Influence of rectum delineation (rectal volume vs. rectal wall) on IMRT treatment planning of the prostate

Secondary malignancy risk for patients with localized prostate cancer after intensity-modulated radiotherapy with and without flattening filter

Men treated for localized prostate cancer by radiotherapy have often a remaining life span of 10 yr or more. Therefore, the risk for secondary malignancies should be taken into account. Plans for ten patients were evaluated which had been performed on an Oncentra® treatment planning system for a treatment with an Elekta Synergy™ linac with Agility™ head. The investigated techniques involved IMRT and VMTA with and without flattening filter. Different dose response models were applied for secondary carcinoma and sarcoma risk in the treated region and also in the periphery. As organs at risk we regarded for carcinoma risk urinary bladder, rectum, colon, esophagus, thyroid, and for sarcoma risk bone and soft tissue. The excess absolute risk (EAR) was found very similar in the treated region for both techniques (IMRT and VMAT) and also for both with and without flattening filter. The secondary sarcoma risk resulted about one magnitude smaller than the secondary carcinoma risk. The EAR to the peripheral organs was statistically significant reduced by application of the flattening filter free mode concerning the flattening filter as main source of scattered dose. Application of flattening filter free mode can thus support to reduce second malignancy risk for patients with localized prostate cancer.

Rectal retractor application during image-guided dose-escalated prostate radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To investigate efficacy of a rectal retractor (RR) on rectal dose during image-guided dose-escalated prostate three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 21 patients with localized prostate cancer were treated with a RR for 3DCRT in 40 × 2 Gy. Patient underwent two scans for radiotherapy planning, without and with RR. RR was used for the first half of the treatment sessions. Two plans were created for each patient to compare the effect of RR on rectal doses. PTW-31014 Pinpoint chamber embedded within RR was used for in vivo dosimetry in 6 of 21 patients. The patient tolerance and acute rectal toxicity were surveyed during radiotherapy using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v.4.0.

RESULTS

Patients tolerated the RR well during 20 fractions with mild degree of anal irritation. Using a RR significantly reduced the rectal wall (RW), anterior RW and posterior RW dose-volume parameters. The average RW D_mean was 29.4 and 43.0 Gy for plans with and without RR, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the measured dose and planned dose was -3.8% (±4.9%). Grade 1 diarrhea, rectal urgency and proctitis occurred in 4, 2 and 3 cases, respectively. There were no grade ≥2 acute rectal toxicities during the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Rectal retraction resulted in a significant reduction of rectal doses with a safe toxicity profile, which may reduce rectal toxicity. Dosimeter inserted into the RR providing a practical method for in vivo dosimetric verification. Further prospective clinical studies will be necessary to demonstrate the clinical advantage of RR.

Impact of bladder volume on acute genitourinary toxicity in intensity modulated radiotherapy for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of changes in bladder volume during high-dose intensity-modulated-radiotherapy (IMRT) of prostate cancer on acute genitourinary (GU) toxicity and prospectively evaluate a simple biofeedback technique for reproducible bladder filling with the aim of reducing acute GU toxicity.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-three patients were trained via a biofeedback mechanism to maintain a partially filled bladder with a reproducible volume of 200-300 cc at planning CT and subsequently at each fraction of radiotherapy. We prospectively analyzed whether and to what extent the patients' ability to maintain a certain bladder filling influenced the degree of acute GU toxicity and whether cut-off values could be differentiated.

RESULTS

We demonstrated that the ability to reach a reproducible bladder volume above a threshold volume of 180 cc and maintain that volume via biofeedback throughout treatment predicts for a decrease in acute GU toxicity during curative high-dose IMRT of the prostate. Patients who were not able to reach a partial bladder filling to that cut-off value and were not able to maintain a partially filled bladder throughout treatment had a significantly higher risk of developing ≥grade 2 GU acute toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Our results support the hypothesis that a biofeedback training for the patient is an easy-to-apply, useful, and cost-effective tool for reducing acute GU toxicity in high-dose IMRT of the prostate. Patients who are not able to reach and maintain a certain bladder volume during planning and treatment-two independent risk factors-might need special consideration.

Comparison of relative and absolute rectal dose-volume parameters and clinical correlation with acute and late radiation proctitis in prostate cancer patients

PURPOSE

To compare relative and absolute dose-volume parameters (DV) of the rectum and their clinical correlation with acute and late radiation proctitis (RP) after radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer (PCa).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

366 patients received RT for PCa. In total, 49.2% received definitive RT, 20.2% received postoperative RT and 30.6% received salvage RT for biochemical recurrence. In 77.9% of patients, RT was delivered to the prostate or prostate bed, and additional whole pelvic RT was performed in 22.1%. 33.9% received 3D-RT, and 66.1% received IMRT. The median follow-up was 59.5 months (18.0-84.0 months). The relative (in %) and absolute (in ccm) rectal doses from 20-75 Gy including the receiver operating characteristics curves (rAUC) from 30-65 Gy (in % and ccm) and several other clinical parameters were analyzed in univariate and multivariate analyses. We performed the statistical analyses separately for the entire cohort (n = 366), patients with (n = 81) and without (n = 285) pelvic RT, comparing RP vs. RP ≥ grade I.

RESULTS

With the exception of the V50_Gyccm (p = 0.02) in the univariate analyses for acute RP in the entire patient cohort, no absolute DV parameter (in ccm) was statistically significant associated with either acute or late RP. In the multivariate analyses, 3D-RT (p < 0.008) and rAUC_V30-50 Gy% (p = 0.006) were significant parameters for acute RP for the entire cohort, and the V50_Gy% (p = 0.01) was the significant parameter for patients with pelvic RT. The rAUC_V40-50 Gy% (p = 0.004) was significant for RT to the prostate/prostate bed. Regarding the statistical analysis for late RP, the rAUC_V30-65 Gy% (p = 0.001) was significant for the entire cohort, and rAUC_V30-50 Gy% (p = 0.001) was significant for RT of the prostate/prostate bed. No parameter was significant in patients with pelvic RT.

CONCLUSION

Absolute DV parameters in ccm are not required for RT in PCa patients.

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment planning for prostate cancer with flattened beam and flattening filter free linear accelerators

This study on patients with localized prostate cancer was set up to investigate valuable differences using flattened beam (FB) and flattening filter free (FFF) mode in the application of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). For ten patients, four different plans were calculated with Oncentra planning system of Elekta, using Synergy machines: IMRT and VMAT, with and without flattening filter. Homogeneity and conformity indexes, dose to the organs at risk, and measurements of peripheral dose and dosimetric plan verification including record of the delivery times were analyzed and statistically evaluated. The indexes for homogeneity and conformity (CTV and PTV) are either advantageous or not significantly different for FFF compared to FB with one minor exception. Regarding the doses to the organs at risk and the measured peripheral dose, equivalent or lower doses were delivered for FFF than with FB. Furthermore, the delivery times were significantly shorter for FFF. VMAT compared to IMRT reveals benefits or at least equivalent values. VMAT-FFF combines the most advantageous plan quality parameters with the shortest delivery times and reduced peripheral dose and is therefore recommended for the given equipment and cancer localization.

Validation of the relative insensitivity of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan quality to gantry space resolution

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is an efficient form of radiotherapy used to deliver intensity-modulated radiotherapy beams. The aim of this study was to investigate the relative insensitivity of VMAT plan quality to gantry angle spacing (GS). Most previous VMAT planning and dosimetric work for GS resolution has been conducted for single arc VMAT. In this work, a quantitative comparison of dose-volume indices (DIs) was made for partial-, single- and double-arc VMAT plans optimized at 2°, 3° and 4° GS, representing a large variation in deliverable multileaf collimator segments. VMAT plans of six prostate cancer and six head-and-neck cancer patients were simulated for an Elekta SynergyS® Linac (Elekta Ltd, Crawley, UK), using the SmartArc™ module of Pinnacle³ TPS, (version 9.2, Philips Healthcare). All optimization techniques generated clinically acceptable VMAT plans, except for the single-arc for the head-and-neck cancer patients. Plan quality was assessed by comparing the DIs for the planning target volume, organs at risk and normal tissue. A GS of 2°, with finest resolution and consequently highest intensity modulation, was considered to be the reference, and this was compared with GS 3° and 4°. The differences between the majority of reference DIs and compared DIs were <2%. The metrics, such as treatment plan optimization time and pretreatment (phantom) dosimetric calculation time, supported the use of a GS of 4°. The ArcCHECK™ phantom-measured dosimetric agreement verifications resulted in a >95.0% passing rate, using the criteria for γ (3%, 3 mm). In conclusion, a GS of 4° is an optimal choice for minimal usage of planning resources without compromise of plan quality.

Dosimetric impact in the dose-volume histograms of rectal and vesical wall contouring in prostate cancer IMRT treatments

AIM

The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences in dose-volume histograms of IMRT treatments for prostate cancer based on the delineation of the main organs at risk (rectum and bladder) as solid organs or by contouring their wall.

BACKGROUND

Rectum and bladder have typically been delineated as solid organs, including the waste material, which, in practice, can lead to an erroneous assessment of the risk of adverse effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was made on 25 patients treated with IMRT radiotherapy for prostate adenocarcinoma. 76.32 Gy in 36 fractions was prescribed to the prostate and seminal vesicles. In addition to the delineation of the rectum and bladder as solid organs (including their content), the rectal and bladder wall were also delineated and the resulting dose-volume histograms were analyzed for the two groups of structures.

RESULTS

Data analysis shows statistically significant differences in the main parameters used to assess the risk of toxicity of a prostate radiotherapy treatment. Higher doses were received on the rectal and bladder walls compared to doses received on the corresponding solid organs.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed differences in terms of received doses to the rectum and bladder based on the method of contouring could gain greater importance in inverse planning treatments, where the treatment planning system optimizes the dose in these volumes. So, one should take into account the method of delineating of these structures to make a clinical decision regarding dose limitation and risk assessment of chronic toxicity.

Searching standard parameters for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) of prostate cancer

Background

Since December 2009 a new VMAT planning system tool is available in Oncentra® MasterPlan v3.3 (Nucletron B.V.). The purpose of this study was to work out standard parameters for the optimization of prostate cancer.

Methods

For ten patients with localized prostate cancer plans for simultaneous integrated boost were optimized, varying systematically the number of arcs, collimator angle, the maximum delivery time, and the gantry spacing. Homogeneity in clinical target volume, minimum dose in planning target volume, median dose in the organs at risk, maximum dose in the posterior part of the rectum, and number of monitor units were evaluated using student’s test for statistical analysis. Measurements were performed with a 2D-array, taking the delivery time, and compared to the calculation by the gamma method.

Results

Plans with collimator 45° were superior to plans with collimator 0°. Single arc resulted in higher minimum dose in the planning target volume, but also higher dose values to the organs at risk, requiring less monitor units per fraction dose than dual arc. Single arc needs a higher value (per arc) for the maximum delivery time parameter than dual arc, but as only one arc is needed, the measured delivery time was shorter and stayed below 2.5 min versus 3 to 5 min. Balancing plan quality, dosimetric results and calculation time, a gantry spacing of 4° led to optimal results.

Conclusion

A set of parameters has been found which can be used as standard for volumetric modulated arc therapy planning of prostate cancer.

Human-computer interaction in radiotherapy target volume delineation: a prospective, multi-institutional comparison of user input devices

The purpose of this study was the prospective comparison of objective and subjective effects of target volume region of interest (ROI) delineation using mouse-keyboard and pen-tablet user input devices (UIDs). The study was designed as a prospective test/retest sequence, with Wilcoxon signed rank test for matched-pair comparison. Twenty-one physician-observers contoured target volume ROIs on four standardized cases (representative of brain, prostate, lung, and head and neck malignancies) twice: once using QWERTY keyboard/scroll-wheel mouse UID and once with pen-tablet UID (DTX2100, Wacom Technology Corporation, Vancouver, WA, USA). Active task time, ROI manipulation task data, and subjective survey data were collected. One hundred twenty-nine target volume ROI sets were collected, with 62 paired pen-tablet/mouse-keyboard sessions. Active contouring time was reduced using the pen-tablet UID, with mean ± SD active contouring time of 26 ± 23 min, compared with 32 ± 25 with the mouse (p ≤ 0.01). Subjective estimation of time spent was also reduced from 31 ± 26 with mouse to 27 ± 22 min with the pen (p = 0.02). Task analysis showed ROI correction task reduction (p = 0.045) and decreased panning and scrolling tasks (p < 0.01) with the pen-tablet; drawing, window/level changes, and zoom commands were unchanged (p = n.s.) Volumetric analysis demonstrated no detectable differences in ROI volume nor intra- or inter-observer volumetric coverage. Fifty-two of 62 (84%) users preferred the tablet for each contouring task; 5 of 62 (8%) denoted no preference, and 5 of 62 (8%) chose the mouse interface. The pen-tablet UID reduced active contouring time and reduced correction of ROIs, without substantially altering ROI volume/coverage.

IMRT of prostate cancer: a comparison of fluence optimization with sequential segmentation and direct step-and-shoot optimization

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has shown its superiority to three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer. Different optimization algorithms are available: algorithms which first optimize the fluence followed by a sequencing (IM), and algorithms which involve the machine parameters directly in the optimization process (DSS). The aim of this treatment-planning study is to compare both of them regarding dose distribution and treatment time.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten consecutive patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled for the planning study. The planning target volume and the rectum volume, urinary bladder and femoral heads as organs at risk were delineated. Average doses, the target dose homogeneity H, D(5), D(95), monitor units per fraction, and the number of segments were evaluated.

RESULTS

While there is only a small difference in the mean doses at rectum and bladder, there is a significant advantage for the target dose homogeneity in the DSS-optimized plans compared to the IM-optimized ones. Differences in the monitor units (nearly 10% less for DSS) and the number of segments are also statistically significant and reduce the treatment time.

CONCLUSION

Particularly with regard to the tumor control probability, the better homogeneity of the DSS-optimized plans is more profitable. The shorter treatment time is an improvement regarding intrafractional organ motion. The DSS optimizer results in a higher target dose homogeneity and, simultaneously, in a lower number of monitor units. Therefore, it should be preferred for IMRT of prostate cancer.