Stereotactic body radiotherapy: a new paradigm in the management of spinal metastases

Spine stereotactic body radiotherapy is based on delivering high biologically effective doses to spinal metastases, with the intent to maximize both tumor and pain control. The purpose of this review is to outline the technical details of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy, contrast clinical outcomes to low biologically effective dose conventional palliative radiotherapy, discuss the role of surgery in the era of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy, and summarize the major serious adverse events that patients would otherwise not be at risk of with conventional radiotherapy.

Surgical resection of epidural disease improves local control following postoperative spine stereotactic body radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is increasingly being applied to the postoperative spine metastases patient. Our aim was to identify clinical and dosimetric predictors of local control (LC) and survival.

METHODS

Eighty patients treated between October 2008 and February 2012 with postoperative SBRT were identified from our prospective database and retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 8.3 months. Thirty-five patients (44%) were treated with 18-26 Gy in 1 or 2 fractions, and 45 patients (56%) with 18-40 Gy in 3-5 fractions. Twenty-one local failures (26%) were observed, and the 1-year LC and overall survival (OS) rates were 84% and 64%, respectively. The most common site of failure was within the epidural space (15/21, 71%). Multivariate proportional hazards analysis identified systemic therapy post-SBRT as the only significant predictor of OS (P = .02) and treatment with 18-26 Gy/1 or 2 fractions (P = .02) and a postoperative epidural disease grade of 0 or 1 (0, no epidural disease; 1, epidural disease that compresses dura only, P = .003) as significant predictors of LC. Subset analysis for only those patients (n = 48/80) with high-grade preoperative epidural disease (cord deformed) indicated significantly greater LC rates when surgically downgraded to 0/1 vs 2 (P = .0009).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative SBRT with high total doses ranging from 18 to 26 Gy delivered in 1-2 fractions predicted superior LC, as did postoperative epidural grade.

Treatment Planning and Delivery Evaluation of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Spinal Tumours: Impact of Arc Discretization in Planning System

The purpose of this study was to compare single arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for spine SBRT in terms of target coverage, organ at risk (OAR) sparing and delivery performance. VMAT plans with 91 control points (VMAT-91CP) were generated for 15 spine metastases patients previously treated with a nine-field IMRT technique. VMAT and IMRT plans were compared based on target coverage, maximum spinal cord dose, maximum plan dose and volume of normal tissue receiving 20% to 80% of the prescribed dose. Treatment delivery time and monitor units (MU) were measured to determine delivery efficiency. To assess the impact of arc discretization in the treatment planning system (TPS), the VMAT-91CP plans were modified by almost doubling the number of CPs (VMAT-181CP). Planned-to-delivered dose agreement for both techniques was assessed using two types of 3D detector arrays. VMAT-91CP target coverage was equivalent to IMRT while maintaining or improving spinal cord sparing. This was achieved without increasing the volume of normal tissue receiving low or intermediate dose levels. Planned-to-delivered dose agreement equivalent to IMRT was achieved with VMAT, but required decreasing the CP angular spacing from 4° to 2° (VMAT-181CP plans). On average, VMAT-181CP plans reduced delivery time by 53% compared to IMRT. Single-arc VMAT for spine SBRT improved delivery efficiency while maintaining target coverage and OAR sparing compared to IMRT. VMAT plans generated with a CP gantry angular spacing of 2° is recommended to avoid a discretization effect in the TPS and ensure acceptable planned-to-delivered dose agreement.

SU-E-T-94: Multileaf Collimator Performance and Validation of Quality Control Tolerances

PURPOSE

The automated quality assurance system (AQUA) is a centralized quality control (QC) software designed to automate QC tests. Statistical analysis of AQUA results was performed to assess the geometric accuracy and long-term reproducibility of a commercially available multileaf collimator (MLC) and examine the applicability of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) tolerances for MLC QC.

METHODS

The MLC was first calibrated with AQUA by minimizing leaf-positioning errors on megavoltage images for 5 different leaf-bank positions (-60 to 100 mm from radiation isocenter). Leaf-positioning accuracy and reproducibility was assessed by repeating the AQUA test 5 times/week. The range of leaf-positioning error over leaf-bank positions and time was reported. Measured leaf-positioning errors were then separated into systematic and random error components. The systematic error corresponds to the variation (standard deviation) in mean positioning errors between leaves over leaf-bank positions and time. The random error quantifies the leaf position variations around its mean and is calculated as the root-mean-square of the individual leaf position standard deviations.

RESULTS

To date, 2 different MLCs have been calibrated using AQUA and 9-18 datasets have been acquired to assess performance. For the unit with the longest follow up, the range of leaf-positioning errors was -0.62 to 0.85 mm and 98% of the measured leaf positions (n=7200) were within ±0.5 mm of the nominal position. The systematic error was the main error component (±0.15 to ±0.2 mm) and was attributed to the residual errors after calibration. The random error was ±0.07 mm for both units and demonstrated good leaf-positioning reproducibility and limited uncertainty of the AQUA measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary results show that after MLC calibration with AQUA, leaf-positioning errors on two different units are well within the AAPM-recommended ±1 mm tolerances. Additional MLC performance improvement is possible if residual errors after calibration can be reduced further as the MLC demonstrated high reproducibility. Funded in part by Elekta Inc.

The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology scope of practice guidelines for lung, liver and spine stereotactic body radiotherapy

AIMS

The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology-Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (CARO-SBRT) Task Force was established in 2010. The aim was to define the scope of practice guidelines for the profession to ensure safe practice specific for the most common sites of lung, liver and spine SBRT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A group of Canadian SBRT experts were charged by our national radiation oncology organisation (CARO) to define the basic principles and technologies for SBRT practice, to propose the minimum technological requirements for safe practice with a focus on simulation and image guidance and to outline procedural considerations for radiation oncology departments to consider when establishing an SBRT programme.

RESULTS

We recognised that SBRT should be considered as a specific programme within a radiation department, and we provide a definition of SBRT according to a Canadian consensus. We outlined the basic requirements for safe simulation as they pertain to spine, lung and liver tumours, and the fundamentals of image guidance. The roles of the radiation oncologist, medical physicist and dosimetrist have been detailed such that we strongly recommend the development of SBRT-specific teams. Quality assurance is a key programmatic aspect for safe SBRT practice, and we outline the basic principles of appropriate quality assurance specific to SBRT.

CONCLUSION

This CARO scope of practice guideline for SBRT is specific to liver, lung and spine tumours. The task force recommendations are designed to assist departments in establishing safe and robust SBRT programmes.