Search

Background: Possible advantages of magnetic resonance (MR)-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) for the treatment of brain tumors include improved definition of treatment volumes and organs at risk (OARs) that could allow margin reductions, resulting in limited dose to the OARs and/or dose escalation to target volumes. Recently, hybrid systems integrating a linear accelerator and an magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan (MRI-linacs, MRL) have been introduced, that could potentially lead to a fully MRI-based treatment workflow., Methods: We performed a systematic review of the published literature regarding the adoption of MRL for the treatment of primary or secondary brain tumors (last update November 3, 2022), retrieving a total of 2487 records; after a selection based on title and abstracts, the full text of 74 articles was analyzed, finally resulting in the 52 papers included in this review., Results and Discussion: Several solutions have been implemented to achieve a paradigm shift from CT-based radiotherapy to MRgRT, such as the management of geometric integrity and the definition of synthetic CT models that estimate electron density. Multiple sequences have been optimized to acquire images with adequate quality with on-board MR scanner in limited times. Various sophisticated algorithms have been developed to compensate the impact of magnetic field on dose distribution and calculate daily adaptive plans in a few minutes with satisfactory dosimetric parameters for the treatment of primary brain tumors and cerebral metastases. Dosimetric studies and preliminary clinical experiences demonstrated the feasibility of treating brain lesions with MRL., Conclusions: The adoption of an MRI-only workflow is feasible and could offer several advantages for the treatment of brain tumors, including superior image quality for lesions and OARs and the possibility to adapt the treatment plan on the basis of daily MRI. The growing body of clinical data will clarify the potential benefit in terms of toxicity and response to treatment.

To analyse the pattern of recurrence of patients treated with Stupp protocol in relation to technique, to compare in silico plans with reduced margin (1 cm) with the original ones and to analyse toxicity. 105 patients were treated: 85 had local recurrence and 68 of them were analysed. Recurrence was considered in field, marginal and distant if >80 %, 20-80 % or <20 % of the relapse volume was included in the 95 %-isodose. In silico plans were retrospectively recalculated using the same technique, fields angles and treatment planning system of the original ones. The pattern of recurrence was in field, marginal and distant in 88, 10 and 2 % respectively and was similar in in silico plans. The margin reduction appears to spare 100 cc of healthy brain by 57 Gy-volume (p = 0.02). The target coverage was worse in standard plans (pt student < 0.001), especially if the tumour was near to organs at risk (pχ2 < 0.001). PTV coverage was better with IMRT and helical-IMRT, than conformal-3D (pAnova test = 0.038). This difference was no more significant with in silico planning. A higher incidence of asthenia and leuko-encephalopathy was observed in patients with greater percentage of healthy brain included in 57 Gy-volume. No differences in the pattern of recurrence according to margins were found. The margin reduction determines sparing of healthy brain and could possibly reduce the incidence of late toxicity. Margin reduction could allow to use less sophisticated techniques, ensuring appropriate target coverage, and the choice of more costly techniques could be reserved to selected cases.

Background: To compare and evaluate the possible advantages related to the use of VMAT and helical IMRT and two different modalities of boost delivering, adjuvant stereotactic boost (SRS) or simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), in the treatment of brain metastasis (BM) in RPA classes I-II patients., Methods: Ten patients were treated with helical IMRT, 5 of them with SRS after whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and 5 with SIB. MRI co-registration with planning CT was mandatory and prescribed doses were 30 Gy in 10 fractions (fr) for WBRT and 15Gy/1fr or 45Gy/10fr in SRS or SIB, respectively. For each patient, 4 "treatment plans" (VMAT SRS and SIB, helical IMRT SRS and SIB) were calculated and accepted if PTV boost was included in 95 % isodose and dose constraints of the main organs at risk were respected without major deviations. Homogeneity Index (HI), Conformal Index (CI) and Conformal Number (CN) were considered to compare the different plans. Moreover, time of treatment delivery was calculated and considered in the analysis., Results: Volume of brain metastasis ranged between 1.43 and 51.01 cc (mean 12.89 ± 6.37 ml) and 3 patients had double lesions. V95% resulted over 95 % in the average for each kind of technique, but the "target coverage" was inadequate for VMAT planning with two sites. The HI resulted close to the ideal value of zero in all cases; VMAT-SIB, VMAT-SRS, Helical IMRT-SIB and Helical IMRT-SRS showed mean CI of 2.15, 2.10, 2.44 and 1.66, respectively (optimal range: 1.5-2.0). Helical IMRT-SRS was related to the best and reliable finding of CN (0.66). The mean of treatment time was 210 s, 467 s, 440 s, 1598 s, respectively, for VMAT-SIB, VMAT-SRS, Helical IMRT-SIB and Helical IMRT-SRS., Conclusions: This dosimetric comparison show that helical IMRT obtain better target coverage and respect of CI and CN; VMAT could be acceptable in solitary metastasis. SIB modality can be considered as a good choice for clinical and logistic compliance; literature's preliminary data are confirming also a radiobiological benefit for SIB. Helical IMRT-SRS seems less effective for the long time of treatment compared to other techniques.

The extent of surgery predicts overall survival (OS) in patients treated for glioblastoma (GBM). The therapeutic approach after partial resection (PR) or biopsy alone (BA) is not clearly defined. This retrospective analysis was therefore planned to analyse clinical features, treatment and survival of patients undergoing PR or BA. We analysed the clinical/therapeutic features and the outcome of 232 patients submitted to BA/PR and treated with radiotherapy (RT) with/without chemotherapy. Two subgroups (pre- and post-Temozolomide-era) were identified. The BA/PR ratio did not change with the accrual periods. In the TMZ-era, 50 % of the patients had chemotherapy; "small" volume, hypo-fractionated and "low" dose RT (<54 Gy) were delivered to 93, 38 and 44 % of the patients; corresponding values for the previous period were 4, 28, 11 and 2 % (P < 0.001). Better two-year OS was evident in the TMZ-era (18 vs 7 %); PR and chemotherapy affected OS in patients treated with hypo-fractionated, low doses RT (P = 0.02, 0.04). Limited volume, more often MRI-based, and "short" RT treatments were given mostly to unfavourably selected patients, without compromising the results of the whole group. This strategy, combined with an increased use of chemotherapy, resulted in reduced treatment burden, in an improved 2-year OS rate and prospectively in better quality of life, even in this prognostically worse subset of glioma patients.

Aims and Background: Radiotherapy is the standard treatment of glioblastoma. Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy is the standard technique to treat glioblastoma. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy and helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy (tomotherapy) are becoming widely used. The present study compared three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy in terms of target coverage and preservation of organs at risk., Methods: Ten patients treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, with a target volume close to or superimposed to the organs at risk, were retrospectively selected. The plans were re-planned with step-and-shoot 3/5 fields intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy. Target coverage and sparing of organs at risk were statistically compared., Results: Mean planning target volume V95% improved with sophisticated techniques (87.2%, 93.2%, 97.6% with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy, respectively). The comparison of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy did not show significant differences, whereas differences were significant when three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and tomotherapy as well as intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy were compared. Mean planning target volume/clinical target volume D99-D98-D95 were not different between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy, but they were different between tomotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy, with better clinical target volume/and planning target volume coverage with the tomotherapy plans. Brain D33/66 were 31.1/11.8 Gy, 37.5/18.3 Gy and 28.5/14.7 Gy with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and tomotherapy, respectively. Mean brainstem, optic nerves and chiasma Dmax were always within the defined constraints. The homogeneity index improved with intensity-modulated radiotherapy/tomotherapy compared to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. Tomotherapy was better than intensity-modulated radiotherapy in all patients., Conclusions: In this selected group of patients, a significant dosimetric advantage was evident for tomotherapy compared with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Significant advantages were evident in terms of panning target volume coverage (V95), D99, D98 and D95. The clinical significance of the results should be defined.