1
|
Cree A, Livsey J, Barraclough L, Dubec M, Hambrock T, Van Herk M, Choudhury A, McWilliam A. The Potential Value of MRI in External-Beam Radiotherapy for Cervical Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2018; 30:737-750. [PMID: 30209010 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2018.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2018] [Revised: 08/02/2018] [Accepted: 08/20/2018] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
The reference standard treatment for cervical cancer is concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided brachytherapy. Improvements in brachytherapy have increased local control rates, but late toxicity remains high with rates of 11% grade ≥3. The primary clinical target volume (CTV) for external-beam radiotherapy includes the cervix and uterus, which can show significant inter-fraction motion. This means that generous margins are required to cover the primary CTV, increasing the radiation dose to organs at risk and, therefore, toxicity. A number of image-guided radiotherapy techniques (IGRT) have been developed, but motion can be random and difficult to predict prior to treatment. In light of the development of integrated MRI linear accelerators, this review discusses the potential value of MRI in external-beam radiotherapy. Current solutions for managing pelvic organ motion are reviewed, including the potential for online adaptive radiotherapy. The impacts of the use of MRI in tumour delineation and in the delivery of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) are highlighted. The potential role and challenges of using multi parametric MRI to guide radiotherapy are also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Cree
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - J Livsey
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - L Barraclough
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - M Dubec
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - T Hambrock
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - M Van Herk
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - A Choudhury
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
| | - A McWilliam
- Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Christie Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
A parameterized model for mean urinary inflow rate and its preliminary application in radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Sci Rep 2017; 7:280. [PMID: 28325943 PMCID: PMC5428256 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-00356-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2016] [Accepted: 02/21/2017] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Forty-nine patients with stage IIb cervical cancer were included to investigate the changes in bladder volume in response to different approaches to maintaining consistent bladder filling. The impacts of age (Page), water consumption (Pwat), and body mass index (BMI, Pbmi) on the mean urinary inflow rate (vtot) were analysed. The bladder volume (BV) increased linearly over time. A large variation in vtot among individuals was observed, ranging from 0.19 to 5.13 ml/min. The vtot was correlated with Page (R = −0.53, p = 0.01) and Pwat (R = 0.84, p = 0.00), and no correlation between vtot and Pbmi was found (p > 0.05). Therefore, vtot could be parameterized using two methods: multivariable linear regression and iterative fitting. There was no statistically significant difference between the two methods. The model accuracy was successfully assessed with several validation tests for patients with good compliance (79.2% of all patients), and the proportion of radiotherapy (RT) fractions with zero wait time (one ultrasound (US) scan) increased from 6.5% to 41.2%. The optimal US scanning number and RT time could be provided using this model. This adaptive RT approach could reduce patient discomfort caused by holding onto urine and reduce technician labour as well as cost.
Collapse
|