1
|
Finnegan RN, Quinn A, Booth J, Belous G, Hardcastle N, Stewart M, Griffiths B, Carroll S, Thwaites DI. Cardiac substructure delineation in radiation therapy - A state-of-the-art review. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024. [PMID: 38757728 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13668] [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: 01/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/29/2024] [Indexed: 05/18/2024]
Abstract
Delineation of cardiac substructures is crucial for a better understanding of radiation-related cardiotoxicities and to facilitate accurate and precise cardiac dose calculation for developing and applying risk models. This review examines recent advancements in cardiac substructure delineation in the radiation therapy (RT) context, aiming to provide a comprehensive overview of the current level of knowledge, challenges and future directions in this evolving field. Imaging used for RT planning presents challenges in reliably visualising cardiac anatomy. Although cardiac atlases and contouring guidelines aid in standardisation and reduction of variability, significant uncertainties remain in defining cardiac anatomy. Coupled with the inherent complexity of the heart, this necessitates auto-contouring for consistent large-scale data analysis and improved efficiency in prospective applications. Auto-contouring models, developed primarily for breast and lung cancer RT, have demonstrated performance comparable to manual contouring, marking a significant milestone in the evolution of cardiac delineation practices. Nevertheless, several key concerns require further investigation. There is an unmet need for expanding cardiac auto-contouring models to encompass a broader range of cancer sites. A shift in focus is needed from ensuring accuracy to enhancing the robustness and accessibility of auto-contouring models. Addressing these challenges is paramount for the integration of cardiac substructure delineation and associated risk models into routine clinical practice, thereby improving the safety of RT for future cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert N Finnegan
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Alexandra Quinn
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jeremy Booth
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gregg Belous
- Australian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Nicholas Hardcastle
- Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Maegan Stewart
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Brooke Griffiths
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Susan Carroll
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David I Thwaites
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Radiotherapy Research Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research, St James's Hospital and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Postmastectomy radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer patients: Comparison of advanced techniques. Med Dosim 2019; 45:34-40. [PMID: 31129035 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2019.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2019] [Revised: 04/23/2019] [Accepted: 04/30/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been shown to improve the overall survival for invasive breast cancer patients, and many advanced radiotherapy technologies were adopted for PMRT. The purpose of our study is to compare various advanced PMRT techniques including fixed-beam intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (NC-VMAT), multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT), and tomotherapy (TOMO). Results of standard VMAT and mixed beam therapy that were published by our group previously were also included in the plan comparisons. Treatment plans were produced for nine PMRT patients previously treated in our clinic. The plans were evaluated based on planning target volume (PTV) coverage, dose homogeneity index (DHI), conformity index (CI), dose to organs at risk (OARs), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of pneumonitis, lifetime attributable risk (LAR) of second cancers, and risk of coronary events (RCE). All techniques produced clinically acceptable PMRT plans. Overall, fixed-beam IMRT delivered the lowest mean dose to contralateral breast (1.56 ± 0.4 Gy) and exhibited lowest LAR (0.6 ± 0.2%) of secondary contralateral breast cancer; NC-VMAT delivered the lowest mean dose to lungs (7.5 ± 0.8 Gy), exhibited lowest LAR (5.4 ± 2.8%) of secondary lung cancer and lowest NTCP (2.1 ± 0.4%) of pneumonitis; mixed beam therapy delivered the lowest mean dose to heart (7.1 ± 1.3 Gy) and exhibited lowest RCE (8.6 ± 7.1%); TOMO plans provided the most optimal target coverage while delivering higher dose to OARs than other techniques. Both NC-VMAT and MA-VMAT exhibited lower values of all OARs evaluation metrics compare to standard VMAT. Fixed-beam IMRT, NC-VMAT, and mixed beam therapy could be the optimal radiation technique for certain breast cancer patients after mastectomy.
Collapse
|