1
|
Cui F, Jin T, Li M, Zhu L, Di X, Zhu H. Assessment of scintillation and Cherenkov imaging as beam shape verification method in CyberKnife® radiotherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2024:e14508. [PMID: 39243112 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2024] [Revised: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 07/26/2024] [Indexed: 09/09/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The goal of this study is to assess the utility of Cherenkov imaging (CI) and scintillation imaging (SI) as high-resolution techniques to measure CyberKnife® beam shape quantitatively at the irradiation surface in quality assurance (QA). METHODS The EMCCD camera captured scintillation and Cherenkov photons arising from 6 MV x-ray dose deposition produced by the CyberKnife® VSI System. Two imaging methods were done at source to surface distance of 800 cm with the same field size, ranging from 10 to 60 mm using fixed cones and iris collimators. The output sensitivity and constancy were measured using the SI and CI, and benchmarked against an ionization chamber. Line profiles of each beam measured by optical imaging were compared with film measurement. Position shifts were introduced to test the sensitivity of SI and CI to small beam position deviations. To assess reproducibility, the beam measurements were tested three times on 5 consecutive days. RESULTS Both systems exhibited comparable sensitivity to the ionization chamber in response to fluctuations in CyberKnife® output. The beam profiles in SI matched well with the measured film image, with accuracy in the range of ± 0.20 and ± 0.26 mm standard deviation for the circle and iris field, respectively. The corresponding accuracy measured by CI is in the range of ± 0.25 and ± 0.33 mm, respectively. These are all within the tolerance recommended by the guidelines of CyberKnife® QA. The accuracy measured by SI and CI for 1 mm beam position shift within 0.21 and 0.45 mm tolerance, respectively. Repeatability measurements of the beam have shown a standard deviation within 0.94 mm. CONCLUSIONS SI and CI techniques are tested to provide a valid way to measure CyberKnife® beam shape in this study. Meanwhile, the systematic comparison of SI and CI also provides evidence for the measurement methods selection appropriately.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fengwei Cui
- CyberKnife Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- Neurosurgical Institute of Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Tao Jin
- CyberKnife Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- Neurosurgical Institute of Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Mingzhu Li
- Department of Oncology, The First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| | - Lei Zhu
- Department of Radiation Oncology Physics and Technology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan City, Shandong Province, China
| | - Xing Di
- CyberKnife Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- Neurosurgical Institute of Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Huaguang Zhu
- CyberKnife Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- Neurosurgical Institute of Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Brunner TB, Boda-Heggemann J, Bürgy D, Corradini S, Dieckmann UK, Gawish A, Gerum S, Gkika E, Grohmann M, Hörner-Rieber J, Kirste S, Klement RJ, Moustakis C, Nestle U, Niyazi M, Rühle A, Lang ST, Winkler P, Zurl B, Wittig-Sauerwein A, Blanck O. Dose prescription for stereotactic body radiotherapy: general and organ-specific consensus statement from the DEGRO/DGMP Working Group Stereotactic Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:737-750. [PMID: 38997440 PMCID: PMC11343978 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-024-02254-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/02/2024] [Indexed: 07/14/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE To develop expert consensus statements on multiparametric dose prescriptions for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) aligning with ICRU report 91. These statements serve as a foundational step towards harmonizing current SBRT practices and refining dose prescription and documentation requirements for clinical trial designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS Based on the results of a literature review by the working group, a two-tier Delphi consensus process was conducted among 24 physicians and physics experts from three European countries. The degree of consensus was predefined for overarching (OA) and organ-specific (OS) statements (≥ 80%, 60-79%, < 60% for high, intermediate, and poor consensus, respectively). Post-first round statements were refined in a live discussion for the second round of the Delphi process. RESULTS Experts consented on a total of 14 OA and 17 OS statements regarding SBRT of primary and secondary lung, liver, pancreatic, adrenal, and kidney tumors regarding dose prescription, target coverage, and organ at risk dose limitations. Degree of consent was ≥ 80% in 79% and 41% of OA and OS statements, respectively, with higher consensus for lung compared to the upper abdomen. In round 2, the degree of consent was ≥ 80 to 100% for OA and 88% in OS statements. No consensus was reached for dose escalation to liver metastases after chemotherapy (47%) or single-fraction SBRT for kidney primaries (13%). In round 2, no statement had 60-79% consensus. CONCLUSION In 29 of 31 statements a high consensus was achieved after a two-tier Delphi process and one statement (kidney) was clearly refused. The Delphi process was able to achieve a high degree of consensus for SBRT dose prescription. In summary, clear recommendations for both OA and OS could be defined. This contributes significantly to harmonization of SBRT practice and facilitates dose prescription and reporting in clinical trials investigating SBRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas B Brunner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 32, 8036, Graz, Austria.
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria.
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Daniel Bürgy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Ute Karin Dieckmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 32, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Ahmed Gawish
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Giessen-Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Sabine Gerum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Paracelsus University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
| | - Eleni Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, 53127, Bonn, Germany
| | - Maximilian Grohmann
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Simon Kirste
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Rainer J Klement
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Leopoldina Hospital Schweinfurt, Robert-Koch-Straße 10, 97422, Schweinfurt, Germany
| | - Christos Moustakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Ursula Nestle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Kliniken Maria Hilf, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Alexander Rühle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Stephanie-Tanadini Lang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Peter Winkler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 32, 8036, Graz, Austria
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Brigitte Zurl
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | | | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wimmert L, Schwarz A, Gauer T, Hofmann C, Dickmann J, Sentker T, Werner R. Impact of breathing signal-guided dose modulation on step-and-shoot 4D CT image reconstruction. Med Phys 2024. [PMID: 39172134 DOI: 10.1002/mp.17360] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2024] [Revised: 07/27/2024] [Accepted: 07/31/2024] [Indexed: 08/23/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breathing signal-guided 4D CT sequence scanning such as the intelligent 4D CT (i4DCT) approach reduces imaging artifacts compared to conventional 4D CT. By design, i4DCT captures entire breathing cycles during beam-on periods, leading to redundant projection data and increased radiation exposure to patients exhibiting prolonged exhalation phases. A recently proposed breathing-guided dose modulation (DM) algorithm promises to lower the imaging dose by temporarily reducing the CT tube current, but the impact on image reconstruction and the resulting images have not been investigated. PURPOSE We evaluate the impact of breathing signal-guided DM on 4D CT image reconstruction and corresponding images. METHODS This study is designed as a comparative and retrospective analysis based on 104 4D CT datasets. Each dataset underwent retrospective reconstruction twice: (a) utilizing the acquired clinical projection data for reconstruction, which yields reference image data, and (b) excluding projections acquired during potential DM phases from image reconstruction, resulting in DM-affected image data. Resulting images underwent automatic organ segmentation (lung/liver). (Dis)Similarity of reference and DM-affected images were quantified by the Dice coefficient of the entire organ masks and the organ overlaps within the DM-affected slices. Further, for lung cases, (a) and (b) were deformably registered and median magnitudes of the obtained displacement field were computed. Eventually, for 17 lung cases, gross tumor volumes (GTV) were recontoured on both (a) and (b). Target volume similarity was quantified by the Hausdorff distance. RESULTS DM resulted in a median imaging dose reduction of 15.4% (interquartile range [IQR]: 11.3%-19.9%) for the present patient cohort. Dice coefficients for lung (n = 73 $n=73$ ) and liver (n = 31 $n=31$ ) patients were consistently high for both the entire organs and the DM-affected slices (IQR lung:0.985 / 0.982 $0.985/0.982$ [entire lung/DM-affected slices only] to0.992 / 0.989 $0.992/0.989$ ; IQR liver:0.977 / 0.972 $0.977/0.972$ to0.986 / 0.986 $0.986/0.986$ ), demonstrating that DM did not cause organ distortions or alterations. Median displacements for DM-affected to reference image registration varied; however, only two out of 73 cases exhibited a median displacement larger than one isotropic 1mm 3 ${\rm mm}^3$ voxel size. The impact on GTV definition for the end-exhalation phase was also minor (median Hausdorff distance: 0.38 mm, IQR: 0.15-0.46 mm). CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that breathing signal-guided DM has a minimal impact on image reconstruction and image appearance while improving patient safety by reducing dose exposure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lukas Wimmert
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Annette Schwarz
- Siemens Healthineers AG, Forchheim, Germany
- Pattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tobias Gauer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | - Thilo Sentker
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Rene Werner
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Trojani V, Grehn M, Botti A, Balgobind B, Savini A, Boda-Heggemann J, Miszczyk M, Elicin O, Krug D, Andratschke N, Schmidhalter D, van Elmpt W, Bogowicz M, de Areba Iglesias J, Dolla L, Ehrbar S, Fernandez-Velilla E, Fleckenstein J, Granero D, Henzen D, Hurkmans C, Kluge A, Knybel L, Loopeker S, Mirandola A, Richetto V, Sicignano G, Vallet V, van Asselen B, Worm E, Pruvot E, Verhoeff J, Fast M, Iori M, Blanck O. Refining Treatment Planning in STereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation: Benchmark Results and Consensus Statement From the STOPSTORM.eu Consortium. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024:S0360-3016(24)03171-7. [PMID: 39122095 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.07.2331] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Revised: 07/09/2024] [Accepted: 07/29/2024] [Indexed: 08/12/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE STereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation (STAR) showed promising results in patients with refractory ventricular tachycardia. However, clinical data are scarce and heterogeneous. The STOPSTORM.eu consortium was established to investigate and harmonize STAR in Europe. The primary goal of this benchmark study was to investigate current treatment planning practice within the STOPSTORM project as a baseline for future harmonization. METHODS AND MATERIALS Planning target volumes (PTVs) overlapping extracardiac organs-at-risk and/or cardiac substructures were generated for 3 STAR cases. Participating centers were asked to create single-fraction treatment plans with 25 Gy dose prescriptions based on in-house clinical practice. All treatment plans were reviewed by an expert panel and quantitative crowd knowledge-based analysis was performed with independent software using descriptive statistics for International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements report 91 relevant parameters and crowd dose-volume histograms. Thereafter, treatment planning consensus statements were established using a dual-stage voting process. RESULTS Twenty centers submitted 67 treatment plans for this study. In most plans (75%) intensity modulated arc therapy with 6 MV flattening filter free beams was used. Dose prescription was mainly based on PTV D95% (49%) or D96%-100% (19%). Many participants preferred to spare close extracardiac organs-at-risk (75%) and cardiac substructures (50%) by PTV coverage reduction. PTV D0.035cm3 ranged from 25.5 to 34.6 Gy, demonstrating a large variety of dose inhomogeneity. Estimated treatment times without motion compensation or setup ranged from 2 to 80 minutes. For the consensus statements, a strong agreement was reached for beam technique planning, dose calculation, prescription methods, and trade-offs between target and extracardiac critical structures. No agreement was reached on cardiac substructure dose limitations and on desired dose inhomogeneity in the target. CONCLUSIONS This STOPSTORM multicenter treatment planning benchmark study not only showed strong agreement on several aspects of STAR treatment planning, but also revealed disagreement on others. To standardize and harmonize STAR in the future, consensus statements were established; however, clinical data are urgently needed for actionable guidelines for treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valeria Trojani
- Department of Medical Physics, AUSL-IRCCS Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Melanie Grehn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center of Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Andrea Botti
- Department of Medical Physics, AUSL-IRCCS Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Brian Balgobind
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Marcin Miszczyk
- IIIrd Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy Department, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland; Collegium Medicum - Faculty of Medicine, WSB University, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland
| | - Olgun Elicin
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Division of Medical Radiation Physics, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center of Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Schmidhalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Division of Medical Radiation Physics, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Wouter van Elmpt
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Marta Bogowicz
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Lukasz Dolla
- Radiotherapy Planning Department, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland
| | - Stefanie Ehrbar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | - Jens Fleckenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Domingo Granero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital General Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Dominik Henzen
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Division of Medical Radiation Physics, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Coen Hurkmans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands; Department of Electrical Engineering and Department of Applied Physics, Technical University Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Anne Kluge
- Department for Radiation Oncology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Lukas Knybel
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Sandy Loopeker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Alfredo Mirandola
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy (Fondazione CNAO), Pavia, Italy
| | - Veronica Richetto
- Medical Physics Unit, A.O.U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Gianluisa Sicignano
- Department of Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar, Verona, Italy
| | - Veronique Vallet
- Department of Radiophysics, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Bram van Asselen
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Esben Worm
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Etienne Pruvot
- Heart and Vessel Department, Service of Cardiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Joost Verhoeff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Martin Fast
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Mauro Iori
- Department of Medical Physics, AUSL-IRCCS Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center of Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shariff M, Grigo J, Masitho S, Brandt T, Weiss A, Lambrecht U, Stillkrieg W, Lotter M, Putz F, Fietkau R, Bert C. End-to-end testing for stereotactic radiotherapy including the development of a Multi-Modality phantom. Z Med Phys 2024; 34:477-484. [PMID: 36539322 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2022.11.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2022] [Revised: 11/16/2022] [Accepted: 11/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE A new insert for a commercially available end-to-end test phantom was designed and in-house manufactured by 3D printing. Subsequently, the insert was tested for different stereotactic radiation therapy workflows (SRS, SBRT, FSRT, and Multimet) also in comparison to the original insert. MATERIAL AND METHODS Workflows contained imaging (MR, CT), treatment planning, positioning, and irradiation. Positioning accuracy was evaluated for non-coplanar x-ray, kV- and MV-CBCT systems, as well as surface guided radiation therapy. Dosimetric accuracy of the irradiation was measured with an ionization chamber at four different linear accelerators including dynamic tumor tracking for SBRT. RESULTS CT parameters of the insert were within the specification. For MR images, the new insert allowed quantitative analysis of the MR distortion. Positioning accuracy of the phantom with the new insert using the imaging systems of the different linacs was < 1 mm/degree also for MV-CBCT and a non-coplanar imaging system which caused > 3 mm deviation with the original insert. Deviation of point dose values was <3% for SRS, FSRT, and SBRT for both inserts. For the Multimet plans deviations exceeded 10% because the ionization chamber was not positioned in each metastasis, but in the center of phantom and treatment plan. CONCLUSION The in-house manufactured insert performed well in all steps of four stereotactic treatment end-to-end tests. Advantages over the commercially available alternative were seen for quantitative analysis of deformation correction in MR images, applicability for non-coplanar x-ray imaging, and dynamic tumor tracking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maya Shariff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany.
| | - Johanna Grigo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Siti Masitho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tobias Brandt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Alexander Weiss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Ulrike Lambrecht
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Willi Stillkrieg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Michael Lotter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Florian Putz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christoph Bert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Büttgen LE, Werner R, Gauer T. Stability analysis of patient-specific 4DCT- and 4DCBCT-based correspondence models. Med Phys 2024. [PMID: 39032078 DOI: 10.1002/mp.17304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2024] [Revised: 06/26/2024] [Accepted: 06/29/2024] [Indexed: 07/22/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surrogate-based motion compensation in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) strongly relies on a constant relationship between an external breathing signal and the internal tumor motion over the course of treatment, that is, a stable patient-specific correspondence model. PURPOSE This study aims to develop methods for analyzing the stability of correspondence models by integrating planning 4DCT and pretreatment 4D cone-beam computed tomography (4DCBCT) data and assessing the relation to patient-specific clinical parameters. METHODS For correspondence modeling, a regression-based approach is applied, correlating patient-specific internal motion (vector fields computed by deformable image registration) and external breathing signals (recorded by Varian's RPM and RGSC system). To analyze correspondence model stability, two complementary methods are proposed. (1) Target volume-based analysis: 4DCBCT-based correspondence models predict clinical target volumes (GTV and internal target volume [ITV]) within the planning 4DCT, which are evaluated by overlap and distance measures (Dice similarity coefficient [DSC]/average symmetric surface distance [ASSD]). (2) System matrix-based analysis: 4DCBCT-based regression models are compared to 4DCT-based models using mean squared difference (MSD) and principal component analysis of the system matrices. Stability analysis results are correlated with clinical parameters. Both methods are applied to a dataset of 214 pretreatment 4DCBCT scans (Varian TrueBeam) from a cohort of 46 lung tumor patients treated with ITV-based SBRT (planning 4DCTs acquired with Siemens AS Open and SOMATOM go.OPEN Pro CT scanners). RESULTS Consistent results across the two complementary analysis approaches (Spearman correlation coefficient of0.6 / 0.7 $0.6/ 0.7$ between system matrix-based MSD and GTV-based DSC/ASSD) were observed. Analysis showed that stability was not predominant, with 114/214 fraction-wise models not surpassing a threshold ofD S C > 0.7 $DSC > 0.7$ for the GTV, and only 14/46 patients demonstrating aD S C > 0.7 $DSC > 0.7$ in all fractions. Model stability did not degrade over the course of treatment. The mean GTV-based DSC is0.59 ± 0.26 $0.59\pm 0.26$ (mean ASSD of2.83 ± 3.37 $2.83\pm 3.37$ ) and the respective ITV-based DSC is0.69 ± 0.20 $0.69\pm 0.20$ (mean ASSD of2.35 ± 1.81 $2.35\pm 1.81$ ). The clinical parameters showed a strong correlation between smaller tumor motion ranges and increased stability. CONCLUSIONS The proposed methods identify patients with unstable correspondence models prior to each treatment fraction, serving as direct indicators for the necessity of replanning and adaptive treatment approaches to account for internal-external motion variations throughout the course of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Esther Büttgen
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - René Werner
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Institute of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Tobias Gauer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radio-Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gleim N, Rühle A, Heider S, Nägler F, Giordano F, Combs S, Becker J, Niyazi M, Grosu A, Nicolay N, Seidel C. Neuroprotection in radiotherapy of brain metastases: A pattern-of-care analysis in Germany, Austria and Switzerland by the German Society for radiation Oncology - working group Neuro-Radio-Oncology (DEGRO AG-NRO). Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 47:100783. [PMID: 38706724 PMCID: PMC11063589 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2024] [Revised: 04/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/20/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Many patients with solid tumors develop brain metastases (BM). With more patients surviving long-term, preservation of neurocognitive function gains importance. In recent years, several methods to delay cognitive deterioration have been tested in clinical trials. However, knowledge on the extent to which these neuroprotective strategies have been implemented in clinical practice is missing. Materials and methods We performed an online survey regarding treatment patterns of BM in German-speaking countries, focused on the use of neuroprotective approaches. The survey was distributed among radiation oncologists (ROs) registered within the database of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). Results Physicians of 78 centers participated in the survey. Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is still preferred by 70 % of ROs over stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with 6-10 BM. For 4-5 BM WBRT is preferred by 23 % of ROs. The fraction of ROs using hippocampal sparing (HS) in WBRT has increased to 89 %, although the technique is used on a regular basis only by a minority (26 %). The drug memantine is not widely prescribed (14% of ROs). A trend was observed for university hospitals to implement neuroprotective approaches more frequently. Conclusion There is considerable heterogeneity regarding the treatment of BM in German-speaking countries and a general standard of care is lacking. Neuroprotective strategies are not yet standard approaches in daily clinical routine, although usage is increasing. Further clinical trials, as well as improvement of technical opportunities and reimbursement, might further shift the treatment landscape towards neuroprotective radiation treatments in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N. Gleim
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - A. Rühle
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - S. Heider
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - F. Nägler
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - F.A. Giordano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany
- DKFZ Hector Cancer Institute, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, Heidelberg, Germany
- Mannheim Institute for Intelligent Systems in Medicine (MIiSM), Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, Mannheim, Germany
| | - S.E. Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich, Germany
| | - J. Becker
- Department of Radiotherapy and Special Oncology, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, Hannover, Germany
| | - M. Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, Tübingen, Germany
- Center for Neuro-Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center Tübingen-Stuttgart, University Hospital Tübingen, Herrenbergerstraße 23, Tübingen, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Tübingen, A Partnership between DKFZ and University Hospital Tübingen, Auf der Morgenstelle 15, Tübingen, Germany
| | - A.L. Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Freiburg - Medical Center, Robert-Koch-Straße 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - N.H. Nicolay
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| | - C. Seidel
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, Leipzig, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Central Germany, Partner Site Leipzig, Liebigstraße 22, Leipzig, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Carver A, Scaggion A, Jurado-Bruggeman D, Blanck O, Dalqvist E, Romana Giglioli F, Jenko A, Karlsson K, Staykova V, Swinnnen A, Warren S, Mancosu P, Jornet N. Treatment planning and delivery practice of lung SBRT: Results of the 2022 ESTRO physics survey. Radiother Oncol 2024; 196:110318. [PMID: 38702015 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2023] [Revised: 03/18/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/06/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The use of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) in lung cancer is increasing. However, there is no consensus on the most appropriate treatment planning and delivery practice for lung SBRT. To gauge the range of practice, quantify its variability and identify where consensus might be achieved, ESTRO surveyed the medical physics community. MATERIALS AND METHODS An online survey was distributed to ESTRO's physicist membership in 2022, covering experience, dose and fractionation, target delineation, dose calculation and planning practice, imaging protocols, and quality assurance. RESULTS Two-hundred and forty-four unique answers were collected after data cleaning. Most respondents were from Europe the majority of which had more than 5 years' experience in SBRT. The large majority of respondents deliver lung SBRT with the VMAT technique on C-arm Linear Accelerators (Linacs) employing daily pre-treatment CBCT imaging. A broad spectrum of fractionation schemes were reported, alongside an equally wide range of dose prescription protocols. A clear preference was noted for prescribing to 95% or greater of the PTV. Several issues emerged regarding the dose calculation algorithm: 22% did not state it while 24% neglected to specify the conditions under which the dose was calculated. Contouring was usually performed on Maximum or Average Intensity Projection images while dose was mainly computed on the latter. No clear indications emerged for plan homogeneity, complexity, and conformity assessment. Approximately 40% of the responders participated in inter-centre credentialing of SBRT in the last five years. Substantial differences emerged between high and low experience centres, with the latter employing less accurate algorithms and older equipment. CONCLUSION The survey revealed an evident heterogeneity in numerous aspects of the clinical implementation of lung SBRT treatments. International guidelines and codes of practice might promote harmonisation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antony Carver
- University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Medical Physics, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Alessandro Scaggion
- Medical Physics Department, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV - IRCCS, Padova, Italy
| | - Diego Jurado-Bruggeman
- Institut Català d'Oncologia, Medical Physics and Radiation Protection Department, Girona, Spain
| | - Oliver Blanck
- University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Department of Radiation Oncology, Kiel, Germany
| | - Emmy Dalqvist
- Karolinska University Hospital, Radiotherapy Physics and Engineering, Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Stockholm, Sweden; KarolinskaInstitutet, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Aljasa Jenko
- Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Department of Radiotherapy, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Kristin Karlsson
- Karolinska University Hospital, Radiotherapy Physics and Engineering, Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Stockholm, Sweden; KarolinskaInstitutet, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Vanya Staykova
- Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Radiotherapy Physics, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ans Swinnnen
- GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Samantha Warren
- Northern Centre for Cancer Care, Freeman Hospital, Department of Medical Physics, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Pietro Mancosu
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Medical Physics Unit, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, Rozzano-Milan, Italy.
| | - Nuria Jornet
- Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Servei de Radiofísica i Radioprotecció, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wimmert L, Nielsen M, Madesta F, Gauer T, Hofmann C, Werner R. Benchmarking machine learning-based real-time respiratory signal predictors in 4D SBRT. Med Phys 2024; 51:3173-3183. [PMID: 38536107 DOI: 10.1002/mp.17038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2023] [Revised: 02/19/2024] [Accepted: 02/29/2024] [Indexed: 05/08/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic body radiotherapy of thoracic and abdominal tumors has to account for respiratory intrafractional tumor motion. Commonly, an external breathing signal is continuously acquired that serves as a surrogate of the tumor motion and forms the basis of strategies like breathing-guided imaging and gated dose delivery. However, due to inherent system latencies, there exists a temporal lag between the acquired respiratory signal and the system response. Respiratory signal prediction models aim to compensate for the time delays and to improve imaging and dose delivery. PURPOSE The present study explores and compares six state-of-the-art machine and deep learning-based prediction models, focusing on real-time and real-world applicability. All models and data are provided as open source and data to ensure reproducibility of the results and foster reuse. METHODS The study was based on 2502 breathing signals (t t o t a l ≈ 90 $t_{total} \approx 90$ h) acquired during clinical routine, split into independent training (50%), validation (20%), and test sets (30%). Input signal values were sampled from noisy signals, and the target signal values were selected from corresponding denoised signals. A standard linear prediction model (Linear), two state-of-the-art models in general univariate signal prediction (Dlinear, Xgboost), and three deep learning models (Lstm, Trans-Enc, Trans-TSF) were chosen. The prediction performance was evaluated for three different prediction horizons (480, 680, and 920 ms). Moreover, the robustness of the different models when applied to atypical, that is, out-of-distribution (OOD) signals, was analyzed. RESULTS The Lstm model achieved the lowest normalized root mean square error for all prediction horizons. The prediction errors only slightly increased for longer horizons. However, a substantial spread of the error values across the test signals was observed. Compared to typical, that is, in-distribution test signals, the prediction accuracy of all models decreased when applied to OOD signals. The more complex deep learning models Lstm and Trans-Enc showed the least performance loss, while the performance of simpler models like Linear dropped the most. Except for Trans-Enc, inference times for the different models allowed for real-time application. CONCLUSION The application of the Lstm model achieved the lowest prediction errors. Simpler prediction filters suffer from limited signal history access, resulting in a drop in performance for OOD signals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lukas Wimmert
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Maximilian Nielsen
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Frederic Madesta
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Tobias Gauer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Rene Werner
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Madesta F, Sentker T, Gauer T, Werner R. Deep learning-based conditional inpainting for restoration of artifact-affected 4D CT images. Med Phys 2024; 51:3437-3454. [PMID: 38055336 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2023] [Revised: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/16/2023] [Indexed: 12/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND 4D CT imaging is an essential component of radiotherapy of thoracic and abdominal tumors. 4D CT images are, however, often affected by artifacts that compromise treatment planning quality and image information reliability. PURPOSE In this work, deep learning (DL)-based conditional inpainting is proposed to restore anatomically correct image information of artifact-affected areas. METHODS The restoration approach consists of a two-stage process: DL-based detection of common interpolation (INT) and double structure (DS) artifacts, followed by conditional inpainting applied to the artifact areas. In this context, conditional refers to a guidance of the inpainting process by patient-specific image data to ensure anatomically reliable results. The study is based on 65 in-house 4D CT images of lung cancer patients (48 with only slight artifacts, 17 with pronounced artifacts) and two publicly available 4D CT data sets that serve as independent external test sets. RESULTS Automated artifact detection revealed a ROC-AUC of 0.99 for INT and of 0.97 for DS artifacts (in-house data). The proposed inpainting method decreased the average root mean squared error (RMSE) by 52 % (INT) and 59 % (DS) for the in-house data. For the external test data sets, the RMSE improvement is similar (50 % and 59 %, respectively). Applied to 4D CT data with pronounced artifacts (not part of the training set), 72 % of the detectable artifacts were removed. CONCLUSIONS The results highlight the potential of DL-based inpainting for restoration of artifact-affected 4D CT data. Compared to recent 4D CT inpainting and restoration approaches, the proposed methodology illustrates the advantages of exploiting patient-specific prior image information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederic Madesta
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence (bAIome), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Thilo Sentker
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence (bAIome), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Tobias Gauer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - René Werner
- Department of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Institute for Applied Medical Informatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
- Center for Biomedical Artificial Intelligence (bAIome), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Szkitsak J, Karius A, Fernolendt S, Schubert P, Speer S, Fietkau R, Bert C, Hofmann C. Optimized raw data selection for artifact reduction of breathing controlled four-dimensional sequence scanning. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 30:100584. [PMID: 38803466 PMCID: PMC11128500 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100584] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2024] [Revised: 04/10/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 05/29/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Even with most breathing-controlled four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) algorithms image artifacts caused by single significant longer breathing still occur, resulting in negative consequences for radiotherapy. Our study presents first phantom examinations of a new optimized raw data selection and binning algorithm, aiming to improve image quality and geometric accuracy without additional dose exposure. Materials and methods To validate the new approach, phantom measurements were performed to assess geometric accuracy (volume fidelity, root mean square error, Dice coefficient of volume overlap) for one- and three-dimensional tumor motion trajectories with and without considering motion hysteresis effects. Scans without significantly longer breathing cycles served as references. Results Median volume deviations between optimized approach and reference of at maximum 1% were obtained considering all movements. In comparison, standard reconstruction yielded median deviations of 9%, 21% and 12% for one-dimensional, three-dimensional, and hysteresis motion, respectively. Measurements in one- and three-dimensional directions reached a median Dice coefficient of 0.970 ± 0.013 and 0.975 ± 0.012, respectively, but only 0.918 ± 0.075 for hysteresis motions averaged over all measurements for the optimized selection. However, for the standard reconstruction median Dice coefficients were 0.845 ± 0.200, 0.868 ± 0.205 and 0.915 ± 0.075 for one- and three-dimensional as well as hysteresis motions, respectively. Median root mean square errors for the optimized algorithm were 30 ± 16 HU2 and 120 ± 90 HU2 for three-dimensional and hysteresis motions, compared to 212 ± 145 HU2 and 130 ± 131 HU2 for the standard reconstruction. Conclusions The algorithm was proven to reduce 4DCT-related artifacts due to missing projection data without further dose exposure. An improvement in radiotherapy treatment planning due to better image quality can be expected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juliane Szkitsak
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Andre Karius
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | | | - Philipp Schubert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Stefan Speer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christoph Bert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christian Hofmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Siemens Healthcare GmbH, 91301 Forchheim, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
García-Figueiras R, Baleato-González S, Luna A, Padhani AR, Vilanova JC, Carballo-Castro AM, Oleaga-Zufiria L, Vallejo-Casas JA, Marhuenda A, Gómez-Caamaño A. How Imaging Advances Are Defining the Future of Precision Radiation Therapy. Radiographics 2024; 44:e230152. [PMID: 38206833 DOI: 10.1148/rg.230152] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2024]
Abstract
Radiation therapy is fundamental in the treatment of cancer. Imaging has always played a central role in radiation oncology. Integrating imaging technology into irradiation devices has increased the precision and accuracy of dose delivery and decreased the toxic effects of the treatment. Although CT has become the standard imaging modality in radiation therapy, the development of recently introduced next-generation imaging techniques has improved diagnostic and therapeutic decision making in radiation oncology. Functional and molecular imaging techniques, as well as other advanced imaging modalities such as SPECT, yield information about the anatomic and biologic characteristics of tumors for the radiation therapy workflow. In clinical practice, they can be useful for characterizing tumor phenotypes, delineating volumes, planning treatment, determining patients' prognoses, predicting toxic effects, assessing responses to therapy, and detecting tumor relapse. Next-generation imaging can enable personalization of radiation therapy based on a greater understanding of tumor biologic factors. It can be used to map tumor characteristics, such as metabolic pathways, vascularity, cellular proliferation, and hypoxia, that are known to define tumor phenotype. It can also be used to consider tumor heterogeneity by highlighting areas at risk for radiation resistance for focused biologic dose escalation, which can impact the radiation planning process and patient outcomes. The authors review the possible contributions of next-generation imaging to the treatment of patients undergoing radiation therapy. In addition, the possible roles of radio(geno)mics in radiation therapy, the limitations of these techniques, and hurdles in introducing them into clinical practice are discussed. ©RSNA, 2024 Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roberto García-Figueiras
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Sandra Baleato-González
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Antonio Luna
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Anwar R Padhani
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Joan C Vilanova
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Ana M Carballo-Castro
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Laura Oleaga-Zufiria
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Juan Antonio Vallejo-Casas
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Ana Marhuenda
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| | - Antonio Gómez-Caamaño
- From the Department of Radiology, Division of Oncologic Imaging (R.G.F., S.B.G.), and Department of Radiation Oncology (A.M.C.C., A.G.C.), Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Department of Advanced Medical Imaging, Grupo Health Time, Sercosa (Servicio Radiologia Computerizada, Clínica Las Nieves, Jaén, Spain (A.L.); Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, Middlesex, England (A.R.P.); Department of Radiology, Clínica Girona and Hospital Santa Caterina, Girona, Spain (J.C.V.); Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (L.O.Z.); Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Medicina Nuclear, Instituto Maimónides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain (J.A.V.C.); and Department of Radiology, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, Valencia, Spain (A.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Habermann FNOJ, Schmitt D, Failing T, Ziegler DA, Fischer J, Fischer LA, Guhlich M, Bendrich S, Knaus O, Overbeck TR, Treiber H, von Hammerstein-Equord A, Koch R, El Shafie R, Rieken S, Leu M, Dröge LH. And Yet It Moves: Clinical Outcomes and Motion Management in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) of Centrally Located Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): Shedding Light on the Internal Organ at Risk Volume (IRV) Concept. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:231. [PMID: 38201658 PMCID: PMC10778176 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16010231] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2023] [Revised: 12/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/28/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024] Open
Abstract
The internal organ at risk volume (IRV) concept might improve toxicity profiles in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We studied (1) clinical aspects in central vs. peripheral tumors, (2) the IRV concept in central tumors, (3) organ motion, and (4) associated normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCPs). We analyzed patients who received SBRT for NSCLC (clinical aspects, n = 78; motion management, n = 35). We found lower biologically effective doses, larger planning target volume sizes, higher lung doses, and worse locoregional control for central vs. peripheral tumors. Organ motion was greater in males and tall patients (bronchial tree), whereas volume changes were lower in patients with a high body mass index (BMI) (esophagus). Applying the IRV concept (retrospectively, without new optimization), we found an absolute increase of >10% in NTCPs for the bronchial tree in three patients. This study emphasizes the need to optimize methods to balance dose escalation with toxicities in central tumors. There is evidence that organ motion/volume changes could be more pronounced in males and tall patients, and less pronounced in patients with higher BMI. Since recent studies have made efforts to further subclassify central tumors to refine treatment, the IRV concept should be considered for optimal risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Felix-Nikolai Oschinka Jegor Habermann
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Daniela Schmitt
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Thomas Failing
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
- Institute of Medical Physics and Radiation Protection (IMPS), University of Applied Sciences, Wiesenstr. 14, 35390 Gießen, Germany
| | - David Alexander Ziegler
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Jann Fischer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Laura Anna Fischer
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Manuel Guhlich
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Stephanie Bendrich
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Olga Knaus
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Tobias Raphael Overbeck
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany
| | - Hannes Treiber
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany
| | - Alexander von Hammerstein-Equord
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
- Department of Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany
| | - Raphael Koch
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany
| | - Rami El Shafie
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Martin Leu
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| | - Leif Hendrik Dröge
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (F.-N.O.J.H.); (D.S.); (D.A.Z.); (J.F.); (L.A.F.); (M.G.); (S.B.); (R.E.S.); (S.R.); (M.L.)
- Göttingen Comprehensive Cancer Center (G-CCC), University Medical Center Göttingen, Von-Bar-Str. 2/4, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (T.R.O.); (H.T.); (A.v.H.-E.); (R.K.)
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Rosu-Bubulac M, Trankle CR, Mankad P, Grizzard JD, Ellenbogen KA, Jordan JH, Weiss E. Institutional experience report on the target contouring workflow in the radiotherapy department for stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation delivered on conventional linear accelerators. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:83-96. [PMID: 37872398 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02159-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Accepted: 09/17/2023] [Indexed: 10/25/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE In stereotactic arrhythmia radioablation (STAR), the target is defined using multiple imaging studies and a multidisciplinary team consisting of electrophysiologist, cardiologist, cardiac radiologist, and radiation oncologist collaborate to identify the target and delineate it on the imaging studies of interest. This report describes the workflow employed in our radiotherapy department to transfer the target identified based on electrophysiology and cardiology imaging to the treatment planning image set. METHODS The radiotherapy team was presented with an initial target in cardiac axes orientation, contoured on a wideband late gadolinium-enhanced (WB-LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) study, which was subsequently transferred to the computed tomography (CT) scan used for treatment planning-i.e., the average intensity projection (AIP) image set derived from a 4D CT-via an axial CMR image set, using rigid image registration focused on the target area. The cardiac and the respiratory motion of the target were resolved using ciné-CMR and 4D CT imaging studies, respectively. RESULTS The workflow was carried out for 6 patients and resulted in an internal target defined in standard anatomical orientation that encompassed the cardiac and the respiratory motion of the initial target. CONCLUSION An image registration-based workflow was implemented to render the STAR target on the planning image set in a consistent manner, using commercial software traditionally available for radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mihaela Rosu-Bubulac
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
| | - Cory R Trankle
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
- Pauley Heart Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Pranav Mankad
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
- Pauley Heart Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - John D Grizzard
- Department of Radiology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Kenneth A Ellenbogen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
- Pauley Heart Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Jennifer H Jordan
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
- Pauley Heart Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Elisabeth Weiss
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Schöpe M, Sahlmann J, Jaschik S, Findeisen A, Klautke G. Comparison of patient setup accuracy for optical surface-guided and X-ray-guided imaging with respect to the impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy. Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:60-70. [PMID: 37971534 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02170-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2022] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 11/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of this work is to estimate the patient positioning accuracy of a surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system using an optical surface scanner compared to an X‑ray-based imaging system (IGRT) with respect to their impact on intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS Patient positioning data, both acquired with SGRT and IGRT systems at the same linacs, serve as a basis for determination of positioning accuracy. A total of 35 patients with two different open face masks (578 datasets) were positioned using X‑ray stereoscopic imaging and the patient position inside the open face mask was recorded using SGRT. The measurement accuracy of the SGRT system (in a "standard" and an SRS mode with higher resolution) was evaluated using both IGRT and SGRT patient positioning datasets taking into account the measurement errors of the X‑ray system. Based on these clinically measured datasets, the positioning accuracy was estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. The relevant evaluation criterion, as standard of practice in cranial SRT, was the 95th percentile. RESULTS The interfractional measurement displacement vector of the SGRT system, σSGRT, in high resolution mode was estimated at 2.5 mm (68th percentile) and 5 mm (95th percentile). If the standard resolution was used, σSGRT increased by about 20%. The standard deviation of the axis-related σSGRT of the SGRT system ranged between 1.5 and 1.8 mm interfractionally and 0.5 and 1.0 mm intrafractionally. The magnitude of σSGRT is mainly due to the principle of patient surface scanning and not due to technical limitations or vendor-specific issues in software or hardware. Based on the resulting σSGRT, MC simulations served as a measure for the positioning accuracy for non-coplanar couch rotations. If an SGRT system is used as the only patient positioning device in non-coplanar fields, interfractional positioning errors of up to 6 mm and intrafractional errors of up to 5 mm cannot be ruled out. In contrast, MC simulations resulted in a positioning error of 1.6 mm (95th percentile) using the IGRT system. The cause of positioning errors in the SGRT system is mainly a change in the facial surface relative to a defined point in the brain. CONCLUSION In order to achieve the necessary geometric accuracy in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy, use of an X‑ray-based IGRT system, especially when treating with non-coplanar couch angles, is highly recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Schöpe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Bürgerstraße 2, 09113, Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Jacob Sahlmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Bürgerstraße 2, 09113, Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Stefan Jaschik
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Bürgerstraße 2, 09113, Chemnitz, Germany.
| | - Anne Findeisen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Bürgerstraße 2, 09113, Chemnitz, Germany
| | - Gunther Klautke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, Bürgerstraße 2, 09113, Chemnitz, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Putz F, Bock M, Schmitt D, Bert C, Blanck O, Ruge MI, Hattingen E, Karger CP, Fietkau R, Grigo J, Schmidt MA, Bäuerle T, Wittig A. Quality requirements for MRI simulation in cranial stereotactic radiotherapy: a guideline from the German Taskforce "Imaging in Stereotactic Radiotherapy". Strahlenther Onkol 2024; 200:1-18. [PMID: 38163834 PMCID: PMC10784363 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02183-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2023] [Accepted: 11/06/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
Accurate Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) simulation is fundamental for high-precision stereotactic radiosurgery and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, collectively referred to as stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT), to deliver doses of high biological effectiveness to well-defined cranial targets. Multiple MRI hardware related factors as well as scanner configuration and sequence protocol parameters can affect the imaging accuracy and need to be optimized for the special purpose of radiotherapy treatment planning. MRI simulation for SRT is possible for different organizational environments including patient referral for imaging as well as dedicated MRI simulation in the radiotherapy department but require radiotherapy-optimized MRI protocols and defined quality standards to ensure geometrically accurate images that form an impeccable foundation for treatment planning. For this guideline, an interdisciplinary panel including experts from the working group for radiosurgery and stereotactic radiotherapy of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO), the working group for physics and technology in stereotactic radiotherapy of the German Society for Medical Physics (DGMP), the German Society of Neurosurgery (DGNC), the German Society of Neuroradiology (DGNR) and the German Chapter of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (DS-ISMRM) have defined minimum MRI quality requirements as well as advanced MRI simulation options for cranial SRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Putz
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
| | - Michael Bock
- Klinik für Radiologie-Medizinphysik, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Daniela Schmitt
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Christoph Bert
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Maximilian I Ruge
- Klinik für Stereotaxie und funktionelle Neurochirurgie, Zentrum für Neurochirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
| | - Elke Hattingen
- Institut für Neuroradiologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Christian P Karger
- Abteilung Medizinische Physik in der Strahlentherapie, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Nationales Zentrum für Strahlenforschung in der Onkologie (NCRO), Heidelberger Institut für Radioonkologie (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Johanna Grigo
- Strahlenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Manuel A Schmidt
- Neuroradiologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tobias Bäuerle
- Radiologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Andrea Wittig
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Schofield A, Newall M, Inwood D, Downes S, Corde S. Commissioning of Aktina SRS cones and dosimetric validation of the RayStation photon Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm. Phys Eng Sci Med 2023; 46:1503-1518. [PMID: 37603132 DOI: 10.1007/s13246-023-01315-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2022] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 08/22/2023]
Abstract
Clinical implementation of SRS cones demands particular experimental care and dosimetric considerations in order to deliver precise and safe radiotherapy to patients. The purpose of this work was to present the commissioning data of recent Aktina cones combined with a 6MV flattened beam produced by an Elekta VersaHD linear accelerator. Additionally, the modelling process, and an assessment of dosimetric accuracy of the RayStation Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm for cone based SRS was performed. There are currently no studies presenting beam data for this equipment and none that outlines the modelling parameters and validation of dose calculation using RayStation's photon Monte Carlo dose engine with cones. Beam data was measured using an SFD and a microDiamond and benchmarked against EBT3 film for cones of diameter 5-39 mm. Modelling was completed and validated within homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. End-to-end image-guided validation was performed using a StereoPHAN™ housing, an SRS MapCHECK and EBT3 film, and calculation time was investigated as a function of statistical uncertainty and field diameter. The TPS calculations agreed with measured data within their estimated uncertainties and clinical treatment plans could be calculated in under a minute. The data presented serves as a reference for others commissioning Aktina stereotactic cones and the modelling parameters serve similarly, while providing a starting point for those commissioning the same TPS algorithm for use with cones. It has been shown in this work that RayStation's Monte Carlo photon dose algorithm performs satisfactorily in the presence of SRS cones.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andy Schofield
- Radiation Oncology Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia
| | - Matthew Newall
- Radiation Oncology Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia
| | - Dean Inwood
- Radiation Oncology Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia
| | - Simon Downes
- Radiation Oncology Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia
| | - Stéphanie Corde
- Radiation Oncology Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.
- Centre for Medical Radiation Physics, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia.
- Illawara Health and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, 2522, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Balgobind BV, Visser J, Grehn M, Marquard Knap M, de Ruysscher D, Levis M, Alcantara P, Boda-Heggemann J, Both M, Cozzi S, Cvek J, Dieleman EMT, Elicin O, Giaj-Levra N, Jumeau R, Krug D, Algara López M, Mayinger M, Mehrhof F, Miszczyk M, Pérez-Calatayud MJ, van der Pol LHG, van der Toorn PP, Vitolo V, Postema PG, Pruvot E, Verhoeff JC, Blanck O. Refining critical structure contouring in STereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation (STAR): Benchmark results and consensus guidelines from the STOPSTORM.eu consortium. Radiother Oncol 2023; 189:109949. [PMID: 37827279 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109949] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Revised: 09/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE In patients with recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT), STereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation (STAR) shows promising results. The STOPSTORM.eu consortium was established to investigate and harmonise STAR treatment in Europe. The primary goals of this benchmark study were to standardise contouring of organs at risk (OAR) for STAR, including detailed substructures of the heart, and accredit each participating centre. MATERIALS AND METHODS Centres within the STOPSTORM.eu consortium were asked to delineate 31 OAR in three STAR cases. Delineation was reviewed by the consortium expert panel and after a dedicated workshop feedback and accreditation was provided to all participants. Further quantitative analysis was performed by calculating DICE similarity coefficients (DSC), median distance to agreement (MDA), and 95th percentile distance to agreement (HD95). RESULTS Twenty centres participated in this study. Based on DSC, MDA and HD95, the delineations of well-known OAR in radiotherapy were similar, such as lungs (median DSC = 0.96, median MDA = 0.1 mm and median HD95 = 1.1 mm) and aorta (median DSC = 0.90, median MDA = 0.1 mm and median HD95 = 1.5 mm). Some centres did not include the gastro-oesophageal junction, leading to differences in stomach and oesophagus delineations. For cardiac substructures, such as chambers (median DSC = 0.83, median MDA = 0.2 mm and median HD95 = 0.5 mm), valves (median DSC = 0.16, median MDA = 4.6 mm and median HD95 = 16.0 mm), coronary arteries (median DSC = 0.4, median MDA = 0.7 mm and median HD95 = 8.3 mm) and the sinoatrial and atrioventricular nodes (median DSC = 0.29, median MDA = 4.4 mm and median HD95 = 11.4 mm), deviations between centres occurred more frequently. After the dedicated workshop all centres were accredited and contouring consensus guidelines for STAR were established. CONCLUSION This STOPSTORM multi-centre critical structure contouring benchmark study showed high agreement for standard radiotherapy OAR. However, for cardiac substructures larger disagreement in contouring occurred, which may have significant impact on STAR treatment planning and dosimetry evaluation. To standardize OAR contouring, consensus guidelines for critical structure contouring in STAR were established.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian V Balgobind
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Jorrit Visser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Melanie Grehn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | | | - Dirk de Ruysscher
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mario Levis
- Department of Oncology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Pino Alcantara
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Faculty of Medicine, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Marcus Both
- Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Salvatore Cozzi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy; Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
| | - Jakub Cvek
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Edith M T Dieleman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olgun Elicin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Niccolò Giaj-Levra
- Department of Advanced Radiation Oncology Department, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar, Verona, Italy
| | - Raphaël Jumeau
- Department of Radio-Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Manuel Algara López
- Department of Radiotherapy, Hospital del Mar, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Michael Mayinger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Felix Mehrhof
- Department for Radiation Oncology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Marcin Miszczyk
- IIIrd Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy Department, Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland
| | | | - Luuk H G van der Pol
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Viviana Vitolo
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy (Fondazione CNAO), Pavia, Italy
| | - Pieter G Postema
- Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Etienne Pruvot
- Heart and Vessel Department, Service of Cardiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Joost C Verhoeff
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Esposito M, Mancosu P, Bruschi A, Ghirelli A, Pini S, Alpi P, Barca R, Paoli CD, Meacci F, Leonulli BG, Fondelli S, Paoletti L, Scoccianti S, Russo S. The role of EPID in vivo dosimetry in the risk management of stereotactic lung treatments. Strahlenther Onkol 2023; 199:992-999. [PMID: 37256302 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02081-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2022] [Accepted: 03/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE In this work we report our experience with the use of in vivo dosimetry (IVD) in the risk management of stereotactic lung treatments. METHODS A commercial software based on the electronic portal imaging device (EPID) signal was used to reconstruct the actual planning target volume (PTV) dose of stereotactic lung treatments. The study was designed in two phases: i) in the observational phase, the IVD results of 41 consecutive patients were reviewed and out-of-tolerance cases were studied for root cause analysis; ii) in the active phase, the IVD results of 52 patients were analyzed and corrective actions were taken when needed. Moreover, proactive preventions were further introduced to reduce the risk of future failures. The error occurrence rate was analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of proactive actions. RESULTS A total of 330 fractions were analyzed. In the first phase, 13 errors were identified. In the active phase, 12 errors were detected, 5 of which needed corrective actions; in 4 patients the actions taken corrected the error. Several preventions and barriers were introduced to reduce the risk of future failures: the planning checklist was updated, the procedure for vacuum pillows was improved, and use of the respiratory compression belt was optimized. A decrease in the failure rate was observed, showing the effectiveness of procedural adjustment. CONCLUSION The use of IVD allowed the quality of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatments to be improved. Patient-specific and procedural corrective actions were successfully taken as part of risk management, leading to an overall improvement in the dosimetric accuracy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco Esposito
- S. C. Fisica Sanitaria, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Via dell'Antella 58, 50012, Bagno a Ripoli, Firenze, Italy.
- International Center for Theoretical Physics, Strada Costiera, 11, 34151, Trieste, Italy.
| | - Pietro Mancosu
- Medical Physics Unit of Radiotherapy Dept., IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Andrea Bruschi
- S. C. Fisica Sanitaria, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Via dell'Antella 58, 50012, Bagno a Ripoli, Firenze, Italy
| | - Alessandro Ghirelli
- S. C. Fisica Sanitaria, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Via dell'Antella 58, 50012, Bagno a Ripoli, Firenze, Italy
| | - Silvia Pini
- S. C. Fisica Sanitaria, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Via dell'Antella 58, 50012, Bagno a Ripoli, Firenze, Italy
| | - Paolo Alpi
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | - Raffaella Barca
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | - Camilla Delli Paoli
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | - Fiammetta Meacci
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | | | - Simona Fondelli
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | - Lisa Paoletti
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | - Silvia Scoccianti
- S. C. Radioterapia, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Firenze, Italy
| | - Serenella Russo
- S. C. Fisica Sanitaria, Firenze-Azienda Sanitaria USL Toscana Centro, Via dell'Antella 58, 50012, Bagno a Ripoli, Firenze, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Stevens RRF, Hazelaar C, Fast MF, Mandija S, Grehn M, Cvek J, Knybel L, Dvorak P, Pruvot E, Verhoeff JJC, Blanck O, van Elmpt W. Stereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation (STAR): Assessment of cardiac and respiratory heart motion in ventricular tachycardia patients - A STOPSTORM.eu consortium review. Radiother Oncol 2023; 188:109844. [PMID: 37543057 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109844] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Revised: 07/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/28/2023] [Indexed: 08/07/2023]
Abstract
AIM To identify the optimal STereotactic Arrhythmia Radioablation (STAR) strategy for individual patients, cardiorespiratory motion of the target volume in combination with different treatment methodologies needs to be evaluated. However, an authoritative overview of the amount of cardiorespiratory motion in ventricular tachycardia (VT) patients is missing. METHODS In this STOPSTORM consortium study, we performed a literature review to gain insight into cardiorespiratory motion of target volumes for STAR. Motion data and target volumes were extracted and summarized. RESULTS Out of the 232 studies screened, 56 provided data on cardiorespiratory motion, of which 8 provided motion amplitudes in VT patients (n = 94) and 10 described (cardiac/cardiorespiratory) internal target volumes (ITVs) obtained in VT patients (n = 59). Average cardiac motion of target volumes was < 5 mm in all directions, with maximum values of 8.0, 5.2 and 6.5 mm in Superior-Inferior (SI), Left-Right (LR), Anterior-Posterior (AP) direction, respectively. Cardiorespiratory motion of cardiac (sub)structures showed average motion between 5-8 mm in the SI direction, whereas, LR and AP motions were comparable to the cardiac motion of the target volumes. Cardiorespiratory ITVs were on average 120-284% of the gross target volume. Healthy subjects showed average cardiorespiratory motion of 10-17 mm in SI and 2.4-7 mm in the AP direction. CONCLUSION This review suggests that despite growing numbers of patients being treated, detailed data on cardiorespiratory motion for STAR is still limited. Moreover, data comparison between studies is difficult due to inconsistency in parameters reported. Cardiorespiratory motion is highly patient-specific even under motion-compensation techniques. Therefore, individual motion management strategies during imaging, planning, and treatment for STAR are highly recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raoul R F Stevens
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - Colien Hazelaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Martin F Fast
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Stefano Mandija
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Melanie Grehn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jakub Cvek
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Lukas Knybel
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Pavel Dvorak
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | - Etienne Pruvot
- Heart and Vessel Department, Service of Cardiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Joost J C Verhoeff
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Wouter van Elmpt
- Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Gkika E, Kostyszyn D, Fechter T, Moustakis C, Ernst F, Boda-Heggemann J, Sarria G, Dieckmann K, Dobiasch S, Duma MN, Eberle F, Kroeger K, Häussler B, Izaguirre V, Jazmati D, Lautenschläger S, Lohaus F, Mantel F, Menzel J, Pachmann S, Pavic M, Radlanski K, Riesterer O, Gerum S, Röder F, Willner J, Barczyk S, Imhoff D, Blanck O, Wittig A, Guckenberger M, Grosu AL, Brunner TB. Interobserver agreement on definition of the target volume in stereotactic radiotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma using different imaging modalities. Strahlenther Onkol 2023; 199:973-981. [PMID: 37268767 PMCID: PMC10598103 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02085-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2022] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate interobserver agreement (IOA) on target volume definition for pancreatic cancer (PACA) within the Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) and to identify the influence of imaging modalities on the definition of the target volumes. METHODS Two cases of locally advanced PACA and one local recurrence were selected from a large SBRT database. Delineation was based on either a planning 4D CT with or without (w/wo) IV contrast, w/wo PET/CT, and w/wo diagnostic MRI. Novel compared to other studies, a combination of four metrics was used to integrate several aspects of target volume segmentation: the Dice coefficient (DSC), the Hausdorff distance (HD), the probabilistic distance (PBD), and the volumetric similarity (VS). RESULTS For all three GTVs, the median DSC was 0.75 (range 0.17-0.95), the median HD 15 (range 3.22-67.11) mm, the median PBD 0.33 (range 0.06-4.86), and the median VS was 0.88 (range 0.31-1). For ITVs and PTVs the results were similar. When comparing the imaging modalities for delineation, the best agreement for the GTV was achieved using PET/CT, and for the ITV and PTV using 4D PET/CT, in treatment position with abdominal compression. CONCLUSION Overall, there was good GTV agreement (DSC). Combined metrics appeared to allow a more valid detection of interobserver variation. For SBRT, either 4D PET/CT or 3D PET/CT in treatment position with abdominal compression leads to better agreement and should be considered as a very useful imaging modality for the definition of treatment volumes in pancreatic SBRT. Contouring does not appear to be the weakest link in the treatment planning chain of SBRT for PACA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Gkika
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany.
| | - D Kostyszyn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - T Fechter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - C Moustakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - F Ernst
- Institute for Robotics and Cognitive Systems, University of Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany
| | - J Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine Mannheim, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - G Sarria
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - K Dieckmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Departments of the MedUni Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - S Dobiasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, TU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - M N Duma
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | - F Eberle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - K Kroeger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - B Häussler
- Radiation Oncology Dr. Häussler/Dr. Schorer, Munich, Germany
| | - V Izaguirre
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Halle, Halle, Germany
| | - D Jazmati
- Proton Therapy Centre, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - S Lautenschläger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, Marburg, Germany
| | - F Lohaus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - F Mantel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - J Menzel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - S Pachmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Weilheim Clinic, Weilheim, Germany
| | - M Pavic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - K Radlanski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Charite, University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - O Riesterer
- Centre for Radiation Oncology KSA-KSB, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - S Gerum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Clinic, Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Salzburg, Austria
| | - F Röder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Clinic, Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Salzburg, Austria
| | - J Willner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
| | - S Barczyk
- Center for Radiation Oncology, Belegklinik am St. Agnes-Hospital, Bocholt, Germany
| | - D Imhoff
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Saphir Radiosurgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - O Blanck
- Saphir Radiosurgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - A Wittig
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | - M Guckenberger
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Anca-L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Robert Koch Str 3, Freiburg, Germany
| | - T B Brunner
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Khaledi N, Khan R, Gräfe JL. Historical Progress of Stereotactic Radiation Surgery. J Med Phys 2023; 48:312-327. [PMID: 38223793 PMCID: PMC10783188 DOI: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_62_23] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Revised: 09/24/2023] [Accepted: 09/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Radiosurgery and stereotactic radiotherapy have established themselves as precise and accurate areas of radiation oncology for the treatment of brain and extracranial lesions. Along with the evolution of other methods of radiotherapy, this type of treatment has been associated with significant advances in terms of a variety of modalities and techniques to improve the accuracy and efficacy of treatment. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the progress in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) over several decades, and includes a review of various articles and research papers, commencing with the emergence of stereotactic techniques in radiotherapy. Key clinical aspects of SRS, such as fixation methods, radiobiology considerations, quality assurance practices, and treatment planning strategies, are presented. In addition, the review highlights the technological advancements in treatment modalities, encompassing the transition from cobalt-based systems to linear accelerator-based modalities. By addressing these topics, this study aims to offer insights into the advancements that have shaped the field of SRS, that have ultimately enhanced the accuracy and effectiveness of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Navid Khaledi
- Department of Medical Physics, Cancer Care Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
| | - Rao Khan
- Department of Physics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Physics and Astronomy and Department of Radiation Oncology, Howard University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - James L. Gräfe
- Department of Physics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Cancer Care Program, Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Center. 300 Prince Philip Drive St. John’s, NL, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Lalya I, Benchakroun N, Sifat H, El Kacemi H, B Amaoui, El Hfid M, Sahraoui S, El Mazghi SA, Tahri A, Benider A, Acharki A. [Stereotactic radiotherapy in Morocco : Inventory and technological compatibility with the minimum requirements of international recommendations of good practice]. Cancer Radiother 2023; 27:676-681. [PMID: 37482465 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2023.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2023] [Revised: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 06/07/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- I Lalya
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Hôpital Militaire d'Instruction Mohammed-V, Rabat, Maroc; Université Mohammed-V, Rabat, Maroc.
| | - N Benchakroun
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Centre d'oncologie Mohammed VI- CHU de Casablanca, Casablanca, Maroc; Université Hassan II, Casablanca, Maroc
| | - H Sifat
- Hôpital Militaire d'Instruction Mohammed-V, Rabat, Maroc; Université Mohammed-V, Rabat, Maroc
| | - H El Kacemi
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Université Mohammed-V, Rabat, Maroc; Institut National d'Oncologie (INO), Rabat, Maroc
| | - B Amaoui
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Centre universitaire d'oncologie, Agadir, Maroc
| | - M El Hfid
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Centre universitaire d'oncologie, Tanger, Maroc
| | - S Sahraoui
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Centre d'oncologie Mohammed VI- CHU de Casablanca, Casablanca, Maroc; Université Hassan II, Casablanca, Maroc
| | - S A El Mazghi
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Centre international d'oncologie, Fès, Maroc
| | - A Tahri
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Clinique spécialisée d'oncologie Menara, Marrakech, Maroc
| | - A Benider
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Clinique d'oncologie Ryad, Casablanca, Maroc
| | - A Acharki
- Association d'Oncologie Radiothérapie du Maroc (AORAM), Casablanca, Maroc; Clinique d'oncologie Ryad, Casablanca, Maroc
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Fietkau R, Höller U, Krause M, Petersen C, van Kampen M, Vordermark D, Willner J. [Structural, procedural, and personnel requirements for provision of radiation oncology and radiation therapy services in Germany in 2023-a position paper of the German Society of Radiation Oncologists (DEGRO)]. Strahlenther Onkol 2023; 199:697-705. [PMID: 37336797 PMCID: PMC10361887 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02105-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/01/2023] [Indexed: 06/21/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Rainer Fietkau
- Strahlenklinik, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Deutschland, Universitätsstr. 27, 91054
| | - Ulrike Höller
- Deutsche Gesellschaft für Radioonkologie (DEGRO), Berlin, Deutschland
| | - Mechthild Krause
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland
| | - Cordula Petersen
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Deutschland.
- Ambulanzzentrum, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Deutschland.
| | - Michael van Kampen
- Radioonkologische Klinik, Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt/Main, Deutschland
| | - Dirk Vordermark
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Halle (Saale), Halle (Saale), Deutschland
| | - Jochen Willner
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Klinikum Bayreuth GmbH, Medizincampus Oberfranken der FAU Erlangen, Bayreuth, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Tomatis S, Mancosu P, Reggiori G, Lobefalo F, Gallo P, Lambri N, Paganini L, La Fauci F, Bresolin A, Parabicoli S, Pelizzoli M, Navarria P, Franzese C, Lenoci D, Scorsetti M. Twenty Years of Advancements in a Radiotherapy Facility: Clinical Protocols, Technology, and Management. Curr Oncol 2023; 30:7031-7042. [PMID: 37504370 PMCID: PMC10378035 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30070510] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2023] [Revised: 07/19/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hypo-fractionation can be an effective strategy to lower costs and save time, increasing patient access to advanced radiation therapy. To demonstrate this potential in practice within the context of temporal evolution, a twenty-year analysis of a representative radiation therapy facility from 2003 to 2022 was conducted. This analysis utilized comprehensive data to quantitatively evaluate the connections between advanced clinical protocols and technological improvements. The findings provide valuable insights to the management team, helping them ensure the delivery of high-quality treatments in a sustainable manner. METHODS Several parameters related to treatment technique, patient positioning, dose prescription, fractionation, equipment technology content, machine workload and throughput, therapy times and patients access counts were extracted from departmental database and analyzed on a yearly basis by means of linear regression. RESULTS Patients increased by 121 ± 6 new per year (NPY). Since 2010, the incidence of hypo-fractionation protocols grew thanks to increasing Linac technology. In seven years, both the average number of fractions and daily machine workload decreased by -0.84 ± 0.12 fractions/year and -1.61 ± 0.35 patients/year, respectively. The implementation of advanced dose delivery techniques, image guidance and high dose rate beams for high fraction doses, currently systematically used, has increased the complexity and reduced daily treatment throughput since 2010 from 40 to 32 patients per 8 h work shift (WS8). Thanks to hypo-fractionation, such an efficiency drop did not affect NPY, estimating 693 ± 28 NPY/WS8, regardless of the evaluation time. Each newly installed machine was shown to add 540 NPY, while absorbing 0.78 ± 0.04 WS8. The COVID-19 pandemic brought an overall reduction of 3.7% of patients and a reduction of 0.8 fractions/patient, to mitigate patient crowding in the department. CONCLUSIONS The evolution of therapy protocols towards hypo-fractionation was supported by the use of proper technology. The characteristics of this process were quantified considering time progression and organizational aspects. This strategy optimized resources while enabling broader access to advanced radiation therapy. To truly value the benefit of hypo-fractionation, a reimbursement policy should focus on the patient rather than individual treatment fractionation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Tomatis
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Pietro Mancosu
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Reggiori
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Lobefalo
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Pasqualina Gallo
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Nicola Lambri
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Lucia Paganini
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco La Fauci
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Bresolin
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Sara Parabicoli
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Pelizzoli
- Medical Physics Service, Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Pierina Navarria
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, 20090 Milan, Italy
| | - Domenico Lenoci
- Development Strategic Initiatives Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, 20090 Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Bolten JH, Dunst J, Siebert FA. Geometric accuracy in patient positioning for stereotactic radiotherapy of intracranial tumors. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100461. [PMID: 37720460 PMCID: PMC10500024 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100461] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2023] [Revised: 06/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2023] [Indexed: 09/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Background/Purpose This study determines and compares the geometric setup errors between stereoscopic x-ray and kilo-voltage cone beam CT (CBCT) in phantom tests on a linear accelerator (linac) for image-guided (IG) stereotactic radiotherapy of intracranial tumors. Additionally, dose-volume metrics in the target volumes of the setup errors of CBCT were evaluated. Materials/Methods A Winston-Lutz- and an anthropomorphic phantom were used. The mean deviation and root mean square error (RMSE) of CBCT and stereoscopic x-ray were compared. Dose-volume metrics of the planning target volume (PTV) and gross target volume (GTV) for CBCT were calculated. Results The RMSEs in the tests with the Winston-Lutz-Phantom were 0.3 mm, 1.1 mm and 0.3 mm for CBCT and 0.1 mm, 0,1 mm and <0.1 mm for stereoscopic x-ray in the translational dimensions (right-left, anterior-posterior and superior-inferior). The RMSEs in the tests with the anthropomorphic phantom were 0.3 mm, 0.2 mm and 0.1 mm for CBCT and 0.1 mm, 0,1 mm and <0.1 mm for stereoscopic x-ray. The effects on dose-volume metrics of the setup errors of CBCT on the GTV were within 1 % for all considered dose values. The effects on the PTV were within 5 % for all considered dose values. Conclusion Both IG systems provide high accuracy patient positioning within a submillimeter range. The phantom tests exposed a slightly higher accuracy of stereoscopic x-ray than CBCT. The comparison with other studies with a similar purpose emphasizes the importance of individual IG installation quality assurance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan-Hendrik Bolten
- Clinic of Radiotherapy (Radiooncology), University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- Clinic of Radiotherapy (Radiooncology), University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Frank-André Siebert
- Clinic of Radiotherapy (Radiooncology), University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Krug D, Zaman A, Eidinger L, Grehn M, Boda-Heggemann J, Rudic B, Mehrhof F, Boldt LH, Hohmann S, Merten R, Buergy D, Fleckenstein J, Kluge A, Rogge A, Both M, Rades D, Tilz RR, Olbrich D, König IR, Siebert FA, Schweikard A, Vonthein R, Bonnemeier H, Dunst J, Blanck O. Radiosurgery for ventricular tachycardia (RAVENTA): interim analysis of a multicenter multiplatform feasibility trial. Strahlenther Onkol 2023:10.1007/s00066-023-02091-9. [PMID: 37285038 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02091-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2023] [Accepted: 04/23/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Single-session cardiac stereotactic radiation therapy (SBRT) has demonstrated promising results for patients with refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). However, the full safety profile of this novel treatment remains unknown and very limited data from prospective clinical multicenter trials are available. METHODS The prospective multicenter multiplatform RAVENTA (radiosurgery for ventricular tachycardia) study assesses high-precision image-guided cardiac SBRT with 25 Gy delivered to the VT substrate determined by high-definition endocardial and/or epicardial electrophysiological mapping in patients with refractory VT ineligible for catheter ablation and an implanted cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Primary endpoint is the feasibility of full-dose application and procedural safety (defined as an incidence of serious [grade ≥ 3] treatment-related complications ≤ 5% within 30 days after therapy). Secondary endpoints comprise VT burden, ICD interventions, treatment-related toxicity, and quality of life. We present the results of a protocol-defined interim analysis. RESULTS Between 10/2019 and 12/2021, a total of five patients were included at three university medical centers. In all cases, the treatment was carried out without complications. There were no serious potentially treatment-related adverse events and no deterioration of left ventricular ejection fraction upon echocardiography. Three patients had a decrease in VT episodes during follow-up. One patient underwent subsequent catheter ablation for a new VT with different morphology. One patient with local VT recurrence died 6 weeks after treatment in cardiogenic shock. CONCLUSION The interim analysis of the RAVENTA trial demonstrates early initial feasibility of this new treatment without serious complications within 30 days after treatment in five patients. Recruitment will continue as planned and the study has been expanded to further university medical centers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03867747 (clinicaltrials.gov). Registered March 8, 2019. Study start: October 1, 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
| | - Adrian Zaman
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Kardiologie, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Lina Eidinger
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Kardiologie, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Melanie Grehn
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Boris Rudic
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medizinische Klinik I, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Felix Mehrhof
- Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Leif-Hendrik Boldt
- Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Kardiologie (CVK), Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Stephan Hohmann
- Hannover Herzrhythmus Centrum, Klinik für Kardiologie und Angiologie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Roland Merten
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Spezielle Onkologie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Daniel Buergy
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Jens Fleckenstein
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Anne Kluge
- Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Annette Rogge
- Klinisches Ethikkomitee, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Marcus Both
- Klinik für Radiologie und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Dirk Rades
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Roland Richard Tilz
- Klinik für Rhythmologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Denise Olbrich
- Zentrum für Klinische Studien, Universität zu Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Inke R König
- Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Frank-Andre Siebert
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Achim Schweikard
- Institut für Robotik und Kognitive Systeme, Universität zu Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Reinhard Vonthein
- Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Hendrik Bonnemeier
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Kardiologie, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
- Klinik für Kardiologie, Helios Klinik Cuxhaven, Cuxhaven, Germany
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Straße 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Gawish A, Abdullayev N, El-Arayedh S, Röllich B, Ochel HJ, Brunner TB. Metabolic response after 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT-directed IGRT/SBRT for oligometastases prostate cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2023; 25:987-994. [PMID: 36369631 PMCID: PMC10025179 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-022-03002-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2022] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We used 68Ga PSMA PET/CT in the current investigation to assess the metabolic response and local control of metastasis in patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer receiving SBRT. MATERIALS AND PROCEDURES We performed a retrospective evaluation of the medical data of all patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer who underwent stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) between 2017 and 2021. Our analysis only included medical records of patients who had SBRT for oligometastatic prostate cancer and had pre and post-SBRT 68Ga PSMA PET/CT images. Patient-related (age), disease-related (Gleason score, location of metastases), and treatment-related (factors and outcomes) data were collected from the medical files. RESULTS A total of 17 patients (28 lesions) with a median age of 69 years were included in the research. A median follow-up of 16.6 months was used (range 6-36 months). The median follow-up period for 68 Ga PSMA PET/CT was 8 months (the range was 5-24 months). The median pre-treatment PSA level was 1.7 ng/mL (range 0.39-18.3 ng/mL) compared to the post-treatment PSA nadir of 0.05 ng/mL (0.02-4.57). During the follow-up period, local control was 96%, and there was a link between PSMA avidity on PET. In the treated lesions, there were no recurrences. During follow-up, none of the patients experienced toxicities of grade 3 or above. CONCLUSIONS SBRT is a highly successful and safe way of treating patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer. Additional research is needed to examine 68Ga PSMA PET/CT to assess further for demarcation and follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmed Gawish
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
| | - Nurlan Abdullayev
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Souhir El-Arayedh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Burkard Röllich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Hans-Joachim Ochel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Thomas B Brunner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Graz, 8036, Graz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Krug D, Imhoff D, Haidenberger A, Heßler N, Schäfer J, Huttenlocher S, Chatzikonstantinou G, Fürweger C, Ramm U, König IR, Chun F, Staehler M, Rödel C, Muacevic A, Vonthein R, Dunst J, Blanck O. Robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: final analysis of the German HYPOSTAT trial. Strahlenther Onkol 2023; 199:565-573. [PMID: 36757424 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-023-02044-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2022] [Accepted: 01/04/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE We report results of the first German prospective multicenter single-arm phase II trial (ARO 2013-06; NCT02635256) of hypofractionated robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with localized prostate cancer (HYPOSTAT). METHODS Patients eligible for the HYPOSTAT study had localized prostate cancer (cT1‑3 cN0 cM0), Gleason score ≤ 7, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 15 ng/ml, prostate volume ≤ 80 cm3, and an International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) ≤ 12. Initially, inclusion was limited to patients ≥ 75 years or patients 70-74 years with additional risk factors. The trial protocol was later amended to allow for enrolment of patients aged ≥ 60 years. The treatment consisted of 35 Gy delivered in 5 fractions to the prostate and for intermediate- or high-risk patients, also to the proximal seminal vesicles using the CyberKnife system (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Primary endpoint was the rate of treatment-related gastrointestinal or genitourinary grade ≥ 2 toxicity based on the RTOG scale 12-15 months after treatment. Secondary endpoints were acute toxicity, late toxicity, urinary function, quality of life, and PSA response. RESULTS From July 2016 through December 2018, 85 eligible patients were enrolled and received treatment, of whom 83 could be evaluated regarding the primary endpoint. Patients mostly had intermediate-risk disease with a median PSA value of 7.97 ng/ml and Gleason score of 7a and 7b in 43.5% and 25.9% of patients, respectively. At the final follow-up 12-15 months after treatment, no patient suffered from treatment-related gastrointestinal or genitourinary grade ≥ 2 toxicity. Acute toxicity was mostly mild, with three grade 3 events, and the cumulative rate of grade ≥ 2 genitourinary toxicity was 8.4% (95% CI 4.1-16.4%). There were no major changes in urinary function or quality of life. The median PSA value dropped to 1.18 ng/ml 12-15 months after treatment. There was one patient who developed distant metastases. CONCLUSION Robotic SBRT with 35 Gy in 5 fractions was associated with a favorable short-term toxicity profile. Recruitment for the HYPOSTAT‑2 trial (ARO-2018‑4; NCT03795337), which further analyses the late toxicity of this regimen with a planned sample size of 500 patients, is ongoing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein - Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany. .,Saphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt am Main und Norddeutschland, Kiel, Germany.
| | - Detlef Imhoff
- Saphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt am Main und Norddeutschland, Kiel, Germany.,Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | | | - Nicole Heßler
- Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Jane Schäfer
- Zentrum für Klinische Studien, Universität zu Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Stefan Huttenlocher
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein - Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany.,Saphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt am Main und Norddeutschland, Kiel, Germany
| | - Georgios Chatzikonstantinou
- Saphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt am Main und Norddeutschland, Kiel, Germany.,Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | | | - Ulla Ramm
- Saphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt am Main und Norddeutschland, Kiel, Germany.,Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Inke R König
- Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.,German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Lübeck, Germany
| | - Felix Chun
- Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Michael Staehler
- Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Rödel
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | | | - Reinhard Vonthein
- Institut für Medizinische Biometrie und Statistik, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein - Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein - Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus L, 24105, Kiel, Germany.,Saphir Radiochirurgie Zentrum Frankfurt am Main und Norddeutschland, Kiel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Aras D, Çetin EHÖ, Ozturk HF, Ozdemir E, Kara M, Ekizler FA, Ozeke O, Ozcan F, Korkmaz A, Kervan U, Turhan N, Coskun N, Tezcan Y, Huang H, Aksu T, Topaloglu S. Stereotactic body radioablation therapy as an immediate and early term antiarrhythmic palliative therapeutic choice in patients with refractory ventricular tachycardia. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2023; 66:135-143. [PMID: 36040658 PMCID: PMC9424800 DOI: 10.1007/s10840-022-01352-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic body radioablation therapy (SBRT) has recently been introduced with the ability to provide ablative energy noninvasively to arrhythmogenic substrate while reducing damage to normal cardiac tissue nearby and minimizing patients' procedural risk. There is still debate regarding whether SBRT has a predominant effect in the early or late period after the procedure. We sought to assess the time course of SBRT's efficacy as well as the value of using a blanking period following a SBRT session. METHODS Eight patients (mean age 58 ± 14 years) underwent eight SBRT sessions for refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT). SBRT was given using a linear accelerator device with a total dose of 25 Gy to the targeted area. RESULTS During a median follow-up of 8 months, all patients demonstrated VT recurrences; however, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and anti-tachycardia pacing therapies were significantly reduced with SBRT (8.46 to 0.83/per month, p = 0.047; 18.50 to 3.29/per month, p = 0.036, respectively). While analyzing the temporal SBRT outcomes, the 2 weeks to 3 months period demonstrated the most favorable outcomes. After 6 months, one patient was ICD therapy-free and the remaining patients demonstrated VT episodes. CONCLUSIONS Our findings showed that the SBRT was associated with a marked reduction in the burden of VT and ICD interventions especially during first 3 months. Although SBRT does not seem to succeed complete termination of VT in long-term period, our findings support the strategy that SBRT can be utilized for immediate antiarrhythmic palliation in critically ill patients with otherwise untreatable refractory VT and electrical storm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dursun Aras
- grid.411781.a0000 0004 0471 9346Department of Cardiology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Elif Hande Özcan Çetin
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Huseyin Furkan Ozturk
- grid.449874.20000 0004 0454 9762Department of Radiation Oncology, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Elif Ozdemir
- grid.449874.20000 0004 0454 9762Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Meryem Kara
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Firdevs Aysenur Ekizler
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Ozcan Ozeke
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Firat Ozcan
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Ahmet Korkmaz
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Umit Kervan
- Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Nesrin Turhan
- Department of Pathology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Nazim Coskun
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Yilmaz Tezcan
- grid.449874.20000 0004 0454 9762Department of Radiation Oncology, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Henry Huang
- grid.262743.60000000107058297Department of Cardiology, Rush Medical College, Chicago, IL USA
| | - Tolga Aksu
- Department of Cardiology, Yeditepe University Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey, 34100.
| | - Serkan Topaloglu
- Department of Cardiology, University of Health Sciences, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Grishchuk D, Dimitriadis A, Sahgal A, De Salles A, Fariselli L, Kotecha R, Levivier M, Ma L, Pollock BE, Regis J, Sheehan J, Suh J, Yomo S, Paddick I. ISRS Technical Guidelines for Stereotactic Radiosurgery: Treatment of Small Brain Metastases (≤1 cm in Diameter). Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 13:183-194. [PMID: 36435388 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.10.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2022] [Revised: 10/10/2022] [Accepted: 10/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of this literature review was to develop International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) consensus technical guidelines for the treatment of small, ≤1 cm in maximal diameter, intracranial metastases with stereotactic radiosurgery. Although different stereotactic radiosurgery technologies are available, most of them have similar treatment workflows and common technical challenges that are described. METHODS AND MATERIALS A systematic review of the literature published between 2009 and 2020 was performed in Pubmed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodology. The search terms were limited to those related to radiosurgery of brain metastases and to publications in the English language. RESULTS From 484 collected abstract 37 articles were included into the detailed review and bibliographic analysis. An additional 44 papers were identified as relevant from a search of the references. The 81 papers, including additional 7 international guidelines, were deemed relevant to at least one of five areas that were considered paramount for this report. These areas of technical focus have been employed to structure these guidelines: imaging specifications, target volume delineation and localization practices, use of margins, treatment planning techniques, and patient positioning. CONCLUSION This systematic review has demonstrated that Stereotactic Radiosurgery (SRS) for small (1 cm) brain metastases can be safely performed on both Gamma Knife (GK) and CyberKnife (CK) as well as on modern LINACs, specifically tailored for radiosurgical procedures, However, considerable expertise and resources are required for a program based on the latest evidence for best practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Diana Grishchuk
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom.
| | - Alexis Dimitriadis
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom
| | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Antonio De Salles
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Laura Fariselli
- Radiotherapy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta Milano, Unita di Radiotherapia, Milan, Italy
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Marc Levivier
- Neurosurgery Service and Gamma Knife Center, Center Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Lijun Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Bruce E Pollock
- Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jean Regis
- Department of Functional Neurosurgery, La Timone Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France
| | - Jason Sheehan
- Department of Neurologic Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia
| | - John Suh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Shoji Yomo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Aizawa Comprehensive Cancer Center, Aizawa Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan
| | - Ian Paddick
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Moustakis C, Eich HT, Blanck O, Chan MKH, Boda-Heggemann J, Andratschke N, Schmitt D. In Reply to Oskan. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:374-375. [PMID: 36055320 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.06.061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 06/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Christos Moustakis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - Hans Theodor Eich
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Mark K H Chan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen and University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medicine Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Daniela Schmitt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
A Comparative Study on the Clinical Efficacy of Stereotaxic Catheter Drainage and Conservative Treatment for Small and Medium Amount Intracerebral Hemorrhage in the Basal Ganglia. EVIDENCE-BASED COMPLEMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE 2022; 2022:7393061. [PMID: 36204120 PMCID: PMC9532061 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7393061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2022] [Accepted: 09/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
The incidence rate and fatal disability rate of cerebral hemorrhage increase year by year. At present, most patients with a hematoma volume of ≤20 mL are treated conservatively by internal medicine. With the development of the stereotactic technique, it has been widely used for the treatment of cerebral hemorrhage in clinics. This study compared the clinical differences between stereotactic surgery and conservative treatment for small- and medium-sized cerebral hemorrhages. The results show that stereotactic hematoma evacuation is more effective than conservative treatment in the treatment of medium and small intracerebral hemorrhages in the basal ganglia. It can accelerate the resolution of hematoma and improve the neurological function and quality of life of patients, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
Collapse
|
34
|
Rogers S, Baumert B, Blanck O, Böhmer D, Boström J, Engenhart-Cabillic R, Ermis E, Exner S, Guckenberger M, Habermehl D, Hemmatazad H, Henke G, Lohaus F, Lux S, Mai S, Minasch D, Rezazadeh A, Steffal C, Temming S, Wittig A, Zweifel C, Riesterer O, Combs S. Stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy for resected brain metastases: current pattern of care in the Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group of the German Association for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 198:919-925. [PMID: 36006436 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01991-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Accepted: 07/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Preoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of brain metastases may achieve similar local control and better leptomeningeal control rates than postoperative fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) in patients treated with elective metastasectomy. To plan a multicentre trial of preoperative SRS compared with postoperative FSRT, a survey of experts was conducted to determine current practice. METHODS A survey with 15 questions was distributed to the DEGRO Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group. Participants were asked under what circumstances they offered SRS, FSRT, partial and/or whole brain radiotherapy before or after resection of a brain metastasis, as well as the feasibility of preoperative stereotactic radiosurgery and neurosurgical resection within 6 days. RESULTS Of 25 participants from 24 centres, 22 completed 100% of the questions. 24 respondents were radiation oncologists and 1 was a neurosurgeon. All 24 centres have one or more dedicated radiosurgery platform and all offer postoperative FSRT. Preoperative SRS is offered by 4/24 (16.7%) centres, and 9/24 (37.5%) sometimes recommend single-fraction postoperative SRS. Partial brain irradiation is offered by 8/24 (33.3%) centres and 12/24 (50%) occasionally recommend whole-brain irradiation. Two centres are participating in clinical trials of preoperative SRS. SRS techniques and fractionation varied between centres. CONCLUSION All responding centres currently offer postoperative FSRT after brain metastasectomy. Approximately one third offer single-fraction postoperative SRS and four already perform preoperative SRS. With regard to potential co-investigators, 18 were identified for the PREOP‑2 multicentre trial, which will randomise between preoperative SRS and postoperative FSRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Rogers
- Radio-Onkologie-Zentrum KSA-KSB, Kantonsspital Aarau, 5001, Aarau, Switzerland.
| | - B Baumert
- Kantonsspital Graubünden, 7000, Chur, Switzerland
| | - O Blanck
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, 24105, Kiel, Germany
| | - D Böhmer
- Charite University Medicine, Campus Benjamin Franklin, 12203, Berlin, Germany
| | - J Boström
- Gamma Knife Zentrum, 44892, Bochum, Germany
| | | | - E Ermis
- Bern University Hospital (Inselspital), 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - S Exner
- Strahlenzentrum Hamburg, 22419, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | - H Hemmatazad
- Bern University Hospital (Inselspital), 3010, Bern, Switzerland
| | - G Henke
- Kantonsspital St. Gallen, 9000, St Gallen, Switzerland
| | - F Lohaus
- University Hospital Dresden, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - S Lux
- Radprax Strahlentherapie, 42697, Solingen, Germany
| | - S Mai
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, 68167, Mannheim, Germany
| | - D Minasch
- University Hospital Innsbruck, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - A Rezazadeh
- University Hospital of Cologne, 50937, Cologne, Germany
| | - C Steffal
- KFJ/SMZ-Süd Vienna; Klinik Favoriten, 1100, Vienna, Austria
| | - S Temming
- Robert Janker Klinik, 53129, Bonn, Germany
| | - A Wittig
- University Hospital Jena, 07743, Jena, Germany
| | - C Zweifel
- Kantonsspital Graubünden, 7000, Chur, Switzerland
| | - O Riesterer
- Radio-Onkologie-Zentrum KSA-KSB, Kantonsspital Aarau, 5001, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - S Combs
- Kinik an der Isaar, Technisches Universität München, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Da Silva Mendes V, Reiner M, Huang L, Reitz D, Straub K, Corradini S, Niyazi M, Belka C, Kurz C, Landry G, Freislederer P. ExacTrac Dynamic workflow evaluation: Combined surface optical/thermal imaging and X-ray positioning. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2022; 23:e13754. [PMID: 36001389 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13754] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2021] [Revised: 07/07/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
In modern radiotherapy (RT), especially for stereotactic radiotherapy or stereotactic radiosurgery treatments, image guidance is essential. Recently, the ExacTrac Dynamic (EXTD) system, a new combined surface-guided RT and image-guided RT (IGRT) system for patient positioning, monitoring, and tumor targeting, was introduced in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to provide more information about the geometric accuracy of EXTD and its workflow in a clinical environment. The surface optical/thermal- and the stereoscopic X-ray imaging positioning systems of EXTD was evaluated and compared to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Additionally, the congruence with the radiation isocenter was tested. A Winston Lutz test was executed several times over 1 year, and repeated end-to-end positioning tests were performed. The magnitude of the displacements between all systems, CBCT, stereoscopic X-ray, optical-surface imaging, and MV portal imaging was within the submillimeter range, suggesting that the image guidance provided by EXTD is accurate at any couch angle. Additionally, results from the evaluation of 14 patients with intracranial tumors treated with open-face masks are reported, and limited differences with a maximum of 0.02 mm between optical/thermal- and stereoscopic X-ray imaging were found. As the optical/thermal positioning system showed a comparable accuracy to other IGRT systems, and due to its constant monitoring capability, it can be an efficient tool for detecting intra-fractional motion and for real-time tracking of the surface position during RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michael Reiner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Lili Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Daniel Reitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Katrin Straub
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Stefanie Corradini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christopher Kurz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Philipp Freislederer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Automating QA analysis for a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) couch using image displacement and an accelerometer sensor. Phys Med 2022; 101:129-136. [PMID: 35998433 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2022] [Revised: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 08/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to develop an approach for automating quality assurance (QA) analysis for a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) couch using image displacement and an accelerometer sensor. A cubic phantom was fabricated using 3D printing and the accelerometer sensor was embedded in the phantom to measure the couch in the pitch and roll directions. The accuracy and reliability of image displacement and the accelerometer sensor were investigated prior to their practical use for 6DOF couch QA. Image displacement performance had an accuracy and reliability of 0.026 ± 0.026 mm for the translation direction and 0.021 ± 0.016° for the rotation direction. Accelerometer sensor performance had an accuracy and reliability of 0.023 ± 0.018° for pitch rotation and 0.051 ± 0.024° for roll rotation. Automating QA analysis was used to perform 6DOF couch QA, and the couch position errors measured using image displacement were less than 0.99 mm, 0.91 mm, 0.82 mm for the vertical, longitudinal, lateral translation in range between ±20 mm, and 0.07°, 0.23°, and 0.2° for pitch, roll, and yaw rotation in range between ±3° whereas the couch position errors measured using the accelerometer sensor were less than 0.1° and 0.19° for the pitch and roll rotation in range between ±3°.
Collapse
|
37
|
Retif P, Djibo Sidikou A, Mathis C, Letellier R, Verrecchia-Ramos E, Dupres R, Michel X. Evaluation of the ability of the Brainlab Elements Cranial Distortion Correction algorithm to correct clinically relevant MRI distortions for cranial SRT. Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 198:907-918. [PMID: 35980455 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01988-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2021] [Accepted: 07/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Cranial stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) requires highly accurate lesion delineation. However, MRI can have significant inherent geometric distortions. We investigated how well the Elements Cranial Distortion Correction algorithm of Brainlab (Munich, Germany) corrects the distortions in MR image-sets of a phantom and patients. METHODS A non-distorted reference computed tomography image-set of a CIRS Model 603-GS (CIRS, Norfolk, VA, USA) phantom was acquired. Three-dimensional T1-weighted images were acquired with five MRI scanners and reconstructed with vendor-derived distortion correction. Some were reconstructed without correction to generate heavily distorted image-sets. All MR image-sets were corrected with the Brainlab algorithm relative to the computed tomography acquisition. CIRS Distortion Check software measured the distortion in each image-set. For all uncorrected and corrected image-sets, the control points that exceeded the 0.5-mm clinically relevant distortion threshold and the distortion maximum, mean, and standard deviation were recorded. Empirical cumulative distribution functions (eCDF) were plotted. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. The algorithm was evaluated with 10 brain metastases using Dice similarity coefficients (DSC). RESULTS The algorithm significantly reduced mean and standard deviation distortion in all image-sets. It reduced the maximum distortion in the heavily distorted image-sets from 2.072 to 1.059 mm and the control points with > 0.5-mm distortion fell from 50.2% to 4.0%. Before and especially after correction, the eCDFs of the four repeats were visually similar. ICC was 0.812 (excellent-good agreement). The algorithm increased the DSCs for all patients and image-sets. CONCLUSION The Brainlab algorithm significantly and reproducibly ameliorated MRI distortion, even with heavily distorted images. Thus, it increases the accuracy of cranial SRT lesion delineation. After further testing, this tool may be suitable for SRT of small lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul Retif
- Medical Physics Unit, CHR Metz-Thionville, Metz, France. .,Université de Lorraine, CNRS, CRAN, 54000, Nancy, France.
| | | | | | | | | | - Rémi Dupres
- Medical Imaging Department, CHR Metz-Thionville, Metz, France
| | - Xavier Michel
- Radiation Therapy Department, CHR Metz-Thionville, Metz, France
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Failure modes in stereotactic radiosurgery. A narrative review. Radiography (Lond) 2022; 28:999-1009. [PMID: 35921732 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2021] [Revised: 07/03/2022] [Accepted: 07/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) refers to an advanced radiotherapy technique that requires a high level of precision and accuracy and a flawless workflow. Failures within the SRS process can lead to serious consequences due to high doses delivered per treatment. This narrative review aimed to identify the riskiest failure modes (FMs) and the stages at which they occur in the SRS process, as well as the strategies applied to mitigate the risks. It was based on the analysis of published failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) data. KEY FINDINGS From the literature search in PubMed and Scopus, 7 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the qualitative synthesis. In total, 9 radiotherapy departments conducted FMEA in the SRS process. 4 of them were community hospitals and 5 were academic centers. Overall, 54 high-risk FMs were identified with treatment planning (FMs: 18), treatment delivery (FMs: 12), consultation and patient registration (FMs: 10) being the riskiest stages. 10 FMs were stereotactic specific, while the remaining 44 could be met in any radiotherapy technique. Failures associated with contouring, medical records review, target reirradiation, and patient positioning were mostly outlined. Risk mitigation strategies included timeouts, double-checks, checklists, training and changes in the working practice. CONCLUSION Our review demonstrated that crucial FMs can occur in all SRS stages. Although generalisations were challenging, the FMs analysis provided a significant source of information about potential high risks and continuous improvement strategies that can be applied both in the SRS and other radiotherapy processes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The results of this research will assist radiotherapy facilities in proactive risk management studies and will allow radiotherapy professionals to reflect on their practice and learn from others' experiences.
Collapse
|
39
|
Quality assurance of a breathing controlled four-dimensional computed tomography algorithm. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 23:85-91. [PMID: 35844256 PMCID: PMC9283927 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2022] [Revised: 06/01/2022] [Accepted: 06/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Initial quality assurance of a novel breathing-controlled four-dimensional computed tomography algorithm. Assessment of geometry, motion representation and image quality for regular and irregular breathing. No clinically relevant differences in results for regular and irregular breathing. Only minor differences in tumor geometry representation and image quality compared to static three-dimensional computed tomography. Table flexion has no clinically relevant impact on geometry representation.
Background & purpose Material & methods Results Conclusions
Collapse
|
40
|
Reitz D, Muecke J, da Silva Mendes V, Landry G, Reiner M, Niyazi M, Belka C, Freislederer P, Corradini S. Intrafractional monitoring of patients using four different immobilization mask systems for cranial radiotherapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 23:134-139. [PMID: 35958289 PMCID: PMC9361321 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2022.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2021] [Revised: 07/16/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Patients receiving cranial radiotherapy are immobilized with a thermoplastic mask to restrict patient motion. Depending on the target volume margins and treatment dose, different mask systems are used. Intrafractional movements can be monitored using stereoscopic X-ray imaging. The aim of the present work was to compare the magnitudes of intrafractional deviation for different mask systems. Material and methods Four different head mask systems (open face mask, open mask, stereotactic mask, double mask) used in the treatment of 40 patients were investigated. In total 487 treatment fractions and 3708 X-ray images were collected. Deviations were calculated by comparison of the acquired X-ray images with digitally reconstructed radiographs. The results of intrafractional X-ray deviations for translational and rotational axes were compared between the different mask systems. Results Deviations were below 0.6 mm for translations and below 0.6° for rotations for all mask systems. Along the lateral and longitudinal directions the stereotactic mask was superior, while along the vertical direction the double mask showed the lowest deviations. For low rotational deviations the double mask is the best amongst all other mask systems. Conclusion As expected, the lowest movement was shown using cranial stereotactic mask systems. The results have shown deviations lower than 0.6 mm and 0.6° using any of the four thermoplastic mask systems.
Collapse
|
41
|
Kluge A, Ehrbar S, Grehn M, Fleckenstein J, Baus WW, Siebert FA, Schweikard A, Andratschke N, Mayinger MC, Boda-Heggemann J, Buergy D, Celik E, Krug D, Kovacs B, Saguner AM, Rudic B, Bergengruen P, Boldt LH, Stauber A, Zaman A, Bonnemeier H, Dunst J, Budach V, Blanck O, Mehrhof F. Treatment Planning for Cardiac Radioablation: Multicenter Multiplatform Benchmarking for the XXX Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 114:360-372. [PMID: 35716847 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.06.056] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2022] [Revised: 05/15/2022] [Accepted: 06/05/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Cardiac radioablation is a novel treatment option for patients with refractory ventricular tachycardia (VT) unsuitable for catheter ablation. The quality of treatment planning depends on dose specifications, platform capabilities, and experience of the treating staff. To harmonize the treatment planning, benchmarking of this process is necessary for multicenter clinical studies such as the XXX trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS Planning computed tomography data and consensus structures from three patients were sent to five academic centers for independent plan development using a variety of platforms and techniques with the XXX study protocol serving as guideline. Three-dimensional dose distributions and treatment plan details were collected and analyzed. In addition, an objective relative plan quality ranking system for VT treatments was established. RESULTS For each case, three coplanar volumetric modulated arc (VMAT) plans for C-arm linear accelerators (LINAC) and three non-coplanar treatment plans for robotic arm LINAC were generated. All plans were suitable for clinical applications with minor deviations from study guidelines in most centers. Eleven of 18 treatment plans showed maximal one minor deviation each for target and cardiac substructures. However, dose-volume histograms showed substantial differences: in one case, the PTV≥30Gy ranged from 0.0% to 79.9% and the RIVA V14Gy ranged from 4.0% to 45.4%. Overall, the VMAT plans had steeper dose gradients in the high dose region, while the plans for the robotic arm LINAC had smaller low dose regions. Thereby, VMAT plans required only about half as many monitor units, resulting in shorter delivery times, possibly an important factor in treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS Cardiac radioablation is feasible with robotic arm and C-arm LINAC systems with comparable plan quality. Although cross-center training and best practice guidelines have been provided, further recommendations, especially for cardiac substructures, and ranking of dose guidelines will be helpful to optimize cardiac radioablation outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Kluge
- Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Stefanie Ehrbar
- Klinik für Radio-Onkologie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zürich, CH
| | - Melanie Grehn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jens Fleckenstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Wolfgang W Baus
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Cyberknife Center, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Frank-Andre Siebert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Achim Schweikard
- University of Lübeck, Institute for Robotic and Cognitive Systems, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Nicolaus Andratschke
- Klinik für Radio-Onkologie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zürich, CH
| | - Michael C Mayinger
- Klinik für Radio-Onkologie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zürich, CH
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Daniel Buergy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Eren Celik
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Cyberknife Center, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Boldizsar Kovacs
- Universitäres Herzzentrum, Klinik für Kardiologie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zürich, CH
| | - Ardan M Saguner
- Universitäres Herzzentrum, Klinik für Kardiologie, UniversitätsSpital Zürich, University of Zurich, Zürich, CH
| | - Boris Rudic
- Medizinische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim and German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Heidelberg/Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Paula Bergengruen
- Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Leif-Hendrik Boldt
- Med. Klinik m.S. Kardiologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Annina Stauber
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Cyberknife Center, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Adrian Zaman
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Hendrik Bonnemeier
- Klinik für Innere Medizin III, Abteilung für Elektrophysiologie und Rhythmologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Jürgen Dunst
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Volker Budach
- Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Felix Mehrhof
- Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Masitho S, Putz F, Mengling V, Reißig L, Voigt R, Bäuerle T, Janka R, Fietkau R, Bert C. Accuracy of MRI-CT registration in brain stereotactic radiotherapy: Impact of MRI acquisition setup and registration method. Z Med Phys 2022; 32:477-487. [PMID: 35643799 PMCID: PMC9948832 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2022.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2021] [Revised: 04/19/2022] [Accepted: 04/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In MR-based radiotherapy (RT), MRI images are co-registered to the planning CT to leverage MR image information for RT planning. Especially in brain stereotactic RT, where typical CTV-PTV margins are 1-2 mm, high registration accuracy is critical. Several factors influence the registration accuracy, including the acquisition setup during MR simulation and the registration methods. PURPOSE In this work, the impact of the MRI acquisition setup and registration method was evaluated in the context of brain RT, both geometrically and dosimetrically. METHODS AND MATERIALS MRI of 20 brain radiotherapy patients was acquired in two MRI acquisition setups (RT and diagnostic). Three different automatic registration tools provided by three treatment planning systems were used to rigidly register both MRIs and CT in addition to the clinical registration. Segmentation-based evaluation using Hausdorff Distance (HD)/Dice Similarity Coefficient and landmark-based evaluation were used as evaluation metrics. Dose-volume-histograms were evaluated for target volumes and various organs at risks. RESULTS MRI acquisition in the RT setup provided a similar head extension as compared to the planning CT. The registration method had a more significant influence than the acquisition setup (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p<0.05). When registering using a less optimal registration method, the RT setup improved the registration accuracy compared to the diagnostic setup (Difference: ΔMHD = 0.16 mm, ΔHDP95 = 0.64 mm, mean Euclidean distance (ΔmEuD) = 2.65 mm). Different registration methods and acquisition setups lead to the variation of the clinical DVH. Acquiring MRI in the RT setup can improve PTV and GTV coverage compared to the diagnostic setup. CONCLUSIONS Both MRI acquisition setup and registration method influence the MRI-CT registration accuracy in brain RT patients geometrically and dosimetrically. MR-simulation in the RT setup assures optimal registration accuracy if automatic registration is impaired, and therefore recommended for brain RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siti Masitho
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany.
| | - Florian Putz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Veit Mengling
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Lisa Reißig
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Raphaela Voigt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tobias Bäuerle
- Department of Radiology. Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rolf Janka
- Department of Radiology. Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christoph Bert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Oligometastasis in breast cancer—current status and treatment options from a radiation oncology perspective. Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 198:601-611. [PMID: 35527272 PMCID: PMC9217902 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01938-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2022] [Accepted: 03/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
AbstractEvidence from a few small randomized trials and retrospective cohorts mostly including various tumor entities indicates a prolongation of disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) from local ablative therapies in oligometastatic disease (OMD). However, it is still unclear which patients benefit most from this approach. We give an overview of the several aspects of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in extracranial OMD in breast cancer from a radiation oncology perspective. A PubMed search referring to this was conducted. An attempt was made to relate the therapeutic efficacy of SBRT to various prognostic factors. Data from approximately 500 breast cancer patients treated with SBRT for OMD in mostly in small cohort studies have been published, consistently indicating high local tumor control rates and favorable progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Predictors for a good prognosis after SBRT are favorable biological subtype (hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative), solitary metastasis, bone-only metastasis, and long metastasis-free interval. However, definitive proof that SBRT in OMD breast cancer prolongs DFS or OS is lacking, since, with the exception of one small randomized trial (n = 22 in the SBRT arm), none of the cohort studies had an adequate control group. Further studies are needed to prove the benefit of SBRT in OMD breast cancer and to define adequate selection criteria. Currently, the use of local ablative SBRT should always be discussed in a multidisciplinary tumor board.
Collapse
|
44
|
Eder MM, Reiner M, Heinz C, Garny S, Freislederer P, Landry G, Niyazi M, Belka C, Riboldi M. Single-isocenter stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: Impact of patient misalignments on target coverage in non-coplanar treatments. Z Med Phys 2022; 32:296-311. [PMID: 35504799 PMCID: PMC9948862 DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2022.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2021] [Revised: 02/10/2022] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
Frameless single-isocenter non-coplanar stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for patients with multiple brain metastases is a treatment at high geometrical complexity. The goal of this study is to analyze the dosimetric impact of non-coplanar image guidance with stereoscopic X-ray imaging. Such an analysis is meant to provide insights on the adequacy of safety margins, and to evaluate the benefit of imaging at non-coplanar configurations. The ExacTrac® (ET) system (Brainlab AG, Munich, Germany) was used for stereoscopic X-ray imaging in frameless single-isocenter non-coplanar SRS for multiple brain metastases. Sub-millimeter precision was found for the ET-based pre-treatment setup, whereas a degradation was noted for non-coplanar treatment angles. Misalignments without intra-fractional positioning corrections were reconstructed in 6 degrees of freedom (DoF) to resemble the situation without non-coplanar image guidance. Dose recalculation in 20 SRS patients with applied positioning corrections did not reveal any significant differences in D98% for 75 planning target volumes (PTVs) and gross tumor volumes (GTVs). For recalculation without applied positioning corrections, significant differences (p<0.05) were reported in D98% for both PTVs and GTVs, with stronger effects for small PTV volumes. A worst-case analysis at increasing translational and rotational misalignment revealed that dosimetric changes are a complex function of the combination thereof. This study highlighted the important role of positioning correction with ET at non-coplanar configurations in frameless single-isocenter non-coplanar SRS for patients with multiple brain metastases. Uncorrected patient misalignments at non-coplanar couch angles were linked to a significant loss of PTV coverage, with effects varying according to the combination of single DoF and PTV geometrical properties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Martin Eder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Garching, Germany.
| | - Michael Reiner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Christian Heinz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Sylvia Garny
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Philipp Freislederer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Garching, Germany.
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Marco Riboldi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Buergy D, Würschmidt F, Gkika E, Hörner-Rieber J, Knippen S, Gerum S, Balermpas P, Henkenberens C, Voglhuber T, Kornhuber C, Barczyk S, Röper B, Rashid A, Blanck O, Wittig A, Herold HU, Brunner TB, Sweeney RA, Kahl KH, Ciernik FI, Ottinger A, Izaguirre V, Putz F, König L, Hoffmann M, Combs SE, Guckenberger M, Boda-Heggemann J. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of adrenal metastases - A dose-finding study. Int J Cancer 2022; 151:412-421. [PMID: 35383919 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2022] [Revised: 02/22/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Optimal doses for the treatment of adrenal metastases with stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) are unknown. We aimed to identify dose-volume cut-points associated with decreased local recurrence rates (LRR). A multicenter database of patients with adrenal metastases of any histology treated with SBRT (biologically effective dose, BED10 ≥ 50Gy, ≤ 12 fractions) was analyzed. Details on dose-volume parameters were required (planning target volume: PTV-D98%, PTV-D50%, PTV-D2%; gross tumor volume: GTV-D50%, GTV-mean). Cut-points for LRR were optimized using the R maxstat package. 196 patients with 218 lesions were included, the largest histopathological subgroup was adenocarcinoma (n = 101). Cut-point optimization resulted in significant cut-points for PTV-D50% (BED10: 73.2Gy; p = 0.003), GTV-D50% (BED10: 74.2Gy; p = 0.006), GTV-mean (BED10: 73.0Gy; p = 0.007), and PTV-D2% (BED10: 78.0Gy; p = 0.02) but not for the PTV-D98% (p = 0.06). Differences in LRR were clinically relevant (LRR ≥ doubled for cut-points that were not achieved). Further dose-escalation was not associated with further improved LRR. PTV-D50%, GTV-D50%, and GTV-mean cut-points were also associated with significantly improved LRR in the adenocarcinoma subgroup. Separate dose optimizations indicated a lower cut-point for the PTV-D50% (BED10: 69.1Gy) in adenocarcinoma lesions, other values were similar (< 2% difference). Associations of cut-points with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were not significant but durable freedom from local recurrence was associated with OS in a landmark model (p < 0.001). To achieve a significant improvement of LRR for adrenal SBRT, a moderate escalation of PTV-D50% BED10 > 73.2Gy (adenocarcinoma: 69.1Gy) should be considered. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Buergy
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Mannheim, Deutschland
| | | | - Eleni Gkika
- Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Strahlenheilkunde, Freiburg, Deutschland
| | - Juliane Hörner-Rieber
- Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Heidelberg, Deutschland
| | - Stefan Knippen
- Universitätsklinikum Jena, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Jena, Deutschland.,Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Strahlenklinik, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - Sabine Gerum
- Radioonkologie LMU München, Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, München, Deutschland.,Klinik für Radiotherapie und Radioonkologie, Paracelsus Universität Salzburg, Landeskrankenhaus, Salzburg, Österreich
| | - Panagiotis Balermpas
- Universitätsspital Zürich, Universität Zürich, Klinik für Radio-Onkologie, Zürich, Schweiz
| | - Christoph Henkenberens
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Spezielle Onkologie, Hannover, Deutschland
| | - Theresa Voglhuber
- Technische Universität München (TUM), Department of Radiation Oncology, Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich
| | - Christine Kornhuber
- Universitätsklinikum Halle (Saale), Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Halle (Saale), Deutschland
| | - Steffen Barczyk
- Zentrum für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Belegklinik am St. Agnes-Hospital, Bocholt, Deutschland
| | - Barbara Röper
- DIE RADIOLOGIE, MVZ Strahlentherapie Bogenhausen - Harlaching - Neuperlach, München, Deutschland
| | - Ali Rashid
- MediClin Robert Janker Klinik, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Bonn, Deutschland
| | - Oliver Blanck
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Kiel, Deutschland
| | - Andrea Wittig
- Universitätsklinikum Jena, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Jena, Deutschland
| | - Hans-Ulrich Herold
- Cyberknife Centrum Mitteldeutschland GmbH, Institut für Radiochirurgie und Präzisionsbestrahlung, Erfurt, Deutschland
| | - Thomas B Brunner
- Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg, Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Magdeburg, Deutschland
| | - Reinhart A Sweeney
- Leopoldina Krankenhaus Schweinfurt, Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Schweinfurt, Deutschland
| | - Klaus Henning Kahl
- Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Augsburg, Deutschland
| | - F Ilja Ciernik
- Städtisches Klinikum Dessau, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Dessau, Deutschland
| | - Annette Ottinger
- Klinikum Darmstadt GmbH, Institut für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Darmstadt, Deutschland
| | - Victor Izaguirre
- Universitätsklinikum Halle (Saale), Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Halle (Saale), Deutschland
| | - Florian Putz
- Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Strahlenklinik, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - Laila König
- Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Klinik für Radioonkologie und Strahlentherapie, Heidelberg, Deutschland
| | - Michael Hoffmann
- Radioonkologie LMU München, Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, München, Deutschland
| | - Stephanie E Combs
- Technische Universität München (TUM), Department of Radiation Oncology, Ismaninger Straße 22, Munich.,Helmholtz Zentrum München (HMGU), Ingolstädter Landstraße 1, Neuherberg, Deutschland.,Deutsches Zentrum für Translationale Krebsforschung (DKTK) Partner Site Munich
| | - Matthias Guckenberger
- Universitätsspital Zürich, Universität Zürich, Klinik für Radio-Onkologie, Zürich, Schweiz
| | - Judit Boda-Heggemann
- Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Mannheim, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Maksoud Z, Schmidt MA, Huang Y, Rutzner S, Mansoorian S, Weissmann T, Bert C, Distel L, Semrau S, Lettmaier S, Eyüpoglu I, Fietkau R, Putz F. Transient Enlargement in Meningiomas Treated with Stereotactic Radiotherapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14061547. [PMID: 35326697 PMCID: PMC8946188 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14061547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2022] [Revised: 03/10/2022] [Accepted: 03/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Accurate assessment of treatment efficacy is a prerequisite for the improvement in therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials. However, it is very challenging to accurately track the size of meningiomas after radiotherapy, because of their complex shapes and often slow growth. Measuring the whole tumor volume as opposed to simple diameter measurements to assess treatment efficacy, therefore, is very promising but little is known on expected volumetric changes of meningiomas following radiotherapy. Therefore, in this study, we meticulously investigated volumetric changes in meningiomas following radiotherapy incorporating volumetric measurements from 468 MRI studies and evaluated newly proposed RANO volumetric criteria in the context of radiotherapy. We found that temporary tumor enlargement after radiotherapy overall was rare but occurred significantly more frequently after high than after low single doses of radiation, represented an important differential diagnosis to tumor progression and would have skewed results in a clinical trial if not accounted for. Abstract To investigate the occurrence of pseudoprogression/transient enlargement in meningiomas after stereotactic radiotherapy (RT) and to evaluate recently proposed volumetric RANO meningioma criteria for response assessment in the context of RT. Sixty-nine meningiomas (benign: 90%, atypical: 10%) received stereotactic RT from January 2005–May 2018. A total of 468 MRI studies were segmented longitudinally during a median follow-up of 42.3 months. Best response and local control were evaluated according to recently proposed volumetric RANO criteria. Transient enlargement was defined as volumetric increase ≥20% followed by a subsequent regression ≥20%. The mean best volumetric response was −23% change from baseline (range, −86% to +19%). According to RANO, the best volumetric response was SD in 81% (56/69), MR in 13% (9/69) and PR in 6% (4/69). Transient enlargement occurred in only 6% (4/69) post RT but would have represented 60% (3/5) of cases with progressive disease if not accounted for. Transient enlargement was characterized by a mean maximum volumetric increase of +181% (range, +24% to +389 %) with all cases occurring in the first year post-RT (range, 4.1–10.3 months). Transient enlargement was significantly more frequent with SRS or hypofractionation than with conventional fractionation (25% vs. 2%, p = 0.015). Five-year volumetric control was 97.8% if transient enlargement was recognized but 92.9% if not accounted for. Transient enlargement/pseudoprogression in the first year following SRS and hypofractionated RT represents an important differential diagnosis, especially because of the high volumetric control achieved with stereotactic RT. Meningioma enlargement during subsequent post-RT follow-up and after conventional fractionation should raise suspicion for tumor progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ziad Maksoud
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Manuel Alexander Schmidt
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
- Department of Neuroradiology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Schwabachanlage 6, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - Yixing Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Sandra Rutzner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Sina Mansoorian
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Thomas Weissmann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Christoph Bert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Luitpold Distel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Sabine Semrau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Sebastian Lettmaier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Ilker Eyüpoglu
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
- Department of Neurosurgery, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Schwabachanlage 6, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - Rainer Fietkau
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
| | - Florian Putz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Universitaetsstraße 27, 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (Z.M.); (Y.H.); (S.R.); (S.M.); (T.W.); (C.B.); (L.D.); (S.S.); (S.L.); (R.F.)
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC ER-EMN), 91054 Erlangen, Germany; (M.A.S.); (I.E.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +49-9131-853-4080
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Wegener S, Schindhelm R, Sauer OA. Implementing corrections of isocentric shifts for the stereotactic irradiation of cerebral targets: Clinical validation. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2022; 23:e13577. [PMID: 35234345 PMCID: PMC9121032 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13577] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: Any Linac will show geometric imprecisions, including non‐ideal alignment of the gantry, collimator and couch axes, and gantry sag or wobble. Their angular dependence can be quantified and resulting changes of the dose distribution predicted (Wack, JACMP 20(5), 2020). We analyzed whether it is feasible to correct geometric shifts during treatment planning. The successful implementation of such a correction procedure was verified by measurements of different stereotactic treatment plans. Methods: Isocentric shifts were quantified for two Elekta Synergy Agility Linacs using the QualiForMed ISO‐CBCT+ module, yielding the shift between kV and MV isocenters, the gantry flex and wobble as well as the positions of couch and collimator rotation axes. Next, the position of each field's isocenter in the Pinnacle treatment planning system was adjusted accordingly using a script. Fifteen stereotactic treatment plans of cerebral metastases (0.34 to 26.53 cm3) comprising 9–11 beams were investigated; 54 gantry and couch combinations in total. Unmodified plans and corrected plans were measured using the Sun Nuclear SRS‐MapCHECK with the Stereophan phantom and evaluated using gamma analysis. Results: Geometric imprecisions, such as shifts of up to 0.8 mm between kV and MV isocenter, a couch rotation axis 0.9 mm off the kV isocente,r and gantry flex with an amplitude of 1.1 mm, were found. For eight, mostly small PTVs D98 values declined more than 5% by simulating these shifts. The average gamma (2%/2 mm, absolute, global, 20% threshold) was reduced from 0.53 to 0.31 (0.32 to 0.30) for Linac 1 (Linac 2) when including the isocentric corrections. Thus, Linac 1 reached the accuracy level of Linac 2 after correction. Conclusion: Correcting for Linac geometric deviations during the planning process is feasible and was dosimetrically validated. The dosimetric impact of the geometric imperfections can vary between Linacs and should be assessed and corrected where necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Wegener
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Robert Schindhelm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| | - Otto A Sauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Patterns of Pretreatment Diagnostic Assessment in Patients Treated with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): Special Characteristics in the COVID Pandemic and Influence on Outcomes. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:1080-1092. [PMID: 35200591 PMCID: PMC8871078 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29020092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2022] [Revised: 01/29/2022] [Accepted: 02/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
The pandemic raised a discussion about the postponement of medical interventions for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We analyzed the characteristics of pretreatment diagnostic assessment in the pandemic and the influence of diagnostic assessment on outcomes. A total of 96 patients with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for NSCLC were included. The number of patients increased from mean 0.9 (2012–2019) to 1.45 per month in the COVID era (p < 0.05). Pandemic-related factors (contact reduction, limited intensive care unit resources) might have influenced clinical decision making towards SBRT. The time from pretreatment assessment (multidisciplinary tumor board decision, bronchoscopy, planning CT) to SBRT was longer during the COVID period (p < 0.05). Reduced services, staff shortage, or appointment management to mitigate infection risks might explain this finding. Overall survival, progression-free survival, locoregional progression-free survival, and distant progression-free survival were superior in patients who received a PET/CT scan prior to SBRT (p < 0.05). This supports that SBRT guidelines advocate the acquisition of a PET/CT scan. A longer time from PET/CT scan/conventional staging to SBRT (<10 vs. ≥10 weeks) was associated with worse locoregional control (p < 0.05). The postponement of diagnostic or therapeutic measures in the pandemic should be discussed cautiously. Patient- and tumor-related features should be evaluated in detail.
Collapse
|
49
|
Dose assessment for daily cone-beam CT in lung radiotherapy patients and its combination with treatment planning. Phys Eng Sci Med 2022; 45:231-237. [PMID: 35076869 DOI: 10.1007/s13246-022-01105-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2020] [Accepted: 01/19/2022] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
With the increased use of X-ray imaging for patient alignment in external beam radiation therapy, particularly with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), the additional dose received by patients has become of greater consideration. In this study, we analysed the radiation dose from CBCT for clinical lung radiotherapy and assessed its relative contribution when combined with radiation treatment planning for a variety of lung radiotherapy techniques. The Monte Carlo simulation program ImpactMC was used to calculate the 3D dose delivered by a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator to patients undergoing thorax CBCT imaging. The concomitant dose was calculated by simulating the daily CBCT irradiation of ten lung cancer patients. Each case was planned with a total dose of 50-60 Gy to the target lesion in 25-30 fractions using the 3DCRT or IMRT plan and retrospectively planned using VMAT. For each clinical case, the calculated CBCT dose was summed with the planned dose, and the dose to lungs, heart, and spinal cord were analysed according to conventional dose conformity metrics. Our results indicate greater variations in dose to the heart, lungs, and spinal cord based on planning technique, (3DCRT, IMRT, VMAT) than from the inclusion of daily cone-beam imaging doses over 25-30 fractions. The average doses from CBCT imaging per fraction to the lungs, heart and spinal cord were 0.52 ± 0.10, 0.49 ± 0.15 and 0.39 ± 0.08 cGy, respectively. Lung dose variations were related to the patient's size and body composition. Over a treatment course, this may result in an additional mean absorbed dose of 0.15-0.2 Gy. For lung V5, the imaging dose resulted in an average increase of ~ 0.6% of the total volume receiving 5 Gy. The increase in V20 was more dependent on the planning technique, with 3DCRT increasing by 0.11 ± 0.09% with imaging and IMRT and VMAT increasing by 0.17 ± 0.05% and 0.2 ± 0.06%, respectively. In this study, we assessed the concomitant dose for daily CBCT lung cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. The additional radiation dose to the normal lungs from daily CBCT was found to range from 0.15 to 0.2 Gy when the patient was treated with 25-30 fractions. Consideration of potential variation in relative biological effectiveness between kilovoltage imaging and megavoltage treatment dose was outside the scope of this study. Regardless of this, our results show that the assessment of imaging dose can be incorporated into the treatment planning process and the relative effect on overall dose distribution was small compared to the difference among planning techniques.
Collapse
|
50
|
Planning benchmark study for SBRT of liver metastases: Results of the DEGRO/DGMP working group stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:214-227. [PMID: 35074434 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.01.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2021] [Revised: 12/19/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate, if liver SBRT treatment planning can be harmonized across different treatment planning systems, delivery techniques and institutions by using a specific prescription method and to minimize the knowledge gap concerning inter-system and inter-user differences. To provide best practice guidelines for all used techniques. METHODS A multiparametric specification of target dose (GTVD50%, GTVD0.1cc, GTVV90%, PTVV70%) with a prescription dose of GTVD50% = 3 × 20 Gy and OAR limits were distributed with CTs and structure sets from three liver metastases patients. Thirty-five institutions provided 132 treatment plans using different irradiation techniques. These plans were first analyzed for target and OAR doses. Four different renormalization methods were performed (PTVDmin, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, PTVDmax). The resulting 660 treatments plans were evaluated regarding target doses in order to study the effect of dose renormalization to different prescription methods. A relative scoring system was used for comparisons. RESULTS GTVD50% prescription can be performed in all systems. Treatment plan harmonization was overall successful with standard deviations for Dmax, PTVD98%, GTVD98% and PTVDmean of 1.6 Gy, 3.3 Gy, 1.9 Gy and 1.5 Gy, respectively. Primary analysis showed 55 major deviations from clinical goals in 132 plans, while in only <20% of deviations GTV/PTV dose was traded for meeting OAR limits. GTVD50% prescription produced the smallest deviation from target planning objectives and between techniques, followed by the PTVDmax, PTVD98%, PTVD2% and PTVDmin prescription. Deviations were significant for all combinations but for the PTVDmax prescription compared with GTVD50% and PTVD98%. Based on the various dose prescription methods, all systems significantly differed from each other, while GTVD50% and PTVD98% prescription showed the least differences between the systems. CONCLUSIONS This study showed the feasibility of harmonizing liver SBRT treatment plans across different treatment planning systems and delivery techniques when a sufficient set of clinical goals is given.
Collapse
|