Multicentre treatment planning inter-comparison in a national context: The liver stereotactic ablative radiotherapy case

Liver function and image evaluation after radiotherapy for liver metastases after resection of sigmoid colon cancer a case report

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy is a treatment option in the management of patients with metastatic liver disease. The aim in this case was to evaluate radiation-induced dysfunctional liver lesions using 99mTc-GSA-SPECT, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, and radiation dose distribution in a patient after radiation therapy.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

After sigmoid colon resection, three liver metastases were treated with radiotherapy at the same time. Liver function after radiotherapy was determined to be A according to the Child-Turcott-Pugh classification. 99mTc-GSA-SPECT showed a wider reduction in uptake than Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI at all three sites. HH15 showed decreased liver function.

DISCUSSION

In the 99mTc-GSA-SPECT and Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI hepatocyte phases, residual signals of normal hepatocytes were observed despite irradiation at three sites. Additional treatment could be considered for the two recurrent lesions because there was no deterioration of liver function in post-irradiation imaging findings and blood sampling.

CONCLUSION

99mTc-GSA-SPECT and EOB-MRI showed characteristic findings for evaluation of liver function after radiotherapy for multiple liver metastases, suggesting the need for both imaging evaluations. It is now possible to choose whether to perform local additional treatment (additional radiation, RFA) or other chemotherapy for liver metastases after recurrence.

Automated treatment planning for liver cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the quality of fully automated stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) planning based on volumetric modulated arc therapy, which can reduce the reliance on historical plans and the experience of dosimetrists.

METHODS

Fully automated re-planning was performed on twenty liver cancer patients, automated plans based on automated SBRT planning (ASP) program and manual plans were conducted and compared. One patient was randomly selected and evaluate the repeatability of ASP, ten automated and ten manual SBRT plans were generated based on the same initial optimization objectives. Then, ten SBRT plans were generated for another selected randomly patient with different initial optimization objectives to assess the reproducibility. All plans were clinically evaluated in a double-blinded manner by five experienced radiation oncologists.

RESULTS

Fully automated plans provided similar planning target volume dose coverage and statistically better organ at risk sparing compared to the manual plans. Notably, automated plans achieved significant dose reduction in spinal cord, stomach, kidney, duodenum, and colon, with a median dose of D2% reduction ranging from 0.64 to 2.85 Gy. R50% and Dmean of ten rings for automated plans were significantly lower than those of manual plans. The average planning time for automated and manual plans was 59.8 ± 7.9 min vs. 127.1 ± 16.8 min (- 67.3 min).

CONCLUSION

Automated planning for SBRT, without relying on historical data, can generate comparable or even better plan quality for liver cancer compared with manual planning, along with better reproducibility, and less clinically planning time.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver metastases with different respiratory motion management techniques

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been firmly established as a treatment choice for patients with oligometastases, as it has demonstrated both safety and efficacy by consistently achieving high rates of local control. Moreover, it offers potential survival benefits for carefully selected patients in real-world clinical settings.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and May 2020, a total of 149 patients (with 414 liver metastases) received treatment. The Active Breathing Coordinator device was used for 68 patients, while respiratory gating was used for 65 and abdominal compression was used for 16 patients. The most common histological finding was colorectal adenocarcinoma, with 37.6% of patients having three or more metastases, and 18% having two metastases. The prescribed dose ranged from 36 to 60 Gy, delivered in 3-5 fractions.

RESULTS

Local control rates at 2 and 3 years were 76.1% and 61.2%, respectively, with no instances of local recurrence after 3 years. Factors negatively impacting local control included colorectal histology, lower prescribed dose, and the occurrence of new liver metastases. The median overall survival from SBRT was 32 months, with the presence of metastases outside the liver and the development of new liver metastases after SBRT affecting survival. The median disease-free survival was 10 months. No substantial differences in both local control and survival were observed between the respiratory motion control techniques employed. Treatment tolerance was excellent, with only one patient experiencing acute grade IV thrombocytopenia and two patients suffering from ≥ grade II chronic toxicity.

CONCLUSION

For radical management of single or multiple liver metastases, SBRT is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option. Regardless of the technology employed, experienced physicians can achieve similarly positive outcomes. However, additional studies are required to elucidate prognostic factors that can facilitate improved patient selection.

Multi-isocenter VMAT craniospinal irradiation using feasibility dose-volume histogram-guided auto-planning technique

This study aims to propose a novel treatment planning methodology for multi-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) craniospinal irradiation (CSI) using the special feasibility dose-volume histogram (FDVH)-guided auto-planning (AP) technique. Three different multi-isocenter VMAT -CSI plans were created, including manually based plans (MUPs), conventional AP plans (CAPs) and FDVH-guided AP plans (FAPs). The CAPs and FAPs were specially designed by combining multi-isocenter VMAT and AP techniques in the Pinnacle treatment planning system. Specially, the personalized optimization parameters for FAPs were generated using the FDVH function implemented in PlanIQ software, which provides the ideal organs at risk (OARs) sparing for the specific anatomical geometry based on the valuable assumption of the dose fall-off. Compared to MUPs, CAPs and FAPs significantly reduced the dose for most of the OARs. FAPs achieved the best homogeneity index (0.092 ± 0.013) and conformity index (0.980 ± 0.011), while CAPs were slightly inferior to the FAPs but superior to the MUPs. As opposed to MUPs, FAPs delivered a lower dose to OARs, whereas the difference between FAPs and CAPs was not statistically significant except for the optic chiasm and inner ear_L. The two AP approaches had similar MUs, which were significantly lower than the MUPs. The planning time of FAPs (145.00 ± 10.25 min) was slightly lower than that of CAPs (149.83 ± 14.37 min) and was substantially lower than that of MUPs (157.92 ± 16.11 min) with P < 0.0167. Overall, introducing the multi-isocenter AP technique into VMAT-CSI yielded positive outcomes and may play an important role in clinical CSI planning in the future.

Dose prescription and reporting in stereotactic body radiotherapy: A multi-institutional study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Radiation dose prescriptions are foundational for optimizing treatment efficacy and limiting treatment-related toxicity. We sought to assess the lack of standardization of SBRT dose prescriptions across institutions.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Dosimetric data from 1298 patients from 9 academic institutions treated with IMRT and VMAT were collected. Dose parameters D100, D98, D95, D50, and D2 were used to assess dosimetric variability.

RESULTS

Disease sites included lung (48.3 %) followed by liver (29.7 %), prostate (7.5 %), spine (6.8 %), brain (4.1 %), and pancreas (2.5 %). The PTV volume in lung varied widely with bimodality into two main groups (22.0-28.7 cm3) and (48.0-67.1 cm3). A hot spot ranging from 120-150 % was noted in nearly half of the patients, with significant variation across institutions. A D50 ≥ 110 % was found in nearly half of the institutions. There was significant dosimetric variation across institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

The SBRT prescriptions in the literature or in treatment guidelines currently lack nuance and hence there is significant variation in dose prescriptions across academic institutions. These findings add greater importance to the identification of dose parameters associated with improved clinical outcome comparisons as we move towards more hypofractionated treatments. There is a need for standardized reporting to help institutions in adapting treatment protocols based on the outcome of clinical trials. Dosimetric parameters are subsequently needed for uniformity and thereby standardizing planning guidelines to maximize efficacy, mitigate toxicity, and reduce treatment disparities are urgently needed.

Special stereotactic radiotherapy techniques: procedures and equipment for treatment simulation and dose delivery

Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT ) is a multi-step procedure with each step requiring extreme accuracy. Physician-dependent accuracy includes appropriate disease staging, multi-disciplinary discussion with shared decision-making, choice of morphological and functional imaging methods to identify and delineate the tumor target and organs at risk, an image-guided patient set-up, active or passive management of intra-fraction movement, clinical and instrumental follow-up. Medical physicist-dependent accuracy includes use of advanced software for treatment planning and more advanced Quality Assurance procedures than required for conventional radiotherapy. Consequently, all the professionals require appropriate training in skills for high-quality SRT.

Thanks to the technological advances, SRT has moved from a “frame-based” technique, i.e. the use of stereotactic coordinates which are identified by means of rigid localization frames, to the modern “frame-less” SRT which localizes the target volume directly, or by means of anatomical surrogates or fiducial markers that have previously been placed within or near the target. This review describes all the SRT steps in depth, from target simulation and delineation procedures to treatment delivery and image-guided radiation therapy. Target movement assessment and management are also described.

Planning benchmark study for SBRT of liver metastases: Results of the DEGRO/DGMP working group stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery

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 (GTV_D50%, GTV_D0.1cc, GTV_V90%, PTV_V70%) with a prescription dose of GTV_D50% = 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 (PTV_Dmin, PTV_D98%, PTV_D2%, PTV_Dmax). 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

GTV_D50% prescription can be performed in all systems. Treatment plan harmonization was overall successful with standard deviations for D_max, PTV_D98%, GTV_D98% and PTV_Dmean 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. GTV_D50% prescription produced the smallest deviation from target planning objectives and between techniques, followed by the PTV_Dmax, PTV_D98%, PTV_D2% and PTV_Dmin prescription. Deviations were significant for all combinations but for the PTV_Dmax prescription compared with GTV_D50% and PTV_D98%. Based on the various dose prescription methods, all systems significantly differed from each other, while GTV_D50% and PTV_D98% 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.

Influence of target dose heterogeneity on dose sparing of normal tissue in peripheral lung tumor stereotactic body radiation therapy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of target dose heterogeneity on normal tissue dose sparing for peripheral lung tumor stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).

METHODS

Based on the volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique, three SBRT plans with homogeneous, moderate heterogeneous, and heterogeneous (HO, MHE, and HE) target doses were compared in 30 peripheral lung tumor patients. The prescription dose was 48 Gy in 4 fractions. Ten rings outside the PTV were created to limit normal tissue dosage and evaluate dose falloff.

RESULTS

When MHE and HE plans were compared to HO plans, the conformity index of the PTV was increased by approximately 0.08. The median mean lung dose (MLD), V₅, V₁₀, V₂₀ of whole lung, D_2%, D_1cc, D_2cc of the rib, V₃₀ of the rib, D_2% and the maximum dose (D_max) of the skin, and D_2% and D_max of most mediastinal organs at risk (OARs) and spinal cord were reduced by up to 4.51 Gy or 2.8%. Analogously, the median D_max, D_2% and mean dose of rings were reduced by 0.71 to 8.46 Gy; and the median R_50% and D_2cm were reduced by 2.1 to 2.3 and 7.4% to 8.0%, respectively. Between MHE and HE plans there was little to no difference in OARs dose and dose falloff beyond the target. Furthermore, the dose sparing of rib V₃₀ and the mean dose of rings were negatively correlated with the rib and rings distance from tumor, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For peripheral lung tumor SBRT, target conformity, normal tissue dose, and dose falloff around the target could be improved by loosening or abandoning homogeneity. While there was negligible further dose benefit for the maximum target dose above 125% of the prescription, dose sparing of normal tissue derived from a heterogeneous target decreased as the distance from the tumor increased.

Lean Thinking to manage a national working group on physics aspects of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

To report how the adoption of a Lean Thinking mindset in the management of a national working group (WG) on the physics of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) contributed to achieve SBRT standardization objectives.

METHODS

Vision for the WG has been established as fragmentation reduction and process harmonization enhancement in SBRT for Italian centers. Two main research themes of the technical aspects of SBRT emerged as areas with major standardization improvement needs, small field dosimetry and SBRT planning comparisons, to be investigated through multi-institutional studies. The management of the WG leveraged on the Lean concept of fostering self-organization in a non-hierarchical environment. Four progressive involvement levels were defined for each study. No specific "scientific" pre-experience was required to propose and coordinate a project, just requiring a voluntary commitment. People engagement was measured in terms of number of published articles. The standardization goals have been conducted through a simplified "5S" (Sort, Set in Order, Shine, Standardize, and Sustain) methodology, first considering a phase of awareness (the first three "S"), then identifying and implementing standardization actions (the last two "S").

RESULTS

Since the beginning, 157 medical physicists joined the AIFM/SBRT-WG. Twenty-four papers/reviews/letters have been published in the period 2014-2019 on major radiation oncology journals, authored by >100 physicists (>50% working in small hospitals). Six over 12 first authors worked in peripheral/small hospitals, with no prior publication as first author. These studies contributed to the awareness and standardization phases for both small-field dosimetry and planning. In particular, errors in small-field measurements in 8% of centers were detected thanks to a generalized output factor curve in function of the effective field size created by averaging data available from different Linacs. Furthermore, planner's experience in SBRT was correlated with dosimetric parameters in the awareness phase; while sharing median dose volume histograms (DVHs) reduced variability among centers while keeping the same level of plan complexity. Finally, all the dosimetric parameters statistically significant to the planner experience during the awareness phase, were no longer significantly different in the standardization phase.

CONCLUSIONS

The experience of our SBRT-WG has shown how a Lean Thinking mindset could foster the SBRT procedure standardization and spread the physics of SBRT knowledge, enhancing personal growth. Our expectation is to inspire other scientific societies that have to deal with fragmented contexts or pursue processes harmonization through Lean principles.

Refining complex re-irradiation dosimetry through feasibility benchmarking and analysis for informed treatment planning

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to dually evaluate the effectiveness of PlanIQ in predicting the viability and outcome of dosimetric planning in cases of complex re-irradiation as well as generating an equivalent plan through Pinnacle integration. The study also postulates that a possible strength of PlanIQ lies in mitigating pre-optimization uncertainties tied directly to dose overlap regions where re-irradiation is necessary.

METHODS

A retrospective patient selection (n = 20) included a diverse range of re-irradiation cases to be planned using Pinnacle auto-planning with PlanIQ integration. A consistent planning template was developed and applied across all cases. Direct plan comparisons of manual plans against feasibility-produced plans were performed by physician(s) with dosimetry recording relevant proximal OAR and planning timeline data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

All re-irradiation cases were successfully predicted to be achievable per PlanIQ analyses with three cases (3/20) necessitating 95% target coverage conditions, previously exhibited in the manually planned counterparts, and determined acceptable under institutional standards. At the same time, PlanIQ consistently produced plans of equal or greater quality to the previously manually planned re-irradiation across all (20/20) trials (P = 0.05). Proximal OAR exhibited similar to slightly improved maximum point doses from feasibility-based planning with the largest advantages gained found within the subset of cranial and spine overlap cases, where improvements upward of 10.9% were observed. Mean doses to proximal tissues were found to be a statistically significant (P < 0.05) 5.0% improvement across the entire study. Documented planning times were markedly less than or equal to the time contributed to manual planning across all cases.

CONCLUSION

Initial findings indicate that PlanIQ effectively provides the user clear feasibility feedback capable of facilitating decision-making on whether re-irradiation dose objectives and prescription dose coverage are possible at the onset of treatment planning thus eliminating possible trial and error associated with some manual planning. Introducing model-based prediction tools into planning of complex re-irradiation cases yielded positive outcomes on the final treatment plans.

Dosimetric comparison of dynamic conformal arc integrated with segment shape optimization and variable dose rate versus volumetric modulated arc therapy for liver SBRT

Purpose

The aim is a dosimetric comparison of dynamic conformal arc integrated with the segment shape optimization and variable dose rate (DCA_SSO_VDR) versus VMAT for liver SBRT and interaction of various treatment plan quality indices with PTV and degree of modulation (DoM) for both techniques.

Material

Twenty-five patients of liver SBRT treated using the VMAT technique were selected. DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans were also generated for all patients in Monaco TPS using the same objective constraint template and treatment planning parameters as used for the VMAT technique. For comparison purpose, organs at risk (OARs) doses and treatment plans quality indices, such as maximum dose of PTV (D_max%), mean dose of PTV (D_mean%), maximum dose at 2 cm in any direction from the PTV (D_2cm%), total monitor units (MU's), gradient index R_50%, degree of modulation (DoM), conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and healthy tissue mean dose (HTMD), were compared.

Results

Significant dosimetric differences were observed in several OARs doses and lowered in VMAT plans. The D_2cm%, R_50%, CI, HI and HTMD are dosimetrically inferior in DCA_SSO_VDR plans. The higher DoM results in poor dose gradient and better dose gradient for DCA_SSO_VDR and VMAT treatment plans, respectively.

Conclusions

For liver SBRT, DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans are neither dosimetrically superior nor better alternative to the VMAT delivery technique. A reduction of 69.75% MU was observed in DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans. For the large size of PTV and high DoM, DCA_SSO_VDR treatment plans result in poorer quality.

Estimating dose delivery accuracy in stereotactic body radiation therapy: A review of in-vivo measurement methods

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has been recognized as a standard treatment option for many anatomical sites. Sophisticated radiation therapy techniques have been developed for carrying out these treatments and new quality assurance (QA) programs are therefore required to guarantee high geometrical and dosimetric accuracy. This paper focuses on recent advances on in-vivo measurements methods (IVM) for SBRT treatment. More specifically, all of the online QA methods for estimating the effective dose delivered to patients were compared. Determining the optimal IVM for performing SBRT treatments would reduce the risk of errors that could jeopardize treatment outcome. A total of 89 papers were included. The papers were subdivided into the following topics: point dosimeters (PD), transmission detectors (TD), log file analysis (LFA), electronic portal imaging device dosimetry (EPID), dose accumulation methods (DAM). The detectability capability of the main IVM detectors/devices were evaluated. All of the systems have some limitations: PD has no spatial data, EPID has limited sensitivity towards set-up errors and intra-fraction motion in some anatomical sites, TD is insensitive towards patient related errors, LFA is not an independent measure, DAMs are not always based on measures. In order to minimize errors in SBRT dose delivery, we recommend using synergic combinations of two or more of the systems described in our review: on-line tumor position and patient information should be combined with MLC position and linac output detection accuracy. In this way the effects of SBRT dose delivery errors will be reduced.

Personalized setting of plan parameters using feasibility dose volume histogram for auto-planning in Pinnacle system

Purpose

The personalized setting of plan parameters in the Auto‐Planning module of the Pinnacle treatment planning system (TPS) using the PlanIQ feasibility tool was evaluated for lung cancer conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT).

Materials and method

We reviewed the records of ten patients with lung cancer who were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Three plans were designed for each patient: the clinically accepted manual plan (MP) and two automatic plans including one generated using the generic plan parameters in technique script (AP1) and the other generated using personalized plan parameters derived based on feasibility dose volume histogram (FDVH) in PlanIQ (AP2). The plans were assessed according to the dosimetric parameters, monitor units, and planning time. A plan quality metric (PQM) was defined according to the clinical requirements for plan assessment.

Results

AP2 achieved better lung sparing than AP1 and MP. The PQM value of AP2 (52.5 ± 14.3) was higher than those of AP1 (49.2 ± 16.2) and MP (44.8 ± 16.9) with P < 0.05. The monitor units of AP2 (585.9 ± 142.9 MU) was higher than that of AP1 (511.1 ± 136.5 MU) and lower than that of MP (632.8 ± 143.8 MU) with p < 0.05. The planning time of AP2 (33.2 ± 4.8 min) was slightly higher than that of AP1 (28.2 ± 4.0 min) and substantially lower than that of MP (72.9 ± 28.5 min) with P < 0.05.

Conclusions

The Auto‐Planning module of the Pinnacle system using personalized plan parameters suggested by the PlanIQ Feasibility tool provides superior quality for lung cancer plans, especially in terms of lung sparing. The time consumption of Auto‐Planning was slightly higher with the personalized parameters compared to that with the generic parameters, but significantly lower than that for the manual plan.

Technological quality requirements for stereotactic radiotherapy : Expert review group consensus from the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy

This review details and discusses the technological quality requirements to ensure the desired quality for stereotactic radiotherapy using photon external beam radiotherapy as defined by the DEGRO Working Group Radiosurgery and Stereotactic Radiotherapy and the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy. The covered aspects of this review are 1) imaging for target volume definition, 2) patient positioning and target volume localization, 3) motion management, 4) collimation of the irradiation and beam directions, 5) dose calculation, 6) treatment unit accuracy, and 7) dedicated quality assurance measures. For each part, an expert review for current state-of-the-art techniques and their particular technological quality requirement to reach the necessary accuracy for stereotactic radiotherapy divided into intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery in one single fraction (SRS), intracranial fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT), and extracranial stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is presented. All recommendations and suggestions for all mentioned aspects of stereotactic radiotherapy are formulated and related uncertainties and potential sources of error discussed. Additionally, further research and development needs in terms of insufficient data and unsolved problems for stereotactic radiotherapy are identified, which will serve as a basis for the future assignments of the DGMP Working Group for Physics and Technology in Stereotactic Radiotherapy. The review was group peer-reviewed, and consensus was obtained through multiple working group meetings.

Credentialing of vertebral stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy in a multi-centre trial

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) in multi-centre trials requires rigorous quality assurance to ensure safe and consistent treatment for all trial participants. We report results of vertebral SABR dosimetry credentialing for the ALTG/TROG NIVORAD trial.

MATERIAL/METHODS

Centres with a previous SABR site visit performed axial film measurement of the benchmarking vertebral plan in a local phantom and submitted radiochromic film images for analysis. Remaining centres had on-site review of SABR processes and axial film measurement of the vertebral benchmarking plan. Films were analysed for dosimetric and positional accuracy: gamma analysis (>90% passing 2%/2mm/10% threshold) and ≤ 1 mm positional accuracy at target-cord interface was required.

RESULTS

19 centres were credentialed; 11 had on-site measurement. Delivery devices included linear accelerator, TomoTherapy and CyberKnife systems. Five centres did not achieve 90% gamma passing rate. Of these, three were out of tolerance (OOT) in low (<5Gy) dose regions and > 80% passing rate and deemed acceptable. Two were OOT over the full dose range: one elected not to remeasure; the other also had positional discrepancy greater than 1 mm and repeat measurement with a new plan was in tolerance. The original OOT was attributed to inappropriate MLC constraints. All centres delivered planned target-cord dose gradient within 1 mm.

CONCLUSION

Credentialing measurements for vertebral SABR in a multi-centre trial showed although the majority of centres delivered accurate vertebral SABR, there is high value in independent audit measurements. One centre with inappropriate MLC settings was detected, which may have resulted in delivery of clinically unacceptable vertebral SABR plans.

Dosimetric Multicenter Planning Comparison Studies for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: Methodology and Future Perspectives

In this review a summary of the published literature pertaining to the stereotactic body radiation therapy multiplanning comparison, data sharing strategies, and implementation of benchmark planning cases to improve the skills and knowledge of the participating centers was investigated. A total of 30 full-text articles were included. The studies were subdivided in 3 categories: multiplanning studies on dosimetric variability, planning harmonization before clinical trials, and technical and methodologic studies. The methodology used in the studies were critically analyzed to find common and original elements with the pros and cons. Multicenter planning studies have played a key role in improving treatment plan harmonization, treatment plan compliance, and even clinical practices. This review has highlighted that some fundamental steps should be taken to transform a simple treatment planning comparison study into a potential credentialing method for stereotactic body radiation therapy accreditation. In particular, prescription and general requirements should always be well defined; data analysis should be performed with independent dose volume histogram or dose calculations; quality score indices should be constructed; feedback and correction strategies should be provided; and a simple web-based collaboration platform should be used. The results reported clearly showed that a crowd-based replanning approach is a viable method for achieving harmonization and standardization of treatment planning among centers using different technologies.

Multi-center evaluation of dose conformity in stereotactic body radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging technique for treating oligometastases, but limited data is available on what plan quality is achievable for a range of modalities and clinical sites.

METHODS

SBRT plans for lung, spine, bone, adrenal, liver and node sites from 17 participating centers were reviewed. Centers used various delivery techniques including static and rotational intensity-modulation and multiple non-coplanar beams. Plans were split into lung and other body sites and evaluated with different plan quality metrics, including two which are independent of target coverage; "prescription dose spillage" (PDS) and "modified gradient index" (MGI). These were compared to constraints from the ROSEL and RTOG 0813 clinical trials.

RESULTS

Planning target volume (PTV) coverage was compromised (PTV V100% < 90%) in 29% of patient plans in order to meet organ-at-risk (OAR) tolerances, supporting the use of plan quality metrics which are independent of target coverage. Both lung (n = 48) and other body (n = 99) site PDS values agreed well with ROSEL constraints on dose spillage, but RTOG 0813 values were too high to detect sub-optimal plans. MGI values for lung plans were mis-matched to both sets of previous constraints, with ROSEL values too high and RTOG 0813 values too low. MGI values were lower for other body plans as expected, though this was only statistically significant for PTV volumes <20 cm3.

CONCLUSIONS

Updated guidance for lung and other body site SBRT plan quality using the PDS and MGI metrics is presented.

Plan quality improvement by DVH sharing and planner's experience: Results of a SBRT multicentric planning study on prostate

PURPOSE

To evaluate, in a multi-institutional context, the role of Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) sharing in order to achieve higher plan quality, to harmonize prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) plans and to assess if the planner's experience in SBRT could lead to lower dose at organs at risk (OARs).

METHODS

During the first phase five patients enrolled for prostate SBRT were planned by multiple physicists according to common protocol. The prescription dose was 35 Gy in 5 fractions. Dosimetric parameters, modulation index (MIt), plan parameters, and planner experience level (EL) were statistically analyzed. During the second phase median DVHs from all centers were shared and physicists replanned one patient of the five, aiming at inter-planner harmonization and further OARs sparing. Data were summarized by Spearman-correlogram (p < 0.05) and boxplots. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the re-plans to the original plans.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight SBRT plans from 13 centers were evaluated. EL correlated with modulation of plan parameters and reduction of OARs doses, such as volume receiving 28 Gy of rectum (rectum-V28Gy), rectum-V32Gy, and bladder-V30Gy. The re-plans showed significant reduced variability in rectum-V28Gy and increased PTV dose homogeneity. No significant difference in plan complexity metrics and plan parameters between plans and re-plans were obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

Planner's experience in prostate SBRT was correlated with dosimetric parameters. Sharing median DVHs reduced variability among centers whilst keeping the same level of plan complexity. SBRT planning skills can benefit from a replanning phase after sharing DVHs from multiple centers, improving plan quality and concordance among centers.

Impact of plan parameters and modulation indices on patient-specific QA results for standard and stereotactic VMAT

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the impact of modulation indices and plan parameters on the gamma passing rates (GPR) of patient-specific quality assurance of standard and stereotactic volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans.

METHODS

A total of 758 patients' QA plans were utilized, including standard VMAT plans with Trilogy (n = 87, group A) and TreuBeam STx (n = 332, group B), and 339 stereotactic VMAT plans with TrueBeam STx (group C). Modulation indices were obtained considering the speed and acceleration of the multileaf collimator (MLC) (MI_s, MI_a), and MLC, gantry speed, and dose rate changes (MI_t). The mean aperture size (MA), monitor unit (MU), and amount of jaw tracking (%JT) were acquired. Gamma analysis was performed with 2 mm/2% and 1 mm/2% for the standard and stereotactic VMAT plans, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed to investigate the correlation between modulation index/plan parameters and GPR.

RESULTS

Spearman's rank correlation to GPRs with MI_s, MI_a, and MI_t, were -0.44, -0.45, and -0.46 for group A; -0.39, -0.37, and -0.38 for group B; and -0.04, -0.11, and -0.10 for group C, respectively. While MU and MA showed significant correlations in all groups, %JT showed a significant correlation only with stereotactic VMAT plans. The most influential parameter combinations were MU-MA (r_s = 0.50), MI_s-%JT (r_s = 0.43), and MU-%JT (r_s = 0.38) for groups A, B, and C, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

MLC modulation mostly affected the GPR in the delivery of standard VMAT plans, while MU and %JT showed more importance in stereotactic VMAT plans.

Community approach for reducing small field measurement errors: Experience over 24 centres

PURPOSE

The complexity of the modern Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) techniques requires comprehensive quality assurance programs, to ensure the right treatment to the patient. Dosimetry of small radiation fields is a challenge especially for radiotherapy centres starting to work on this issue. The matter to be discussed here concerns the need of detailed measurement procedures and cross checks to be paired to the usual recommendations on detectors and correction factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The presented work involved 24 Italian radiotherapy centres, with the specific purpose to minimize systematic errors in output factor measurements over different radiotherapy centres. Using the unshielded silicon diode IBA Razor, reference curves for the relative signal ratio (RSR) as a function of beam size were created for each Linac family.

RESULTS

With this study we have demonstrated consistency of small field dosimetry on all the centres involved, moreover all radiotherapy centres using Razor are allowed to compare measurements amongst each other and centres with values deviating more than 5% from the reference curve are advised to repeat their measurements. With this procedure, some critical issues were detected from two centres in RSR measurements, that, if implemented into the own treatment planning system, would induce an unwanted overdosage larger than 5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed approach could allow one to envision high-skilled therapy centres providing support to those featuring minor experience and could represent an important strategy for the clinical implementation of emerging technologies at high quality levels. The methodology adopted exploits crowd knowledge methods which could be applied in others areas of radiation dosimetry.

SBRT planning for spinal metastasis: indications from a large multicentric study

BACKGROUND

The dosimetric variability in spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) planning was investigated in a large number of centres to identify crowd knowledge-based solutions.

METHODS

Two spinal cases were planned by 48 planners (38 centres). The required prescription dose (PD) was 3 × 10 Gy and the planning target volume (PTV) coverage request was: V_PD > 90% (minimum request: V_PD > 80%). The dose constraints were: planning risk volume (PRV) spinal cord: V_18Gy < 0.35 cm³, V_{21.9 Gy} < 0.03 cm³; oesophagus: V_{17.7 Gy} < 5 cm³, V_{25.2 Gy} < 0.03 cm³. Planners who did not fulfil the protocol requirements were asked to re-optimize the plans, using the results of planners with the same technology. Statistical analysis was performed to assess correlations between dosimetric results and planning parameters. A quality index (QI) was defined for scoring plans.

RESULTS

In all, 12.5% of plans did not meet the protocol requirements. After re-optimization, 98% of plans fulfilled the constraints, showing the positive impact of knowledge sharing. Statistical analysis showed a significant correlation (p < 0.05) between the homogeneity index (HI) and PTV coverage for both cases, while the correlation between HI and spinal cord sparing was significant only for the single dorsal PTV case. Moreover, the multileaf collimator leaf thickness correlated with the spinal cord sparing. Planners using comparable delivery/planning system techniques produced different QI, highlighting the impact of the planner's skills in the optimization process.

CONCLUSION

Both the technology and the planner's skills are fundamentally important in spine SBRT planning optimization. Knowledge sharing helped to follow the plan objectives.

Feasibility of anatomical feature points for the estimation of prostate locations in the Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy

This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of anatomical feature points for the estimation of prostate locations in the Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy. The relationships between the reference centroids of prostate regions (CPRs) (prostate locations) and anatomical feature points were explored, and the most feasible anatomical feature points were selected based on the smallest location estimation errors of CPRs and the largest Dice's similarity coefficient (DSC) between the reference and extracted prostates. The reference CPRs were calculated according to reference prostate contours determined by radiation oncologists. Five anatomical feature points were manually determined on a prostate, bladder, and rectum in a sagittal plane of a planning computed tomography image for each case. The CPRs were estimated using three machine learning architectures [artificial neural network, random forest, and support vector machine (SVM)], which learned the relationships between the reference CPRs and anatomical feature points. The CPRs were applied for placing a prostate probabilistic atlas at the coordinates and extracting prostate regions using a Bayesian delineation framework. The average estimation errors without and with SVM using three feature points, which indicated the best performance, were 5.6 ± 3.7 mm and 1.8 ± 1.0 mm, respectively (the smallest error) (p < 0.001). The average DSCs without and with SVM using the three feature points were 0.69 ± 0.13 and 0.82 ± 0.055, respectively (the highest DSC) (p < 0.001). The anatomical feature points may be feasible for the estimation of prostate locations, which can be applied to the general Bayesian delineation frameworks for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

The impact of technology on the changing practice of lung SBRT

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for lung tumours has been gaining wide acceptance in lung cancer. Here, we review the technological evolution of SBRT delivery in lung cancer, from the first treatments using the stereotactic body frame in the 1990's to modern developments in image guidance and motion management. Finally, we discuss the impact of current technological approaches on the requirements for quality assurance as well as future technological developments.

Interfractional diaphragm changes during breath-holding in stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver cancer

Aim and background

IGRT based on bone matching may produce a large target positioning error in terms of the reproducibility of expiration breath-holding on SBRT for liver cancer. We evaluated the intrafractional and interfractional errors using the diaphragm position at the end of expiration by utilising Abches and analysed the factor of the interfractional error.

Materials and methods

Intrafractional and interfractional errors were measured using a couple of frontal kV images, planning computed tomography (pCT) and daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Moreover, max-min diaphragm position within daily CBCT image sets with respect to pCT and the maximum value of diaphragm position difference between CBCT and pCT were calculated.

Results

The mean ± SD (standard deviation) of the intra-fraction diaphragm position variation in the frontal kV images was 1.0 ± 0.7 mm in the C-C direction. The inter-fractional diaphragm changes were 0.4 ± 4.6 mm in the C-C direction, 1.4 ± 2.2 mm in the A-P direction, and -0.6 ± 1.8 mm in the L-R direction. There were no significant differences between the maximum value of the max-min diaphragm position within daily CBCT image sets with respect to pCT and the maximum value of diaphragm position difference between CBCT and pCT.

Conclusions

Residual intrafractional variability of diaphragm position is minimal, but large interfractional diaphragm changes were observed. There was a small effect in the patient condition difference between pCT and CBCT. The impact of the difference in daily breath-holds on the interfractional diaphragm position was large or the difference in daily breath-holding heavily influenced the interfractional diaphragm change.

Evaluation of a commercial automatic treatment planning system for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatments

PURPOSE

Automated treatment planning is a new frontier in radiotherapy. The Auto-Planning module of the Pinnacle³ treatment planning system (TPS) was evaluated for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatments.

METHODS

Ten cases were included in the study. Six plans were generated for each case by four medical physics experts. The first two planned with Pinnacle TPS, both with manual module (MP) and Auto-Planning one (AP). The other two physicists generated two plans with Monaco TPS (VM). Treatment plan comparisons were then carried on the various dosimetric parameters of target and organs at risk, monitor units, number of segments, plan complexity metrics and human resource planning time. The user dependency of Auto-Planning was also tested and the plans were evaluated by a trained physician.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences (Anova test) were observed for spinal cord doses, plan average beam irregularity, number of segments, monitor units and human planning time. The Fisher-Hayter test applied to these parameters showed significant statistical differences between AP e MP for spinal cord doses and human planning time; between MP and VM for monitor units, number of segments and plan irregularity; for all those between AP and VM. The two plans created by different planners with AP were similar to each other.

CONCLUSIONS

The plans created with Auto-Planning were comparable to the manually generated plans. The time saved in planning enables the planner to commit more resources to more complex cases. The independence of the planner enables to standardize plan quality.

Editorial: The role of medical physics in lung SBRT

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a standard treatment for non-operable patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this context, medical physics community has largely helped in the starting and the growth of this technique. In fact, SBRT requires the convergence of many different features for delivering large doses in few fractions to small moving target in an heterogeneous medium. The special issue of last month, was focused on the different physics challenges in lung SBRT. Eleven reviews were presented, covering: imaging for treatment planning and for treatment assessment; dosimetry and planning optimization; treatment delivery possibilities; image guidance during delivery; radiobiology. The current cutting edge role of medical physics was reported. We aimed to give a complete overview of different aspects of lung SBRT that would be of interest to both physicists implementing this technique in their institutions and more experienced physicists that would be inspired to start research projects in areas that still need further developments. We also feel that the role that medical physicists have played in the development and safe implementation of SBRT, particularly in lung region, can be taken as an excellent example to be translated to other areas, not only in Radiation Oncology but also in other health sectors.

Frontiers in planning optimization for lung SBRT

Emerging data are showing the safety and the efficacy of Stereotactic Body Radiation therapy (SBRT) in lung cancer management. In this context, the very high doses delivered to the Planning Target Volume, make the planning phase essential for achieving high dose levels conformed to the shape of the target in order to have a good prognosis for tumor control and to avoid an overdose in relevant healthy adjacent tissue. In this non-systematic review we analyzed the technological and the physics aspects of SBRT planning for lung cancer. In particular, the aims of the study were: (i) to evaluate prescription strategies (homogeneous or inhomogeneous), (ii) to outline possible geometrical solutions by comparing the dosimetric results (iii) to describe the technological possibilities for a safe and effective treatment, (iv) to present the issues concerning radiobiological planning and the automation of the planning process.

Impact of pixel-based machine-learning techniques on automated frameworks for delineation of gross tumor volume regions for stereotactic body radiation therapy

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of pixel-based machine learning (ML) techniques, i.e., fuzzy-c-means clustering method (FCM), and the artificial neural network (ANN) and support vector machine (SVM), on an automated framework for delineation of gross tumor volume (GTV) regions of lung cancer for stereotactic body radiation therapy. The morphological and metabolic features for GTV regions, which were determined based on the knowledge of radiation oncologists, were fed on a pixel-by-pixel basis into the respective FCM, ANN, and SVM ML techniques. Then, the ML techniques were incorporated into the automated delineation framework of GTVs followed by an optimum contour selection (OCS) method, which we proposed in a previous study. The three-ML-based frameworks were evaluated for 16 lung cancer cases (six solid, four ground glass opacity (GGO), six part-solid GGO) with the datasets of planning computed tomography (CT) and ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT images using the three-dimensional Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). DSC denotes the degree of region similarity between the GTVs contoured by radiation oncologists and those estimated using the automated framework. The FCM-based framework achieved the highest DSCs of 0.79±0.06, whereas DSCs of the ANN-based and SVM-based frameworks were 0.76±0.14 and 0.73±0.14, respectively. The FCM-based framework provided the highest segmentation accuracy and precision without a learning process (lowest calculation cost). Therefore, the FCM-based framework can be useful for delineation of tumor regions in practical treatment planning.

Sparing dysphagia/aspiration related structures using novel hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE

Studies using split field IMRT to spare dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS) have raised concern regarding dose uncertainty at matchline. This study explores the utility of hybrid VMAT in sparing the DARS and assesses matchline dose uncertainty in postoperative oral cavity cancer patients and compares it with VMAT.

METHODS & MATERIALS

Ten postoperative oral cavity cancer patients were planned with h-VMAT and VMAT using the same planning CT dataset. PTV and DARS were contoured using standard delineation guidelines. In h-VMAT 80% of the neck dose was planned using AP/PA technique and then VMAT optimization was done for the total PTV by keeping the corresponding AP/PA plan as the base dose. Planning goal for PTV was V_95%≥95% and for DARS, adequate sparing. Plans and dose volume histograms were analyzed using dosimetric indices. Absolute point and portal dose measurements were done for h-VMAT plans to verify dose at the matchline.

RESULTS

Coverage in both the techniques was comparable. Significant differences were observed in mean doses to DARS (Larynx: 24.36±2.51 versus 16.88±2.41Gy; p<0.0006, Pharyngeal constrictors: 25.16±2.41 versus 21.2±2.1Gy; p<0.005, Esophageal inlet: 18.71±2 versus 12.06±0.79Gy; p<0.0002) favoring h-VMAT. Total MU in both the techniques was comparable. Average percentage variations in point dose measurements in h-VMAT done at +3.5 and -3.5 positions were (1.47±1.48 and 2.28±1.35%) respectively. Average gamma agreement for portal dose measured was 97.07%.

CONCLUSION

h-VMAT achieves better sparing of DARS with no matchline dose uncertainty. Since these patients have swallowing dysfunction post-operatively, attempts should be made to spare these critical structures as much as possible.

A mouse radiation-induced liver disease model for stereotactic body radiation therapy validated in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

Lower radiation tolerance of the whole liver hinders dose escalations of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment. This study was conducted to define the exact doses that result in radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) as well as to determine dose constraints for the critical organs at risk (OARs) in mice; these parameters are still undefined in HCC SBRT.

METHODS

This study consisted of two phases. In the primary phase, mice treated with helical tomotherapy-based SBRT were stratified according to escalating radiation doses to the livers. The pathological differences, signs [such as mouse performance status (MPS)], and serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/albumin levels were observed. Radiation-induced disease severities of the OARs were scored using systematic evaluation standards. In the validation phase in humans, 13 patients with HCC who had undergone radiotherapy before hepatectomy were enrolled to validate RILD pathological changes in a mouse study.

RESULTS

The evaluation criteria of the mouse liver radiotherapy-related signs were as follows: MPS ≥ 2.0 ± 0.52, AST/ALT ≥ 589.2 ± 118.5/137.4 ± 15.3 U/L, serum albumin ≤ 16.8 ± 2.29 g/L. The preliminary dose constraints of the OARs were also obtained, such as those for the liver (average dose ≤ 26.36 ± 1.71 Gy) and gastrointestinal tract (maximum dose ≤ 22.63 Gy). Mouse RILD models were able to be developed when the livers were irradiated with average doses of ≥31.76 ± 1.94 Gy (single fraction). RILD pathological changes in mice have also been validated in HCC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Mouse RILD models could be developed with SBRT based on the dose constraints for the OARs and evaluation criteria of mouse liver radiotherapy-related signs, and the authors' results favor the study of further approaches to treat HCC with SBRT.

Outcome Evaluation of Oligometastatic Patients Treated with Surgical Resection Followed by Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery (HSRS) on the Tumor Bed, for Single, Large Brain Metastases

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of a combined treatment, surgery followed by adjuvant hypofractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (HSRS) on the tumor bed, in oligometastatic patients with single, large brain metastasis (BM).

Methods and Materials

Fom January 2011 to March 2015, 69 patients underwent complete surgical resection followed by HSRS with a total dose of 30Gy in 3 daily fractions. Clinical outcome was evaluated by neurological examination and MRI 2 months after radiotherapy and then every 3 months. Local progression was defined as radiographic increase of the enhancing abnormality in the irradiated volume, and brain distant progression as the presence of new brain metastases or leptomeningeal enhancement outside the irradiated volume. Surgical morbidity and radiation-therapy toxicity, local control (LC), brain distant progression (BDP), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.

Results

The median preoperative volume and maximum diameter of BM was 18.5cm³ (range 4.1–64.2cm³) and 3.6cm (range 2.1-5-4cm); the median CTV was 29.0cm³ (range 4.1–203.1cm³) and median PTV was 55.2cm³ (range 17.2–282.9cm³). The median follow-up time was 24 months (range 4–33 months). The 1-and 2-year LC in site of treatment was 100%; the median, 1-and 2-year BDP was 11.9 months, 19.6% and 33.0%; the median, 1-and 2-year OS was 24 months (range 4–33 months), 91.3% and 73.0%. No severe postoperative morbidity or radiation therapy toxicity occurred in our series.

Conclusions

Multimodal approach, surgery followed by HSRS, can be an effective treatment option for selected patients with single, large brain metastases from different solid tumors.

Hypo-fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy alone using volumetric modulated arc therapy for patients with single, large brain metastases unsuitable for surgical resection

BACKGROUND

Hypo-fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (HSRT) is emerging as a valid treatment option for patients with single, large brain metastases (BMs). We analyzed a set of our patients treated with HSRT. The aim of this study was to evaluate local control (LC), brain distant progression (BDP), toxicity and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

From July 2011 to May 2015, 102 patients underwent HSRT consisting of 27Gy/3fractions for lesions 2.1-3 cm and 32Gy/4 fractions for lesions 3.1-5 cm. Local progression was defined as increase of the enhancing abnormality on MRI, and distant progression as new brain metastases outside the irradiated volume. Toxicity in terms of radio-necrosis was assessed using contrast enhanced T1MRI, T2 weighted-MRI and perfusion- MRI.

RESULT

The median maximum diameter of BM was 2.9 cm (range 2.1-5 cm), the median gross target volume (GTV) was 16.3 cm(3) and the median planning target volume (PTV) was 33.7 cm(3) The median,1,2-year local control rate was 30 months, 96, 96 %; the median, 1-2-year rate of BDP was 24 months, 12, 24 %; the median,1,2-year OS was 14 months, 69, 33 %. KPS and controlled extracranial disease were associated with significant survival benefit (p <0.01). Brain radio-necrosis occurred in six patients (5.8 %).

CONCLUSION

In patients with single, large BMs unsuitable for surgical resection, HSRT is a safe and feasible treatment, with good brain local control and limited toxicity.

Clinical results of mean GTV dose optimized robotic guided SBRT for liver metastases

Background

We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of gross tumor volume (GTV) mean-dose-optimized and real-time motion-compensated robotic stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in the treatment of liver metastases.

Methods

Between March 2011 and July 2015, 52 patients were treated with SBRT for a total of 91 liver metastases (one to four metastases per patient) with a median GTV volume of 12 cc (min 1 cc, max 372 cc). The optimization of mean GTV dose was prioritized during treatment planning at the potential cost of planning target volume (PTV) coverage reduction while adhering to safe normal tissue constraints. The delivered median GTV biological effective dose (BED₁₀) was 142.1 Gy₁₀ (range, 60.2 Gy₁₀ –165.3 Gy₁₀) and the prescribed PTV BED₁₀ ranged from 40.6 Gy₁₀ to 112.5 Gy₁₀ (median, 86.1 Gy₁₀). We analyzed local control (LC), progression-free interval (PFI), overall survival (OS), and toxicity.

Results

Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 2–49 months). The 2-year actuarial LC, PFI, and OS rates were 82.1, 17.7, and 45.0 %, and the median PFI and OS were 9 and 23 months, respectively. In univariate analysis histology (p < 0.001), PTV prescription BED₁₀ (HR 0.95, CI 0.91–0.98, p = 0.002) and GTV mean BED₁₀ (HR 0.975, CI 0.954–0.996, p = 0.011) were predictive for LC. Multivariate analysis showed that only extrahepatic disease status at time of treatment was a significant factor (p = 0.033 and p = 0.009, respectively) for PFI and OS. Acute nausea or fatigue grade 1 was observed in 24.1 % of the patients and only 1 patient (1.9 %) had a side effect of grade ≥ 2.

Conclusions

Robotic real-time motion-compensated SBRT is a safe and effective treatment for one to four liver metastases. Reducing the PTV prescription dose and keeping a high mean GTV dose allowed the reduction of toxicity while maintaining a high local control probability for the treated lesions.

Variability in spine radiosurgery treatment planning - results of an international multi-institutional study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to quantify the variability in spinal radiosurgery (SRS) planning practices between five international institutions, all member of the Elekta Spine Radiosurgery Research Consortium.

METHODS

Four institutions provided one representative patient case each consisting of the medical history, CT and MR imaging. A step-wise planning approach was used where, after each planning step a consensus was generated that formed the basis for the next planning step. This allowed independent analysis of all planning steps of CT-MR image registration, GTV definition, CTV definition, PTV definition and SRS treatment planning. In addition, each institution generated one additional SRS plan for each case based on intra-institutional image registration and contouring, independent of consensus results.

RESULTS

Averaged over the four cases, image registration variability ranged between translational 1.1 mm and 2.4 mm and rotational 1.1° and 2.0° in all three directions. GTV delineation variability was 1.5 mm in axial and 1.6 mm in longitudinal direction averaged for the four cases. CTV delineation variability was 0.8 mm in axial and 1.2 mm in longitudinal direction. CTV-to-PTV margins ranged between 0 mm and 2 mm according to institutional protocol. Delineation variability was 1 mm in axial directions for the spinal cord. Average PTV coverage for a single fraction18 Gy prescription was 87 ± 5 %; Dmin to the PTV was 7.5 ± 1.8 Gy averaged over all cases and institutions. Average Dmax to the PRV_SC (spinal cord + 1 mm) was 10.5 ± 1.6 Gy and the average Paddick conformity index was 0.69 ± 0.06.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study reflect the variability in current practice of spine radiosurgery in large and highly experienced academic centers. Despite close methodical agreement in the daily workflow, clinically significant variability in all steps of the treatment planning process was demonstrated. This may translate into differences in patient clinical outcome and highlights the need for consensus and established delineation and planning criteria.