A treatment planning study of prone vs. supine positions for locally advanced rectal carcinoma: Comparison of 3‑dimensional conformal radiotherapy, tomotherapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy

Radiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update

PURPOSE

With the results of several recently published clinical trials, this guideline focused update provides evidence-based recommendations for the indications and dose-fractionation regimens for neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT), optimal sequencing of RT and systemic therapy in the context of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), and considerations for selective omission of RT and surgery for rectal cancer.

METHODS

The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a multidisciplinary task force to update 3 key questions that focused on the role of RT for patients with operable rectal cancer. The key questions addressed (1) indications for neoadjuvant RT, (2) selection of neoadjuvant regimens, and (3) indications for consideration of a nonoperative management (NOM) or local excision approach after definitive/preoperative chemoradiation. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for quality of evidence grading and strength of recommendation.

RESULTS

For patients with stage II-III rectal cancer, neoadjuvant RT was strongly recommended; however, among patients deemed at lower risk of locoregional recurrence, consideration of omission of neoadjuvant RT was conditionally recommended in favor of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a favorable treatment response or upfront surgery. For patients with T3-T4 and node-positive rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant RT, a TNT approach was strongly recommended. Among patients with higher risk of locoregional recurrence, TNT with chemotherapy before or after long-course chemoradiation was strongly recommended, whereas TNT with short-course RT followed by chemotherapy was conditionally recommended. For patients with rectal cancer for whom NOM is a priority, concurrent chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy was strongly recommended. Selection of RT dose-fractionation regimen, sequencing of therapies, and consideration of NOM should be determined by multidisciplinary consensus and based on disease extent, disease location, patient preferences, and quality of life considerations.

CONCLUSIONS

The task force proposed recommendations to inform best clinical practices on the use of RT for rectal cancer with strong emphasis on multidisciplinary care. Future studies should focus on further addressing optimal treatment regimens to allow for more personalized recommendations based on individual risk stratification and patient priorities regarding quality of life.

High buttocks supine position to reduce small bowel exposure in gynecological radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To minimize radiation exposure to the small bowel (SB) in patients undergoing treatment for gynecological tumors by adopting a comfortable positioning method.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

All 76 women undergoing Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) were included in this study. Patients were immobilized in a supine position using a vacuum bag and thermoplastic cast formation. In the trial group (n = 36), patients raised their buttocks and a solid foam pad was placed under the sacral tail before immobilization. The control group (n = 40) received treatment in the standard supine position. The SB was delineated from the pubic symphysis to the total iliac bifurcation in computed tomography (CT) scans.

RESULT

In the trial group, a significant reduction in SB volume within the pelvic cavity was observed (mean 399.17 ± 158.7 cc) compared to the control group (mean 547.48 ± 166.9 cc), with a p-value less than 0.001. The trial group showed a statistically significant reduction in the absolute volume of irradiated SB at each dose, ranging from the low dose (10 Gy) to the high dose (45 Gy). In the control group, a negative correlation was found between SB and bladder volumes (R = -0.411, P = 0.008), whereas in the trial group, this correlation was weaker (R = -0.286, P = 0.091), with no significant relationship observed between bladder volume and SB.

CONCLUSION

The high buttocks supine position effectively reduces SB radiation exposure without the need for bladder distension. This positioning method holds promise for reducing SB irradiation in various pelvic tumors.

Simultaneous Integrated Boost Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Rectal Cancer: Long-Term Results after Protocol-Based Treatment

Background

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) is an advanced form of radiotherapy (RT) technology. The purpose of this study was to report long-term treatment outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing VMAT-SIB based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

Methods

Between January 2016 and January 2018, a total of 22 patients with operable stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma were recruited for the pre-designed VMAT-SIB RT protocol. All patients underwent standard diagnostic and staging work-up. The RT target volumes included the following areas: PTV1 = mesorectum that contained gross tumors and enlarged lymph node regions and PTV2 = mesorectum and regional lymphatics from L4-5/S1 to 3-4 cm below the tumor or levator ani muscle, excluding PTV1. The VMAT-SIB dose prescription was as follows: PTV1 = 52.5 Gy/daily 2.1 Gy/25 fractions, PTV2 = 45 Gy/daily 1.8 Gy/25 fractions.

Results

The mean age of the study population was 64 (range, 18-84) years, and 15 (68.2%) patients were male. Radical operation (total mesorectal excision) was performed by either low anterior resection, ultralow anterior resection, or abdominal perineal resection. All five (22.7%) of the patients with confirmed increasing serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level at diagnosis showed normalization of serum CEA level after the planned treatment. Among 20 patients who underwent preoperative CRT and surgery, tumor down staging in T- and N-stages was achieved in 10 patients (50%) and 13 patients (65%), respectively, with 20% of ypT0/Tis. With a median follow-up of 54.2 (range, 22.6-61.1) months, the 5-year disease-free survival, overall survival, and local control rates were 64.6%, 81.8%, and 84.4%, respectively. Five patients developed distant metastasis and one developed local recurrence as a first event. Two cases with anastomosis site leakage, three with adhesive ileus, and two with abscess formation were observed during postoperative periods.

Conclusions

The current VMAT-SIB-based CRT protocol provided acceptable treatment and toxicity outcomes.

Prone position versus supine position in postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis evaluates the difference of sparing organs at risk (OAR) in different position (Prone position and Supine position) with different breathing patterns (Free breathing, FB/Deep inspiration breath hold, DIBH) for breast cancer patients receiving postoperative radiotherapy and provides a useful reference for clinical practice.

METHOD

The relevant controlled trials of prone position versus supine position in postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer were retrieved from the sources of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science and ClinicalTrails.gov. The principal outcome of interest was OAR doses (heart dose, left anterior descending coronary artery dose and ipsilateral lung dose) and target coverage. We mainly compared the effects of P-FB (Prone position FB) and S-FB (Supine position FB) and discussed the effects of DIBH combined with different positions on OAR dose in postoperative radiotherapy. We calculated summary standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

The analysis included 751 patients from 19 observational studies. Compared with the S-FB, the P-FB can have lower heart dose, left anterior descending coronary artery (LADCA) dose, and ipsilateral lung dose (ILL) more effectively, and the difference was statistically significant (heart dose, SMD = - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.66 ∼ - 0.36, P < .00001. LADCA dose, SMD = - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.85 ∼ - 0.31, P < .0001. ILL dose, SMD = - 2.84, 95% CI - 3.2 ∼ - 2.48, P < .00001). And there was no significant difference in target coverage between the S-FB and P-FB groups (SMD = - 0.1, 95% CI - 0.57 ∼ 0.36, P = .66). Moreover, through descriptive analysis, we found that P-DIBH (Prone position DIBH) has better sparing OAR than P-FB and S-DIBH (Supine position DIBH).

CONCLUSION

By this meta-analysis, compared with the S-FB we found that implementation of P-FB in postoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer can reduce irradiation of heart dose, LADCA dose and ILL dose, without compromising mean dose of target coverage. Moreover, P-DIBH might become the most promising way for breast cancer patients to undergo radiotherapy.

Radiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer: Executive Summary of an ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

This guideline reviews the evidence and provides recommendations for the indications and appropriate technique and dose of neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of localized rectal cancer.

METHODS

The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 4 key questions focused on the use of RT in preoperative management of operable rectal cancer. These questions included the indications for neoadjuvant RT, identification of appropriate neoadjuvant regimens, indications for consideration of a nonoperative or local excision approach after chemoradiation, and appropriate treatment volumes and techniques. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant RT is recommended for patients with stage II-III rectal cancer, with either conventional fractionation with concurrent 5-FU or capecitabine or short-course RT. RT should be performed preoperatively rather than postoperatively. Omission of preoperative RT is conditionally recommended in selected patients with lower risk of locoregional recurrence. Addition of chemotherapy before or after chemoradiation or after short-course RT is conditionally recommended. Nonoperative management is conditionally recommended if a clinical complete response is achieved after neoadjuvant treatment in selected patients. Inclusion of the rectum and mesorectal, presacral, internal iliac, and obturator nodes in the clinical treatment volume is recommended. In addition, inclusion of external iliac nodes is conditionally recommended in patients with tumors invading an anterior organ or structure, and inclusion of inguinal and external iliac nodes is conditionally recommended in patients with tumors involving the anal canal.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on currently published data, the American Society for Radiation Oncology task force has proposed evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of RT for rectal cancer. Future studies will look to further personalize treatment recommendations to optimize treatment outcomes and quality of life.

A critical literature review on the use of bellyboard devices to control small bowel dose for pelvic radiotherapy

Delivering curative radiotherapy doses for rectal and gynaecological tumours has historically been complicated by the dose tolerance of the small bowel. Acute radiation-induced small bowel toxicity includes side effects such as abdominal pain, nausea and diarrhoea. With the advent of new treatment delivery modalities, such as IMRT (Intensity modulated radiotherapy) and VMAT (Volumetric modulated Arc radiotherapy), there has been an expectation that small bowel doses can be better controlled with the use of these technologies. These capabilities enable the creation of treatment plans that can better avoid critical radiosensitive organs. The purpose of this review is to look beyond advances in linear accelerator technology in seeking improvements to small bowel dose and toxicity. This review examines whether an alternative prone patient positioning approach using a bellyboard device in conjunction with IMRT and VMAT treatment delivery can reduce small bowel doses further than using these technologies with the patient in a traditional supine position.

Robust dose planning objectives for mesorectal radiotherapy of early stage rectal cancer - A multicentre dose planning study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Organ preservation strategies are increasingly being explored for early rectal cancer. This requires revision of target volumes according to disease stage, as well as new guidelines for treatment planning. We conducted an international, multicentre dose planning study to develop robust planning objectives for modern radiotherapy of a novel mesorectal-only target volume, as implemented in the STAR-TReC trial (NCT02945566).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The published literature was used to establish relevant dose levels for organ at risk (OAR) plan optimisation. Ten representative patients with early rectal cancer were identified. Treatment scans had mesorectal target volumes as well as bowel cavity, bladder and femoral heads outlined, and were circulated amongst the three participating institutions. Each institution produced plans for short course (SCRT, 5 × 5 Gy) and long course (LCRT, 25 × 2 Gy) treatment, using volumetric modulated arc therapy on different dose planning systems. Optimisation objectives for OARs were established by determining dose metric objectives achievable for ≥90% of plans.

RESULTS

Sixty plans, all fulfilling target coverage criteria, were produced. The planning results and literature review suggested optimisation objectives for SCRT: V 10Gy < 180 cm3, V 18Gy < 110 cm3, V 23Gy < 85 cm3 for bowel cavity; V 21Gy < 15% and V 25Gy < 5% for bladder; and V 12.5Gy < 11% for femoral heads. Corresponding objectives for LCRT: V 20Gy < 180 cm3, V 30Gy < 130 cm3, V 45Gy < 90 cm3 for bowel cavity; V 35Gy < 22% and V 50Gy < 7% for bladder; and V 25Gy < 15% for femoral heads. Constraints were validated across all three institutions.

CONCLUSION

We utilized a multicentre planning study approach to develop robust planning objectives for mesorectal radiotherapy for early rectal cancer.