A dosimetric comparison of the use of equally spaced beam (ESB), beam angle optimization (BAO), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in head and neck cancers treated by intensity modulated radiotherapy

Comparative Study of Eclipse and RayStation Multi-Criteria Optimization-Based Prostate Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Quality

Multi-criteria optimization (MCO) function has been available on commercial radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning systems to improve plan quality; however, no study has compared Eclipse and RayStation MCO functions for prostate RT planning. The purpose of this study was to compare prostate RT MCO plan qualities in terms of discrepancies between Pareto optimal and final deliverable plans, and dosimetric impact of final deliverable plans. In total, 25 computed tomography datasets of prostate cancer patients were used for Eclipse (version 16.1) and RayStation (version 12A) MCO-based plannings with doses received by 98% of planning target volume having 76 Gy prescription (PTV76D98%) and 50% of rectum (rectum D50%) selected as trade-off criteria. Pareto optimal and final deliverable plan discrepancies were determined based on PTV76D98% and rectum D50% percentage differences. Their final deliverable plans were compared in terms of doses received by PTV76 and other structures including rectum, and PTV76 homogeneity index (HI) and conformity index (CI), using a t-test. Both systems showed discrepancies between Pareto optimal and final deliverable plans (Eclipse: -0.89% (PTV76D98%) and -2.49% (Rectum D50%); RayStation: 3.56% (PTV76D98%) and -1.96% (Rectum D50%)). Statistically significantly different average values of PTV76D98%,HI and CI, and mean dose received by rectum (Eclipse: 76.07 Gy, 0.06, 1.05 and 39.36 Gy; RayStation: 70.43 Gy, 0.11, 0.87 and 51.65 Gy) are noted, respectively (p < 0.001). Eclipse MCO-based prostate RT plan quality appears better than that of RayStation.

Dosimetric impact of adding non-coplanar arcs for scalp-avoidance whole-brain irradiation with volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy on scalp dose reduction in pediatric patients with medulloblastomas

PURPOSE

We performed scalp-avoidance whole-brain irradiation with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (SAWB-VMAT) as a component of craniospinal irradiation. In SAWB-VMAT with two coplanar arcs, radiation oncologists and medical physicists sometimes experience difficulty in reducing the dose to the scalp to below the cut-off equivalent dose in 2 Gy per fraction (assuming α/β = 2) to 50% (EQD50%scalp ). To investigate the advantage of adding coplanar or non-coplanar arcs in reducing the dose to the scalp in SAWB-VMAT, we conducted a planning study to compare the EQD50%scalp , the dose to other organs at risk (OARs), and target coverage in VMAT with two coplanar arcs (Co2arcVMAT), VMAT with three coplanar arcs (Co3arcVMAT), and VMAT with two coplanar and two non-coplanar arcs (NcVMAT).

METHODS

Co2arcVMAT, Co3arcVMAT, and NcVMAT plans were created for 10 pediatric patients with medulloblastoma. The planned target volume (PTV) included the regions of the whole brain, cervical spinal cord, cerebrospinal fluid space, and intervertebral foramen. The EQD50%scalp was evaluated separately for four areas (top, back, left, and right) in each case. The prescribed dose for the PTV was 35.2 Gy in 22 fractions.

RESULTS

The median EQD50%scalp of the top area was 21.9 , 22.1 , and 18.3 Gy for Co2arcVMAT, Co3arcVMAT, and NcVMAT, respectively. The EQD50%scalp of the top area was significantly reduced in NcVMAT compared to those in Co2arcVMAT and Co3arcVMAT (p < 0.05). The median EQD50%scalp of the top area for NcVMAT was < 19.9 Gy, which is the cut-off dose for severe permanent alopecia. There were no significant differences in EQD50%scalp in the three other areas, the dose to other OARs, or the dose coverage of PTV among the three techniques.

CONCLUSION

NcVMAT could reduce the EQD50%scalp of the top area below the cut-off dose of 19.9 Gy. NcVMAT appears to be a promising treatment technique for SAWB-VMAT.

A unified path seeking algorithm for IMRT and IMPT beam orientation optimization

Objective. Fully automated beam orientation optimization (BOO) for intensity-modulated radiotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is gaining interest, since achieving optimal plan quality for an unknown number of fixed beam arrangements is tedious. Fast group sparsity-based optimization methods have been proposed to find the optimal orientation, but manual tuning is required to eliminate the exact number of beams from a large candidate set. Here, we introduce a fast, automated gradient descent-based path-seeking algorithm (PathGD), which performs fluence map optimization for sequentially added beams, to visualize the dosimetric benefit of one added field at a time.Approach. Several configurations of 2-4 proton and 5-15 photon beams were selected for three head-and-neck patients using PathGD, which was compared to group sparsity-regularized BOO solved with the fast iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithm (GS-FISTA), and manually selected IMPT beams or one coplanar photon VMAT arc (MAN). Once beams were chosen, all plans were compared on computational efficiency, dosimetry, and for proton plans, robustness.Main results. With each added proton beam, Clinical Target Volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OAR) dosimetric cost improved on average across plans by [1.1%, 13.6%], and for photons, [0.6%, 2.0%]. Comparing algorithms, beam selection for PathGD was faster than GS-FISTA on average by 35%, and PathGD matched the CTV coverage of GS-FISTA plans while reducing OAR mean and maximum dose in all structures by an average of 13.6%. PathGD was able to improve CTV [Dmax, D95%] by [2.6%, 5.2%] and reduced worst-case [max, mean] dose in OARs by [11.1%, 13.1%].Significance. The benefit of a path-seeking algorithm is the beam-by-beam analysis of dosimetric cost. PathGD was shown to be most efficient and dosimetrically desirable amongst group sparsity and manual BOO methods, and highlights the sensitivity of beam addition for IMPT in particular.

Radiotherapy for head and neck tumours using an oral fixation and parameter acquisition device and TOMO technology: a randomised controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy has become one of the main methods used for the treatment of malignant tumours of the head and neck. Spiral tomographic intensity-modulated radiotherapy has the many advantages of precision radiotherapy, which puts forward high requirements for postural reproducibility and accuracy. We will aim to ensure that the accurate positioning of the tumour will reduce the side effects of radiotherapy caused by positioning errors. We will design and implement this clinical trial using the patent of 'a radiotherapy oral fixation and parameter acquisition device (patent number: ZL201921877986.5)'.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This will be a randomised, controlled, prospective study with 120 patients with head and neck tumours. Using the random number table method, a random number sequence will be generated, and the patients will be enrolled in the experimental group (oral fixation device) and the control group (conventional fixation) in a 2:1 ratio. The primary outcome will be the progression-free survival time after the treatment. Secondary outcomes will include the oral mucosal reaction and the quality of life. Follow-ups will be carried out according to the plan. This is V.1.0 of protocol on 1 April 2021. The recruitment process for this clinical trial commenced on 1 May 2021, and will end on 1 October 2022.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial received ethical approval from Medical Ethics Committee of Liaoning Provincial Cancer Hospital (number 20210131X). The final results will be presented at a scientific conference and published in a peer-reviewed journal in accordance with the journal's guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100045096.

Dosimetric comparison among dynamic conformal arc therapy, coplanar and non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy for single brain metastasis

In the delivery of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) by linear accelerator (LINAC), dynamic conformal arc therapy (DCAT) with non-coplanar beams is conventionally used. However, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) can improve target conformity, thereby decreasing the dose to organs at risk by inversed planning methods, but few studies have directly compared DCAT and VMAT with and without non-coplanar beams in patients with single brain metastasis. We therefore conducted a planning study to compare the dose distribution in DCAT, VMAT using only a coplanar arc (CoVMAT) and VMAT with non-coplanar arcs (NcVMAT) in the treatment of single brain metastasis. DCAT, CoVMAT and NcVMAT plans were created for 15 patients. The three modalities were compared in terms of target conformity, target coverage, the dose to normal brain tissue, monitor units (MUs) and beam-on time. Both conformity indices (RTOG-CI and IP-CI) as well as the D98% of the gross target volume (GTV) were significantly better in the NcVMAT plans than in the DCAT plans. Comparisons of the doses to normal brain tissue revealed that the V20Gy, V15Gy, V12Gy, V10Gy and V5Gy were significantly smaller in the NcVMAT plans than in the plans based on the other two modalities. The MUs of the DCAT and NcVMAT plans were larger than those of the CoVMAT plans, and the beam-on time was longer in the NcVMAT and CoVMAT plans than in the DCAT plans. Compared to the CoVMAT and DCAT plans, NcVMAT plans significantly improved target conformity and reduced the doses to normal brain tissue at V20Gy, V15Gy, V12Gy, V10Gy and V5Gy.

Dosimetric justification for the use of volumetric modulated arc therapy in head and neck cancer-A systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) has evolved rapidly in the past decades from conformal three-dimensional technique (3D-CRT) to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). This paper presents a dosimetric comparative study between VMAT and IMRT delivery based on current literature, while also presenting the potential challenges encountered with volumetric arc therapy.

METHODS

A systematic search of the scientific literature was conducted within Medline/Pubmed databases. A number of 13 papers fulfilled the search criteria which was based on the main objective to evaluate dosimetric characteristics of comparative treatment delivery with VMAT vs IMRT in HNC.

RESULTS

Overall, from a dosimetric perspective, dose delivery via VMAT and IMRT present comparable results. Beside the delivery technique, target volume coverage also depends on the planner's expertise as well as the employed planning algorithm. At times, the superiority of VMAT emerges from the improved sparing of normal tissue, reduction of monitor units (MU) and of treatment delivery time. Similar to IMRT, one of the most important challenges of VMAT is the risk of developing secondary cancer due to the higher number of MUs compared to 3D-CRT.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the comparative results with the more established IMRT, VMAT in HNC can be safely delivered either as a single treatment or combined with other techniques.

Precision Postoperative Radiotherapy in Sinonasal Carcinomas after Endonasal Endoscopic Surgery

Simple Summary

Sinonasal cancers are rare and heterogeneous tumors, mainly carcinomas, with essentially local evolution and a severe vital and functional prognosis. These tumors are more and more being treated in first intent by a mini-morbid endoscopic approach rather than open surgery as the cornerstone of curative treatment. Adjuvant radiotherapy remains necessary owing to non-optimal local control. This article describes the requirements of radiotherapy to ensure adequate delays, the potential of postoperative radiotherapy to increase local and distant disease control and to decrease morbidity further after mini morbid surgery and dose painting techniques, and reviews the criteria that lead to the choice of one technique over another.

Abstract

Radiotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of sinonasal cancer, mainly in the adjuvant setting after surgical resection. Many technological approaches have been described, including intensity-modulated radiotherapy, concomitant chemoradiotherapy, charged particle therapy or combined approaches. The choice is based on general criteria related to the oncological results and morbidity of each technique and their availability, as well as specific criteria related to the tumor (tumor extensions, pathology and quality of margins). The aims of this review are: (i) to provide an overview of the radiotherapy techniques available for the management of sinonasal malignant tumors and (ii) to describe the constraints and opportunities of radiotherapy owing to the recent developments of endonasal endoscopic surgery. The indication and morbidity of the different techniques will be discussed based on a critical literature review.

Radiation-Induced Salivary Gland Dysfunction: Mechanisms, Therapeutics and Future Directions

Salivary glands sustain collateral damage following radiotherapy (RT) to treat cancers of the head and neck, leading to complications, including mucositis, xerostomia and hyposalivation. Despite salivary gland-sparing techniques and modified dosing strategies, long-term hypofunction remains a significant problem. Current therapeutic interventions provide temporary symptom relief, but do not address irreversible glandular damage. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of mechanisms involved in RT-induced hyposalivation and provide a framework for future mechanistic studies. One glaring gap in published studies investigating RT-induced mechanisms of salivary gland dysfunction concerns the effect of irradiation on adjacent non-irradiated tissue via paracrine, autocrine and direct cell-cell interactions, coined the bystander effect in other models of RT-induced damage. We hypothesize that purinergic receptor signaling involving P2 nucleotide receptors may play a key role in mediating the bystander effect. We also discuss promising new therapeutic approaches to prevent salivary gland damage due to RT.