Search

Combining external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and prostate seed implant (PSI) is efficacious in treating intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer at the cost of increased genitourinary toxicity. Accurate combined dosimetry remains elusive due to lack of registration between treatment plans and different biological effect. The current work proposes a method to convert physical dose to biological effective dose (BED) and spatially register the dose distributions for more accurate combined dosimetry. A PSI phantom was CT scanned with and without seeds under rigid and deformed transformations. The resulting CTs were registered using image-based rigid registration (RI), fiducial-based rigid registration (RF), or b-spline deformable image registration (DIR) to determine which was most accurate. Physical EBRT and PSI dose distributions from a sample of 91 previously-treated combined-modality prostate cancer patients were converted to BED and registered using RI, RF, and DIR. Forty-eight (48) previously-treated patients whose PSI occurred before EBRT were included as a "control" group due to inherent registration. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters were compared for RI, RF, DIR, DICOM, and scalar addition of DVH parameters using ANOVA or independent Student's t tests (α = 0.05). In the phantom study, DIR was the most accurate registration algorithm, especially in the case of deformation. In the patient study, dosimetry from RI was significantly different than the other registration algorithms, including the control group. Dosimetry from RF and DIR were not significantly different from the control group or each other. Combined dosimetry with BED and image registration is feasible. Future work will utilize this method to correlate dosimetry with clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Management of head and neck cancers (HNC) in older adults is a common but challenging clinical scenario. We assess the impact of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) on survival utilizing the Geriatric-8 (G8) questionnaire. 171 HNC patients, deemed medically unfit for definitive treatment, were treated with SBRT ± systemic therapy. G8 questionnaires were collected at baseline, at 4–6 weeks, and at 2–3 months post-treatment. Patients were stratified according to their baseline G8 score: <11 as 'vulnerable', 11–14 as 'intermediate', and >14 as 'fit'. Overall survival (OS) was assessed through univariate Kaplan Meier analysis. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine if baseline characteristics affected G8 score changes. Median follow-up was seventeen months. 60% of patients presented with recurrent HNC, 30% with untreated HNC primaries, and 10% with metastatic non-HNC primaries. Median age was 75 years. Median Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 2. 51% of patients were 'vulnerable', 37% were 'intermediate', and 12% were 'fit' at baseline, with median survival of 13.2, 24.3, and 41.0 months, respectively (p =.004). Patients who saw a decrease in their follow-up G8 score (n = 69) had significantly lower survival than patients who had stable or increased follow-up G8 scores (n = 102), with median survival of 8.6 vs 36.0 months (p <.001). The G8 questionnaire may be a useful tool in upfront treatment decision-making to predict prognosis and prevent older patients from receiving inappropriate anti-cancer treatment. Decline in follow-up G8 scores may also predict worse survival and aid in goals of care following treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Purpose Peer review is an essential component of quality assurance programs in radiation oncology. The purpose of this work was to assess whether peer reviewers recommend expansion or reduction of planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs) in prospective multidisciplinary daily contour rounds. Methods and Materials The peer group evaluated the appropriateness of PTVs and OARs for each case according to evidence-based departmental directives. We reviewed 7645 cases that presented between September 2013 and March 2017. We isolated recommendations for PTV/OAR modification and classified each as expansion, reduction, both, or indeterminate. Recommendations were analyzed by technique, site, and physician experience. Results Eight junior and 7 senior radiation oncologists were included. PTV or OAR modifications were recommended for 750 of 7645 prescriptions (9.7%). The peer group recommended PTV modifications for 534 prescriptions (7.0%): There were 309 expansions (57.9%), 115 reductions (21.5%), 15 both (2.8%), and 95 indeterminate (17.8%). Reasons for PTV expansions included increased nodal coverage and inadequate margins as a result of motion. The peer group recommended OAR modifications for 216 prescriptions (2.8%): There were 102 expansions (47.2%), 23 reductions (10.6%), 2 both (0.9%), and 89 indeterminate (41.2%). Reasons for OAR expansions included missing critical structures and inadequate extent as per departmental standardization. Head and neck represented the largest percentage of PTV recommendations (28.8%). Intensity modulated radiation therapy plans received the most PTV and OAR recommendations (66.8% and 74.5%, respectively). The recommendation rate for senior and junior faculty was 43% and 28%, respectively. Conclusions Peer review resulted in recommendations for PTV or OAR change for approximately 10% of cases. Expansions of PTV were recommended >2.5 times more often than reductions and >3 times more often than OAR expansions. This general trend was identified for treatment technique, site, and physician experience. Prospective peer review could yield systematically larger volumes, which could affect multicenter clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Our purpose was to evaluate hippocampal doses and target volume coverage with and without hippocampal sparing when treating multiple brain metastases using various stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) platforms. Methods and materials We selected 10 consecutive patients with 14 separate treatments who had been treated in our department for 3 to 10 brain metastases and added hippocampal avoidance contours. All 14 treatments were planned with GammaPlan for Gamma Knife, Eclipse for single isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), TomoTherapy Treatment Planning System (TPS) for TomoTherapy, and MultiPlan for CyberKnife. Initial planning was performed with the goal of planning target volume coverage of V100 ≥95% without hippocampal avoidance. If the maximum hippocampal point dose (Dmax) was <6.6 Gy in a single fraction and <40% of the hippocampi received ≤4.5 Gy, no second plan was performed. If either constraint was not met, replanning was performed with these constraints. Results There was a median of 6 metastases per plan, with an average total tumor volume of 7.32 mL per plan. The median hippocampal Dmax (in Gy) without sparing averaged 1.65, 9.81, 4.38, and 5.46, respectively ( P < .0001). Of 14 plans, 3 Gamma Knife and CyberKnife plans required replanning, whereas 13 VMAT and 8 TomoTherapy plans required replanning. The hippocampal constraints were not achievable in 1 plan on any platform when the tumor was bordering the hippocampus. The mean volume of brain receiving 12 Gy (in mL), which has been associated with symptomatic radionecrosis, was 23.57 with Gamma Knife, 76.77 with VMAT, 40.86 with CyberKnife, and 104.06 with TomoTherapy ( P = .01). The overall average conformity indices for all plans ranged from 0.36 to 0.52. Conclusions Even with SRS, the hippocampi can receive a considerable dose; however, if the hippocampi are outlined as organs of risk, sparing these structures is feasible in nearly all situations with all 4 platforms, without detriment to target coverage, and should be considered in all patients undergoing SRS for multiple brain metastases. Summary Hippocampi play an important role in memory, and sparing of these structures in whole brain radiation can improve neurocognitive outcomes. The hippocampi are not routinely spared when using stereotactic radiosurgery. We evaluated the incidental dose to the hippocampi when treating multiple brain metastases and sought to examine if hippocampal sparing is feasible without detriment to target coverage. We found that hippocampal sparing is possible without affecting coverage or conformality in most cases across treatment platforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: To compare relative carotid and normal tissue sparing using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) or intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for early-stage larynx cancer. Seven treatment plans were retrospectively created on 2 commercial treatment planning systems for 11 consecutive patients with T1-2N0 larynx cancer. Conventional plans consisted of opposed-wedged fields. IMRT planning used an anterior 3-field beam arrangement. Two VMAT plans were created, a full 360° arc and an anterior 180° arc. Given planning target volume (PTV) coverage of 95% total volume at 95% of 6300 cGy and maximum spinal cord dose below 2500 cGy, mean carotid artery dose was pushed as low as possible for each plan. Deliverability was assessed by comparing measured and planned planar dose with the gamma (γ) index. Full-arc planning provided the most effective carotid sparing but yielded the highest mean normal tissue dose (where normal tissue was defined as all soft tissue minus PTV). Static IMRT produced next-best carotid sparing with lower normal tissue dose. The anterior half-arc produced the highest carotid artery dose, in some cases comparable with conventional opposed fields. On the whole, carotid sparing was inversely related to normal tissue dose sparing. Mean γ indexes were much less than 1, consistent with accurate delivery of planned treatment. Full-arc VMAT yields greater carotid sparing than half-arc VMAT. Limited-angle IMRT remains a reasonable alternative to full-arc VMAT, given its ability to mediate the competing demands of carotid and normal tissue dose constraints. The respective clinical significance of carotid and normal tissue sparing will require prospective evaluation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To determine whether cine computed tomography (CT) can serve as an alternative to four-dimensional (4D)-CT by providing tumor motion information and producing equivalent target volumes when used to contour in radiotherapy planning without a respiratory surrogate. Methods and Materials: Cine CT images from a commercial CT scanner were used to form maximum intensity projection and respiratory-averaged CT image sets. These image sets then were used together to define the targets for radiotherapy. Phantoms oscillating under irregular motion were used to assess the differences between contouring using cine CT and 4D-CT. We also retrospectively reviewed the image sets for 26 patients (27 lesions) at our institution who had undergone stereotactic radiotherapy for Stage I non–small-cell lung cancer. The patients were included if the tumor motion was >1 cm. The lesions were first contoured using maximum intensity projection and respiratory-averaged CT image sets processed from cine CT and then with 4D-CT maximum intensity projection and 10-phase image sets. The mean ratios of the volume magnitude were compared with intraobserver variation, the mean centroid shifts were calculated, and the volume overlap was assessed with the normalized Dice similarity coefficient index. Results: The phantom studies demonstrated that cine CT captured a greater extent of irregular tumor motion than did 4D-CT, producing a larger tumor volume. The patient studies demonstrated that the gross tumor defined using cine CT imaging was similar to, or slightly larger than, that defined using 4D-CT. Conclusion: The results of our study have shown that cine CT is a promising alternative to 4D-CT for stereotactic radiotherapy planning. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To assess the need for gross tumor volume (GTV) delineation protocols in head-and-neck cancer (HNC) treatment planning by use of positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) fusion imaging. Assessment will consist of interobserver and intermodality variation analysis. Methods and Materials: Sixteen HNC patients were accrued for the study. Four physicians (2 neuroradiologists and 2 radiation oncologists) contoured GTV on 16 patients. Physicians were asked to contour GTV on the basis of the CT alone, and then on PET/CT fusion. Statistical analysis included analysis of variance for interobserver variability and Student's paired sample t test for intermodality and interdisciplinary variability. A Boolean pairwise analysis was included to measure degree of overlap. Results: Near-significant variation occurred across physicians' CT volumes (p = 0.09) and significant variation occurred across physicians' PET/CT volumes (p = 0.0002). The Boolean comparison correlates with statistical findings. One radiation oncologist's PET/CT fusion volumes were significantly larger than his CT volumes (p < 0.01). Conversely, the other radiation oncologist's CT volumes tended to be larger than his fusion volumes (p = 0.06). No significant interdisciplinary variation was seen. Significant disagreement occurred between radiation oncologists. Conclusion: Significant differences in GTV delineation were found between multiple observers contouring on PET/CT fusion. The need for delineation protocol has been confirmed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) are utilized for in vivo dosimetry (IVD) of modern radiation therapy techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Dosimetric precision achieved with conventional techniques may not be attainable. In this work, we measured accuracy and precision for a large sample of clinical OSLD-based IVD measurements. Methods and materials Weekly IVD measurements were collected from 4 linear accelerators for 2 years and were expressed as percent differences from planned doses. After outlier analysis, 10,224 measurements were grouped in the following way: overall, modality (photons, electrons), treatment technique (3-dimensional [3D] conformal, field-in-field intensity modulation, inverse-planned IMRT, and VMAT), placement location (gantry angle, cardinality, and central axis positioning), and anatomical site (prostate, breast, head and neck, pelvis, lung, rectum and anus, brain, abdomen, esophagus, and bladder). Distributions were modeled via a Gaussian function. Fitting was performed with least squares, and goodness-of-fit was assessed with the coefficient of determination. Model means ( μ ) and standard deviations ( σ ) were calculated. Sample means and variances were compared for statistical significance by analysis of variance and the Levene tests (α = 0.05). Results Overall, μ ± σ was 0.3 ± 10.3%. Precision for electron measurements (6.9%) was significantly better than for photons (10.5%). Precision varied significantly among treatment techniques ( P < .0001) with field-in-field lowest ( σ = 7.2%) and IMRT and VMAT highest ( σ = 11.9% and 13.4%, respectively). Treatment site models with goodness-of-fit greater than 0.90 (6 of 10) yielded accuracy within ±3%, except for head and neck ( μ = –3.7%). Precision varied with treatment site (range, 7.3%-13.0%), with breast and head and neck yielding the best and worst precision, respectively. Placement on the central axis of cardinal gantry angles yielded more precise results ( σ = 8.5%) compared with other locations (range, 10.5%-11.4%). Conclusions Accuracy of ±3% was achievable. Precision ranged from 6.9% to 13.4% depending on modality, technique, and treatment site. Simple, standardized locations may improve IVD precision. These findings may aid development of patient-specific tolerances for OSLD-based IVD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of a gross tumor volume (GTV) contouring protocol on interobserver variability between 4 physicians in positron emission therapy/computed tomography (PET/CT) treatment planning of head-and-neck cancer. A GTV contouring protocol for PET/CT treatment planning was developed utilizing 4 stages: Preliminary contouring on CT alone, determination of appropriate PET windowing, accurate image registration, and modification of CT contouring with correctly formatted PET/CT display and rules for modality disagreement. Two neuroradiologists and 2 radiation oncologists (designated as A, B, C, and D, respectively) were given a tutorial of PET/CT coregistered imaging individualized to their skill level, which included a step-by-step explanation of the protocol with clinical examples. Opportunities for questions and hands-on practice were given. The physicians were asked to re-contour 16 head-and-neck patients from Part I on PET/CT fusion imaging. Differences in volume magnitude were analyzed for statistical significance by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and paired t-tests (α < 0.05). Volume overlap was analyzed for statistical significance using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests (α < 0.05). Volume overlap increased significantly from Part I to Part II (p < 0.05). One previously significant difference between physicians disappeared with the protocol in place. The mean fusion volume of Physician C, however, remained significantly larger than that of Physician D (p < 0.01). This result is unchanged from Part I. The multidisciplinary contouring protocol significantly improved the coincidence of GTVs contoured by multiple physicians. The magnitudes of the volumes showed marginal improvement in consistency. Developing an institutional contouring protocol for PET/CT treatment planning is highly recommended to reduce interobserver variability. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) are used in clinical radiation dosimetry, but their sensitivity changes with the accumulated dose, limiting their reusability. Different studies have reported inconsistent results regarding the changes in sensitivity at different accumulated doses, and the reasons for this inconsistency remain unclear. In addition, the extent to which the OSLD linearity and element sensitivity correction factor (k s , i ) change with the accumulated dose has not been well established. We sought to characterize how the individual k s , i and dose non-linearity correction factor (k L) change with accumulated dose and how such changes affect the measurement of the dose to water (D w). Determining the extent to which these parameters change with the accumulated dose can help clinics, institutions, and the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) at MD Anderson extend the OSLD accumulated dose limit above 10 Gy and thus increase the efficiency of use of these detectors, including for the remote audit output audits run by IROC for the National Clinical Trials Network. 95 nanoDot OSLDs were individually irradiated in 4-Gy cycles with 90 cGy used to determine sensitivity, irradiated between 0.25- to 3-Gy to determine linearity, and then irradiated to return all dosimeters to the same total dose history. Repeated measurements between 10 and 23 Gy were performed with the same batch (N = 129) and with a different batch (batch 2, N = 130). Dosimeters were read with a microSTARii system 5–8 h following each irradiation, and each OSLD was bleached for 24 h in the IROC bleaching box prior to every irradiation. A combination of single-factor ANOVA, Levene tests, and linear regressions was used to quantify changes in OSLD characteristics as a function of accumulated dose. The D w was calculated using Equation (1)in the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 191 report. The signal response of the OSLDs showed stability within 1% up to an accumulated dose of 23 Gy before decreasing with dose. The k s , i remained the same, while linearity changed with accumulated dose but did so in a linear and predictable manner. Our findings improve our understanding of accumulated dose and could help improve overall process efficiency by extending the reusability of OSLDs. • Systematically evaluated how TG-191 factors change with accumulated dose. • Dose-nonlinearity correction factor changes linearly with accumulated dose. • No change in element sensitivity correction factor with accumulated dose. • OSLDs can be used up to 23 Gy with the irradiation and bleaching scheme at IROC. • OSLDs can be reused to higher dose limits with well characterized factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]