Practical issues in the implementation of image-guided radiotherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer within a UK department

National survey of fiducial marker insertion for prostate image guided radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

In the United Kingdom fiducial marker IGRT is the second most common verification method employed in radical prostate radiotherapy yet little evidence exists to support centres introducing or developing this practice. We developed a survey to elicit current fiducial marker practices adopted in the UK, to recommend standardisation of practice.

METHODS

A 16 question survey was distributed across UK Radiotherapy centres via promotion at the British Uro-Oncology Group Conference, 2016. Included were questions relating to workforce planning, patient preparation, insertion procedure and verification methods. The survey was open from September 2016 to January 2017.

RESULTS

Results from 15 centres routinely inserting fiducial markers for prostate IGRT are presented. Eleven professional groups insert fiducial markers across the UK. Fourteen centres insert fiducial markers trans-rectally; one trans-perineally. Centres adopting a trans-rectal approach administer prophylactic ciprofloxacin as a single agent or combined with gentamicin or metronidazole; poor agreement between regimes presented. One centre has introduced targeted antibiotic prophylaxis. Five brands of fiducial markers are utilised nationally. Fourteen centres standardly insert three single fiducial markers, two common configurations emerged. Coupled fiducial markers are routinely implanted by one centre. All centres delay at least one week between fiducial marker insertion and planning CT; seven centres wait two weeks. The most common fiducial verification method is two-dimensional, paired kilo Voltage imaging.

CONCLUSION

Variation in fiducial marker practice across the UK is considerable. Standardisation is required to support centres and healthcare professionals developing this service. Seven recommendations, to unify practice, have been proposed based on survey results and literature.

The stability of seeds in external beam prostate radiotherapy and implications of migration in current practice: a systematic review

Purpose

To determine and summarise the literature on prostatic seed stability by investigating seed marker migration and loss in prostate cancer patients. In addition, documenting the implications of significant seed migration and loss in clinical practise.

Methods

PubMed and Sciencedirect databases were used to locate papers on the stability of gold seed markers in prostate patients treated with external beam radiation therapy. The search found 3,238 articles and ten articles were selected and reviewed based on inclusion and exclusion criteria for the scope of this literature review.

Results

Minimal migration and loss of seeds was observed in the literature reviewed, with the majority of authors reporting <2·0 mm migration within the prostate; however, there were individual cases reported outside of the 2·0 mm threshold. It was also found that significant migration had an impact on image matching, as well as, planning treatment volume margins.

Conclusion

Seed stability within the prostate has been proven, with most authors reporting minimal migration within a 2·0 mm threshold and minimal loss of seeds. Although individual cases can have significant migration and loss, if marker migration exceeds the 2·0 mm threshold, a protocol is required to deal with both non-significant and significant migration.

Treatment planning optimisation in proton therapy

The goal of radiotherapy is to achieve uniform target coverage while sparing normal tissue. In proton therapy, the same sources of geometric uncertainty are present as in conventional radiotherapy. However, an important and fundamental difference in proton therapy is that protons have a finite range, highly dependent on the electron density of the material they are traversing, resulting in a steep dose gradient at the distal edge of the Bragg peak. Therefore, an accurate knowledge of the sources and magnitudes of the uncertainties affecting the proton range is essential for producing plans which are robust to these uncertainties. This review describes the current knowledge of the geometric uncertainties and discusses their impact on proton dose plans. The need for patient-specific validation is essential and in cases of complex intensity-modulated proton therapy plans the use of a planning target volume (PTV) may fail to ensure coverage of the target. In cases where a PTV cannot be used, other methods of quantifying plan quality have been investigated. A promising option is to incorporate uncertainties directly into the optimisation algorithm. A further development is the inclusion of robustness into a multicriteria optimisation framework, allowing a multi-objective Pareto optimisation function to balance robustness and conformity. The question remains as to whether adaptive therapy can become an integral part of a proton therapy, to allow re-optimisation during the course of a patient's treatment. The challenge of ensuring that plans are robust to range uncertainties in proton therapy remains, although these methods can provide practical solutions.

The value of image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy in challenging clinical settings

OBJECTIVE

To illustrate the wider potential scope of image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT), outside of the "standard" indications for IMRT.

METHODS

Nine challenging clinical cases were selected. All were treated with radical intent, although it was accepted that in several of the cases the probability of cure was low. IMRT alone was not adequate owing to the close proximity of the target to organs at risk, the risk of geographical miss, or the need to tighten planning margins, making image-guided radiotherapy an essential integral part of the treatment. Discrepancies between the initial planning scan and the daily on-treatment megavoltage CT were recorded for each case. The three-dimensional displacement was compared with the margin used to create the planning target volume (PTV).

RESULTS

All but one patient achieved local control. Three patients developed metastatic disease but benefited from good local palliation; two have since died. A further patient died of an unrelated condition. Four patients are alive and well. Toxicity was low in all cases. Without daily image guidance, the PTV margin would have been insufficient to ensure complete coverage in 49% of fractions. It was inadequate by >3 mm in 19% of fractions, and by >5 mm in 9%.

CONCLUSION

IG-IMRT ensures accurate dose delivery to treat the target and avoid critical structures, acting as daily quality assurance for the delivery of complex IMRT plans. These patients could not have been adequately treated without image guidance.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

IG-IMRT can offer improved outcomes in less common clinical situations, where conventional techniques would provide suboptimal treatment.

Clinical commissioning of online seed matching protocol for prostate radiotherapy

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to clinically commission an online seed matching image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) protocol using modern hardware/software for patients undergoing prostate radiotherapy. An essential constraint was to achieve this within a busy centre without reducing patient throughput, which had been reported with other techniques.

METHODS

45 patients had 3 fiducial markers inserted into the prostate and were imaged daily using kilovoltage orthogonal images with online correction applied before treatment. A total of 1612 image pairs were acquired and analysed to identify interfractional motion, seed migration and interobserver variability, and assess ease of use.

RESULTS

This method of IGRT was implemented successfully in our centre with no impact on treatment times and patient throughput. Systematic (Σ) interfractional set-up errors were 2.2, 2.7 and 3.9 mm in right-left (RL), superoinferior (SI) and anteroposterior (AP) directions, respectively. Random (σ) interfractional set-up errors were 3.2 (RL), 3.7 (SI) and 5.7 mm (AP). There were significant differences between patients. Seed migration and interobserver variability were not significant issues.

CONCLUSIONS

The described technique is facilitated by the advanced imaging system, allowing a fast and effective method of correcting set-up errors before treatment. Extended implementation of this technique has improved treatment delivery to the majority of our prostate radiotherapy patients. The measurement of interfractional motion in this study is potentially valuable for margin reduction in intensity-modulated radiotherapy/volumetric arc therapy.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This technique can be used within treatment time constraints, benefiting large numbers of patients by helping to avoid geographical miss and potentially reducing toxicity to organs at risk.

Consideration of the likely benefit from implementation of prostate image-guided radiotherapy using current margin sizes: a radiobiological analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the benefit of introduction of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) to prostate radiotherapy practice with current clinical target volume-planning target volume (PTV) margins of 5-10 mm.

METHODS

Systematic error data collected from 50 patients were used together with a random error of σ=3.0 mm to model non-IGRT treatment. IGRT was modelled with residual errors of Σ=σ=1.5 mm. Population tumour control probability (TCP(pop)) was calculated for two three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy techniques: two-phase and concomitant boost. Treatment volumes and dose prescriptions were ostensibly the same. The relative field sizes of the treatment techniques, distribution of systematic errors and correlations between movement axes were examined.

RESULTS

The differences in TCP(pop) between the IGRT and non-IGRT regimes were 0.3% for the two-phase and 1.5% for the concomitant boost techniques. A 2-phase plan, in each phase of which the 95% isodose conformed to its respective PTV, required fields that were 3.5 mm larger than those required for the concomitant boost plan. Despite the larger field sizes, the TCP (without IGRT) in the two-phase plan was only 1.7% higher than the TCP in the concomitant boost plan. The deviation of craniocaudal systematic errors (p=0.02) from a normal distribution, and the correlation of translations in the craniocaudal and anteroposterior directions (p<0.0001) were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The expected population benefit of IGRT for the modelled situation was too small to be detected by a clinical trial of reasonable size, although there was a significant benefit to individual patients. For IGRT to have an observable population benefit, the trial would need to use smaller margins than those used in this study. Concomitant treatment techniques permit smaller fields and tighter conformality than two phases planned separately.