gy to the PTV1 (plan 2) and 3) 5 × 6.5 Gy on the PTV1 with 5 × 8 Gy on the PTV2 (plan 3). The maximum dose (MaxD), mean dose (MD) and doses received by 2% (D2), 5% (D5), 10% (D10) and 25% (D25) of the rectum and bladder walls were used to compare the 3 IMRT plans.ResultsA dose escalation to entire prostate from 6.5 Gy to 8 Gy increased the rectum MD, MaxD, D2, D5, D10 and D25 by 3.75 Gy, 8.42 Gy, 7.88 Gy, 7.36 Gy, 6.67 Gy and 5.54 Gy. Similar results were observed for the bladder with 1.72 Gy, 8.28 Gy, 7.01 Gy, 5.69 Gy, 4.36 Gy and 2.42 Gy for the same dosimetric parameters. An integrated SBRT boost only to PTV2 reduced by about 50% the dose difference for rectum and bladder compared to a homogenous prostate dose escalation. Thereby, the MD, D2, D5, D10 and D25 for rectum were increased by 1.51 Gy, 4.24 Gy, 3.08 Gy, 2.84 Gy and 2.37 Gy in plan 3 compared to plan 1.ConclusionsThe present planning study of an integrated SBRT boost limits the doses received by the rectum and bladder if compared to a whole prostate dose escalation for SBRT approach.     

Automatic VMAT planning for post-operative prostate cancer cases using particle swarm optimization: A proof of concept study

ObjectiveTo investigate the potential of Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) for fully automatic VMAT radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning.Material and MethodsIn PSO a solution space of planning constraints is searched for the best possible RT plan in an iterative, statistical method, optimizing a population of candidate solutions. To identify the best candidate solution and for final evaluation a plan quality score (PQS), based on dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters, was introduced.Automatic PSO-based RT planning was used for N = 10 postoperative prostate cancer cases, retrospectively taken from our clinical database, with a prescribed dose of EUD = 66 Gy in addition to two constraints for rectum and one for bladder. Resulting PSO-based plans were compared dosimetrically to manually generated VMAT plans.ResultsPSO successfully proposed treatment plans comparable to manually optimized ones in 9/10 cases. The median (range) PTV EUD was 65.4 Gy (64.7–66.0) for manual and 65.3 Gy (62.5–65.5) for PSO plans, respectively. However PSO plans achieved significantly lower doses in rectum D_2% 67.0 Gy (66.5–67.5) vs. 66.1 Gy (64.7–66.5, p = 0.016). All other evaluated parameters (PTV D_98% and D_2%, rectum V_40Gy and V_60Gy, bladder D_2% and V_60Gy) were comparable in both plans. Manual plans had lower PQS compared to PSO plans with −0.82 (−16.43–1.08) vs. 0.91 (−5.98–6.25).ConclusionPSO allows for fully automatic generation of VMAT plans with plan quality comparable to manually optimized plans. However, before clinical implementation further research is needed concerning further adaptation of PSO-specific parameters and the refinement of the PQS.     

Adaptive volumetric modulated arc treatment planning for esophageal cancers using cone beam computed tomography

PurposeTo assess the potential of cone beam CT (CBCT) derived adaptive RapidArc treatment for esophageal cancers in reducing the dose to organs at risk (OAR).Methods and materialsTen patients with esophageal cancer were CT scanned in free breathing pattern. The PTV is generated by adding a 3D margin of 1 cm to the CTV as per ICRU 62 recommendations. The double arc RapidArc plan (Clin_RA) was generated for the PTV. Patients were setup using kV orthogonal images and kV-CBCT scan was acquired daily during first week of therapy, then weekly. These images were exported to the Eclipse TPS. The adaptive CTV which includes tumor and involved nodes was delineated in each CBCT image set for the length of the PTV. The composite CTV from first week CBCT was generated using Boolean union operator and 5 mm margin was added circumferentially to generate adaptive PTV (PTV1). Adaptive RapidArc plan (Adap_RA) was generated. NTCP and DVH of the OARs of the two plans were compared. Similarly, PTV2 was generated from weekly CBCT. PTV2 was evaluated for the coverage of 95% isodose of Adap_RA plan.ResultsThe PTV1 and PTV2 volumes covered by 95% isodose in adaptive plans were 93.51 ± 1.17% and 94.59 ± 1.43% respectively. The lung V_10Gy, V_20Gy and mean dose in Adap_RA plan was reduced by 17.43% (p = 0.0012), 34.64% (p = 0.0019) and 16.50% (p = 0.0002) respectively compared to Clin_RA. The Adap_RA plan reduces the heart D_35% and mean dose by 17.35% (p = 0.0011) and 17.16% (p = 0.0012). No significant reduction in spinal cord and liver doses were observed. NTCP for the lung (0.42% vs. 0.08%) and heart (1.39% vs. 0.090%) was reduced significantly in adaptive plans.ConclusionThe adaptive re-planning strategy based on the first week CBCT dataset significantly reduces the doses and NTCP to OARs.     

Adaptive SBRT by 1.5 T MR-linac for prostate cancer: On the accuracy of dose delivery in view of the prolonged session time

PurposeAdaptive Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) of prostate cancer (PC) by online 1.5 T MRi-guidance prolongs session-time, due to contouring and planning tasks, thus increasing the risk of prostate motion. Hence, the interest to verify the adequacy of the delivered dose.Material and methodsFor twenty PC patients treated by 35 Gy (D_p) in five fractions, daily pre- and post- delivery MRi scans were respectively used for adapt-to-shape (ATS) optimization, and re-computation of the delivered irradiation (D_rec). Two expansion recipes, from Clinical (CTV) to Planning target volume (PTV), which slightly differed in the posterior margin were used for groups I and II, of ten patients each. Plans had to assure D_95% ≥ 95%D_p to PTV, and D_1cc ≤ D_p to rectum, bladder, penile bulb, and urethral planning-risk-volume (urethral-PRV). The adequacy of the delivered dose was estimated by inter-fraction average (ifa) of dose-volume metrics computed from D_rec. A cumulative dose (D_sum) was calculated from the five daily D_rec deformed onto the simulation MRi.ResultsFor each patient, CTV coverage resulted in D_95% > 95%D_p when estimated as ifa by D_rec. No significant difference for D_95% and D_99% metrics to CTV resulted between groups I and II. D_1cc was < D_p for rectum, urethral-PRV, and penile bulb, whereas < 103.5%D_p for the bladder.Significant correlations resulted between metrics computed by D_sum and as ifa by D_rec, by both linear-correlation analysis, and Receiver-Operating-Characteristic curve analysis.ConclusionsOur results for PC-SBRT confirm the adequacy of the delivered dose by ATS with 1.5 T MR-linac, and the consistency between dose-volume metrics computed by D_rec and D_sum.     

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.     

A convolution neural network for higher resolution dose prediction in prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy

PurposeThis study aims to investigate the feasibility of using convolutional neural networks to predict an accurate and high resolution dose distribution from an approximated and low resolution input dose.MethodsSixty-six patients were treated for prostate cancer with VMAT. We created the treatment plans using the Acuros XB algorithm with 2 mm grid size, followed by the dose calculated using the anisotropic analytical algorithm with 5 mm grid with the same plan parameters. U-net model was used to predict 2 mm grid dose from 5 mm grid dose. We investigated the two models differing for the training data used as input, one used just the low resolution dose (D model) and the other combined the low resolution dose with CT data (DC model). Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) was calculated to ascertain how well the shape of the dose-volume is matched. We conducted gamma analysis for the following: DVH from the two models and the reference DVH for all prostate structures.ResultsThe DSC values in the DC model were significantly higher than those in the D model (p < 0.01). For the CTV, PTV, and bladder, the gamma passing rates in the DC model were significantly higher than those in the D model (p < 0.002–0.02). The mean doses in the CTV and PTV for the DC model were significantly better matched to those in the reference dose (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsThe proposed U-net model with dose and CT image used as input predicted more accurate dose.     

Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison in head-and-neck radiotherapy using JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT

IntroductionDosimetric and radiobiological evaluations for the Jaws-only Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (JO-IMRT) technique for head and neck jaws-only intensity-modulated radiation therapy (JO-IMRT) and 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT). To compare the head-and-neck therapeutic approaches utilizing JO-IMRT and 3D-CRT techniques, different radiation dose indices were calculated, including: conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and radiobiological variables like Niemierko's equivalent uniform dose based tumor control probability (TCP) of planning target volume (PTV), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of organs at risk (OAR) (brainstem, spinal cord, and parotid grand).Materials and methodsTwenty-five nasopharynx patients were studied using the Prowess Panther Treatment Planning System (Prowess Inc). The results were compared with the dose distribution obtained using 3D-CRT.ResultsRegarding tumor coverage and CI, JO-IMRT showed better results than 3D-CRT. The average doses received by the PTVs were quite similar: 72.1 ± 0.8 Gy by 3D-CRT and 72.5 ± 0.6 Gy by JO-IMRT plans (p > 0.05). The mean doses received by the parotid gland were 56.7 ± 0.7 Gy by 3D-CRT and 26.8 ± 0.3 Gy by JO-IMRT (p > 0.05). The HI and CI were 0.13 ± 0.01 and 0.14 ± 0.05 and (p > 0.05) by 3D-CRT and 0.83 ± 0.05 and 0.73 ± 0.10 by JO-IMRT (p < 0.05). The average TCP of PTV was 0.82 ± 0.08 by 3D-CRT and 0.92 ± 0.02 by JO-IMRT. Moreover, the NTCP of the parotid glands, brain stem, and spinal cord were lower using the JO-IMRT than 3D-CRT plans. In comparison to the 3D-CRT approach, the JO-IMRT technique was able to boost dose coverage to the PTV, improve the target's CI and HI, and spare the parotid glands. This suggests the power of the JO-IMRT over 3D-CRT in head-and-neck radiotherapy.     

Characterization of knowledge-based volumetric modulated arc therapy plans created by three different institutions’ models for prostate cancer

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to clarify factors predicting the performance of knowledge-based planning (KBP) models in volume modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer in terms of sparing the organ at risk (OAR).Materials and methodsIn three institutions, each KBP model was trained by more than 20 library plans (LP) per model. To validate the characterization of each KBP model, 45 validation plans (VP) were calculated by the KBP system. The ratios of overlap between the OAR volume and the planning target volume (PTV) to the whole organ volume (V_overlap/V_whole) were analyzed for each LP and VP. Regression lines between dose–volume parameters (V₉₀, V₇₅, and V₅₀) and V_overlap/V_whole were evaluated. The mean OAR dose, V₉₀, V₇₅, and V₅₀ of LP did not necessarily match those of VP.ResultsIn both the rectum and bladder, the dose–volume parameters for VP were strongly correlated with V_overlap/V_whole at institutes A, B, and C (R > 0.74, 0.85, and 0.56, respectively). Except in the rectum at institute B, the slopes of the regression lines for LP corresponded to those for VP. For dose–volume parameters for the rectum, the ratios of slopes of the regression lines in VP to those in LP ranged 0.51–1.26. In the bladder, most ratios were less than 1.0 (mean: 0.77).ConclusionFor each OAR, each model made distinct dosimetric characterizations in terms of V_overlap/V_whole. The relationship between dose–volume parameters and V_overlap/V_whole of OARs in LP predicts the KBP models’ performance sparing OARs.     

Dosimetric impact of Acuros XB on cervix radiotherapy using RapidArc technique: a dosimetric study

BackgroundAcuros XB (AXB) may predict better rectal toxicities and treatment outcomes in cervix carcinoma. The aim of the study was to quantify the potential impact of AXB computations on the cervix radiotherapy using the RapidArc (RA ) technique as compared to anisotropic analytical algorithm (AA) computations.Materials and methodsA cohort of 30 patients previously cared for cervix carcinoma (stages II–IIIB) was selected for the present analysis. The RA plans were computed using AA and AXB dose computation engines under identical beam setup and MLC pattern.ResultsThere was no significant (p > 0.05) difference in D_95% and D_98% to the planning target volume (PTV); moreover, a significant (p < 0.05) rise was noticed for mean dose to the PTV (0.26%), D_50% (0.26%), D_2% (0.80%) and V_110% (44.24%) for AXB computation as compared to AA computations. Further, AXB estimated a significantly (p < 0.05) lower value for maximum and minimum dose to the PTV. Additionally, there was a significant (p < 0.05) reduction observed in mean dose to organs at risk (OARs) for AXB computation as compared to AA, though the reduction in mean dose was non-significant (p > 0.05) for the rectum. The maximum difference observed was 4.78% for the rectum V_50Gy, 1.72%, 1.15% in mean dose and 2.22%, 1.48% in D_2% of the left femur and right femur, respectively, between AA and AXB dose estimations.ConclusionFor similar target coverage, there were significant differences observed between the AAA and AXB computations. AA underestimates the V_50Gy of the rectum and overestimates the mean dose and D_2% for femoral heads as compared to AXB. Therefore, the use of AXB in the case of cervix carcinoma may predict better rectal toxicities and treatment outcomes in cervix carcinoma using the RA technique.     

Image-guided IMRT for localized prostate cancer with daily repositioning: Inferring the difference between planned dose and delivered dose distribution

IntroductionTo investigate the dosimetric impact of daily on-line repositioning during a full course of IMRT for prostate cancer.Materials and methodsTwenty patients were treated with image-guided IMRT. Each pre-treatment plan (Plan A) was compared with a post-treatment plan sum (Plan B) based on couch shifts measured. The delivered dose to the prostate without a daily repositioning was inferred by considering each daily couch shift during the whole course of image-guided IMRT (i.e. plan B). Dose metrics were compared for prostate CTV (P-CTV) and PTV (P-PTV) and for organs at risk. Ten patients were treated with a 5 mm margin and 10 patients with a 10 mm margin.ResultsFor plan A vs plan B: the average D95, D98, D50, D mean and EUD were: 76.4 Gy vs 73.9 Gy (p = 0.0007), 75.4 Gy vs 72.3 Gy (p = 0.001), 78.9 Gy vs 78.4 Gy (p = 0.014), 78.7 Gy vs 77.8 Gy (p = 0.003) and 78.1 Gy vs 75.9 Gy (p = 0.002), respectively for P-CTV, and 73.2 Gy vs 69.3 Gy (p = 0.0006), 70.7 Gy vs 66.0 Gy (p = 0.0008), 78.3 Gy vs 77.5 Gy (p = 0.001), 77.8 Gy vs 76.4 Gy (p = 0.0002) and 74.4 Gy vs 69.2 Gy (p = 0.003), respectively for P-PTV. Margin comparison showed no differences in dose metrics between the two plans except for D98 of the rectum in plan B which was significantly higher with a 10 mm margin.ConclusionsThe absence of daily image-guided IMRT resulted in a significantly less uniform and less homogeneous dose distribution to the prostate. A reduction in PTV margin showed neither a lower target coverage nor a better spare of OAR with and without daily image-guided IMRT.     

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.