A treatment planning study evaluating a 'simultaneous integrated boost' technique for accelerated radiotherapy of stage III non-small cell lung cancer

Trends in radiotherapy inpatient admissions in Germany: a population-based study over a 10-year period

Objective

With the increasing complexity of oncological therapy, the number of inpatient admissions to radiotherapy and non-radiotherapy departments might have changed. In this study, we aim to quantify the number of inpatient cases and the number of radiotherapy fractions delivered under inpatient conditions in radiotherapy and non-radiotherapy departments.

Methods

The analysis is founded on data of all hospitalized cases in Germany based on Diagnosis-Related Group Statistics (G-DRG Statistics, delivered by the Research Data Centers of the Federal Statistical Office). The dataset includes information on the main diagnosis of cases (rather than patients) and the performed procedures during hospitalization based on claims of reimbursement. We used linear regression models to analyze temporal trends. The considered data encompass the period from 2008 to 2017.

Results

Overall, the number of patients treated with radiotherapy as inpatients remained constant between 2008 (N = 90,952) and 2017 (N = 88,998). Starting in January 2008, 48.9% of 4000 monthly cases received their treatment solely in a radiation oncology department. This figure decreased to 43.7% of 2971 monthly cases in October 2017. We found a stepwise decrease between December 2011 and January 2012 amounting to 4.3%. Fractions received in radiotherapy departments decreased slightly by 29.3 (95% CI: 14.0–44.5) fractions per month. The number of days hospitalized in radiotherapy departments decreased by 83.4 (95% CI: 59.7, 107.0) days per month, starting from a total of 64,842 days in January 2008 to 41,254 days in 2017. Days per case decreased from 16.2 in January 2008 to 13.9 days in October 2017.

Conclusion

Our data give evidence to the notion that radiotherapy remains a discipline with an important inpatient component. Respecting reimbursement measures and despite older patients with more comorbidities, radiotherapy institutions could sustain a constant number of cases with limited temporal shifts.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00066-021-01829-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Application of Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer]

背景与目的

局部晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC）的标准治疗方案为放疗联合化疗，但其生存仍不令人满意。随着调强放疗技术的发展，同步推量（simultaneous integrated boost, SIB）技术成为局部晚期NSCLC的研究方向。本研究拟探讨局部晚期NSCLC采用SIB调强放疗技术的有效性和安全性。

方法

回顾性分析北京大学肿瘤医院2015年6月-2018年12月采用SIB技术进行放疗的局部晚期NSCLC患者资料，采用Kaplan-Meier方法进行统计分析，分析其疗效、生存及治疗相关毒性。

结果

研究纳入93例患者，中位随访时间34.23个月，3年生存率、无进展生存率、无局部区域复发生存率和无远处转移生存率分别为53.0%、37.0%、50.5%和50.5%。3级放射性食管炎发生率为5.4%，≥3级放射性肺炎发生率为2.2%。

结论

局部晚期NSCLC采用SIB调强放疗技术安全有效。

Simultaneous Integrated Boost for Radiation Dose Escalation to the Gross Tumor Volume With Intensity Modulated (Photon) Radiation Therapy or Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy and Concurrent Chemotherapy for Stage II to III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 1 Study

PURPOSE

To establish, in the phase 1 portion of a prospective phase 1/2 study, the maximum tolerated dose of image guided intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton therapy (IMPT), both with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), for patients with stage II to IIIB non-small cell lung cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients had pathologically proven non-small cell lung cancer, either unresectable stage II to IIIB disease or recurrent disease after surgical resection, and could tolerate concurrent chemoradiation. Radiation doses were selectively escalated to the SIB volume (internal gross tumor volume + 5-mm margin), and the dose to the planning target volume (internal gross tumor volume + 8-mm margin for clinical target volume + 5 mm) was kept at 60 Gy [cobalt gray equivalent (CGE)] over 30 fractions. Patients were randomized between the IMRT and IMPT groups if slots were available on the treatment machines for both groups. Otherwise, patients were allocated to IMRT or IMPT, whichever had an open treatment slot on the machine without randomization.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (6 IMRT, 9 IMPT) were enrolled. The highest doses to the SIB were 72 Gy in the IMRT group and 78 Gy(CGE) in the IMPT group. Nine patients (6 IMRT, 3 IMPT) received an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 89.3 Gy(CGE)], and 6 patients (IMPT) received an SIB dose of 78 Gy(CGE) [biologically effective dose = 98.3 Gy(CGE)]. Dose-limiting (grade ≥3) toxicity (esophagitis) developed in 1 of the 9 patients given 72 Gy(CGE) SIB. Grade ≥3 pneumonitis developed in 2 of the 6 patients treated to 78 Gy(CGE) IMPT SIB: 1 (grade 3) at 3 months after treatment and the other (grade 5, possibly related to treatment) at 2 months after treatment. Only 1 patient developed a marginal tumor recurrence with a median follow-up of 25 months (range, 4.3-47.4 months).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that an SIB dose of 72 Gy(CGE) be used as the highest SIB dose for the planned randomized phase 2 study.

Neoadjuvant Gemcitabine Chemotherapy followed by Concurrent IMRT Simultaneous Boost Achieves High R0 Resection in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Patients

Background

To study the feasibility of down stage the borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) to resectable disease, we reported our institutional results using an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) dose escalation approach to improve R0 resectability.

Methods

We reviewed our past 7 years of experience of using neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy with Gemcitabine followed by concurrent chemoradiaiton for BRPC. During the concurrent, chemo was 5-FU and radiation were IMRT with SIB technique to target the key areas with dose escalation to 5600 in 28 fractions. The key areas were defined by PET positive area. This was followed by restaging imaging to rule out distant metastases before resection.

Results

25 finished dose escalation protocol. 2 of the 25 cases developed distant metastases, 23 (92%) patients without distant metastases underwent pancreatectomy. Among the those received pancreatectomy, 22 (95%) achieved negative margin (R0). The gastrointestinal toxicity > grade 2 was 8% and there was no grade 4 toxicity.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant Gemcitabine-based induction chemotherapy followed by 5-FU-based IMRT-SIB is a feasible option in improving the likelihood of R0 resection rate in BRPC without compromising the organs at risk for toxicity.

Use of simultaneous radiation boost achieves high control rates in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who are not candidates for surgery or conventional chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) has improved the local disease control at a variety of anatomic sites. However, little is known about its use in lung cancer, especially in the context of shorter treatment schedules (hypofractionation). We analyzed the feasibility, toxicity, and patterns of failure of this approach for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were not candidates for surgery or standard concurrent chemoradiation therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified 71 patients with NSCLC who received IMRT+SIB in 15 fractions to ≥ 52.5 Gy from January 2007 to February 2013. Toxicity and local control were evaluated for all patients.

RESULTS

Of the 71 patients, 11 (16%) had stage I to II NSCLC, 15 (21%) stage III, and 45 (63%) stage IV. The esophagitis rate was grade 0 to 1 in 55%, grade 2 in 39%, and grade ≥ 3 in 6%. One patient developed a bronchoesophageal fistula 6 months after radiation. The pneumonitis rate was grade 0 to 1 in 93%, grade 2 in 6%, and grade 3 in 1%. At the time of analysis, 17 (24%) patients had local failure at a median of 5.2 months (range, < 1-16.1) after treatment. All but 1 failure occurred within the higher dose region.

CONCLUSION

Hypofractionated IMRT+SIB is a viable option for some patients with NSCLC, with little high-grade toxicity overall. Nearly all local failures occurred within the higher dose region, implying strong radioresistance or some other mechanism for recurrence in a subgroup of patients.

Breast conserving treatment for breast cancer: dosimetric comparison of sequential versus simultaneous integrated photon boost

BACKGROUND

Breast conserving surgery followed by whole breast irradiation is widely accepted as standard of care for early breast cancer. Addition of a boost dose to the initial tumor area further reduces local recurrences. We investigated the dosimetric benefits of a simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) compared to a sequential boost to hypofractionate the boost volume, while maintaining normofractionation on the breast.

METHODS

For 10 patients 4 treatment plans were deployed, 1 with a sequential photon boost, and 3 with different SIB techniques: on a conventional linear accelerator, helical TomoTherapy, and static TomoDirect. Dosimetric comparison was performed.

RESULTS

PTV-coverage was good in all techniques. Conformity was better with all SIB techniques compared to sequential boost (P = 0.0001). There was less dose spilling to the ipsilateral breast outside the PTVboost (P = 0.04). The dose to the organs at risk (OAR) was not influenced by SIB compared to sequential boost. Helical TomoTherapy showed a higher mean dose to the contralateral breast, but less than 5 Gy for each patient.

CONCLUSIONS

SIB showed less dose spilling within the breast and equal dose to OAR compared to sequential boost. Both helical TomoTherapy and the conventional technique delivered acceptable dosimetry. SIB seems a safe alternative and can be implemented in clinical routine.

High-dose simultaneously integrated breast boost using intensity-modulated radiotherapy and inverse optimization

PURPOSE

Recently a Phase III randomized trial has started comparing a boost of 16 Gy as part of whole-breast irradiation to a high boost of 26 Gy in young women. Our main aim was to develop an efficient simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) technique for the high-dose arm of the trial.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Treatment planning was performed for 5 left-sided and 5 right-sided tumors. A tangential field intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique added to a sequentially planned 3-field boost (SEQ) was compared with a simultaneously planned technique (SIB) using inverse optimization. Normalized total dose (NTD)-corrected dose volume histogram parameters were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

The intended NTD was produced by 31 fractions of 1.66 Gy to the whole breast and 2.38 Gy to the boost volume. The average volume of the PTV-breast and PTV-boost receiving more than 95% of the prescribed dose was 97% or more for both techniques. Also, the mean lung dose and mean heart dose did not differ much between the techniques, with on average 3.5 Gy and 2.6 Gy for the SEQ and 3.8 Gy and 2.6 Gy for the SIB, respectively. However, the SIB resulted in a significantly more conformal irradiation of the PTV-boost. The volume of the PTV-breast, excluding the PTV-boost, receiving a dose higher than 95% of the boost dose could be reduced considerably using the SIB as compared with the SEQ from 129 cc (range, 48-262 cc) to 58 cc (range, 30-102 cc).

CONCLUSIONS

A high-dose simultaneously integrated breast boost technique has been developed. The unwanted excessive dose to the breast was significantly reduced.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer

AIM: To evaluate the dosimetry, efficacy and toxicity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and concurrent chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 7 patients who were definitively treated with IMRT and concurrent chemotherapy. Patients who did not receive IMRT radiation and concurrent chemotherapy were not included in this analysis. IMRT plans were evaluated to assess the tumor coverage and normal tissue avoidance. Treatment response was evaluated and toxicities were assessed.

RESULTS: Five- to nine-beam IMRT were used to deliver a total dose of 59.4-66 Gy (median: 64.8 Gy) to the primary tumor with 6-MV photons. The minimum dose received by the planning tumor volume (PTV) of the gross tumor volume boost was 91.2%-98.2% of the prescription dose (standard deviation [SD]: 3.7%-5.7%). The minimum dose received by the PTV of the clinical tumor volume was 93.8%-104.8% (SD: 4.3%-11.1%) of the prescribed dose. With a median follow-up of 15 mo (range: 3-21 mo), all 6 evaluable patients achieved complete response. Of them, 2 developed local recurrences and 2 had distant metastases, 3 survived with no evidence of disease. After treatment, 2 patients developed esophageal stricture requiring frequent dilation and 1 patient developed tracheal-esophageal fistula.

CONCLUSION: Concurrent IMRT and chemotherapy resulted in an excellent early response in patients with locally advanced cervical and upper thoracic esophageal cancer. However, local and distant recurrence and toxicity remain to be a problem. Innovative approaches are needed to improve the outcome.

Effect of patient setup errors on simultaneously integrated boost head and neck IMRT treatment plans

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to determine dose delivery errors that could result from random and systematic setup errors for head-and-neck patients treated using the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)-intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) technique.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty-four patients who participated in an intramural Phase I/II parotid-sparing IMRT dose-escalation protocol using the SIB treatment technique had their dose distributions reevaluated to assess the impact of random and systematic setup errors. The dosimetric effect of random setup error was simulated by convolving the two-dimensional fluence distribution of each beam with the random setup error probability density distribution. Random setup errors of sigma = 1, 3, and 5 mm were simulated. Systematic setup errors were simulated by randomly shifting the patient isocenter along each of the three Cartesian axes, with each shift selected from a normal distribution. Systematic setup error distributions with Sigma = 1.5 and 3.0 mm along each axis were simulated. Combined systematic and random setup errors were simulated for sigma = Sigma = 1.5 and 3.0 mm along each axis. For each dose calculation, the gross tumor volume (GTV) received by 98% of the volume (D(98)), clinical target volume (CTV) D(90), nodes D(90), cord D(2), and parotid D(50) and parotid mean dose were evaluated with respect to the plan used for treatment for the structure dose and for an effective planning target volume (PTV) with a 3-mm margin.

RESULTS

Simultaneous integrated boost-IMRT head-and-neck treatment plans were found to be less sensitive to random setup errors than to systematic setup errors. For random-only errors, errors exceeded 3% only when the random setup error sigma exceeded 3 mm. Simulated systematic setup errors with Sigma = 1.5 mm resulted in approximately 10% of plan having more than a 3% dose error, whereas a Sigma = 3.0 mm resulted in half of the plans having more than a 3% dose error and 28% with a 5% dose error. Combined random and systematic dose errors with sigma = Sigma = 3.0 mm resulted in more than 50% of plans having at least a 3% dose error and 38% of the plans having at least a 5% dose error. Evaluation with respect to a 3-mm expanded PTV reduced the observed dose deviations greater than 5% for the sigma = Sigma = 3.0 mm simulations to 5.4% of the plans simulated.

CONCLUSIONS

Head-and-neck SIB-IMRT dosimetric accuracy would benefit from methods to reduce patient systematic setup errors. When GTV, CTV, or nodal volumes are used for dose evaluation, plans simulated including the effects of random and systematic errors deviate substantially from the nominal plan. The use of PTVs for dose evaluation in the nominal plan improves agreement with evaluated GTV, CTV, and nodal dose values under simulated setup errors. PTV concepts should be used for SIB-IMRT head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma patients, although the size of the margins may be less than those used with three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy.

Dosimetric advantages of IMRT simultaneous integrated boost for high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE

A sequential two-phase process, initial and boost irradiation, is the common practice for the radiotherapy management of high-risk prostate cancer. In this work, we explore the feasibility of using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) simultaneous integrated boost (SIB), a single-phase process, to simultaneously deliver high dose to the prostate and lower dose to the pelvic nodes. In addition, we introduce the concept of voxel-equivalent dose for the comparison of treatment plans.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The SIB is designed to deliver the same dose (e.g., 45 Gy, 25 x 1.8 Gy) as the conventional method to the pelvic nodes and to deliver higher doses to prostate in the same 25 fractions (i.e., hypofractionation). The equivalent uniform dose (EUD) was used to determine suitable SIB fractionations that deliver the biologically equivalent doses to prostate. For tumor, the EUD was estimated based on the linear quadratic (LQ) model. The most recent LQ parameters derived from clinical data for prostate cancer were used. The sensitivity of LQ parameters was evaluated. The EUD for normal tissue was computed based on the widely used Lyman model. To be able to consider biologic effectiveness spatially (e.g., voxel by voxel), we propose a new concept, termed the voxel-equivalent dose (VED). The calculation of VED was similar to that for EUD, except that it was done within a voxel. To demonstrate dosimetric feasibility and advantages of the proposed IMRT SIB, we have performed a retrospective planning study on selected patient cases using commercial IMRT and three-dimensional (3D) planning systems. Four treatment scenarios were considered: (1) the conventional 3D plan for initial whole-pelvic irradiation and subsequent conventional 3D boost plan for prostate gland, (2) the conventional 3D plan for initial whole-pelvic irradiation and subsequent IMRT boost plan for prostate, (3) IMRT plan for initial whole-pelvic irradiation and subsequent IMRT boost plan for prostate, and (4) IMRT SIB. EUDs and VED-based dose-volume histograms for prostate, pelvic nodes, small bowel, rectum, bladder, and other tissue for all 4 scenarios were compared.

RESULTS

A series of equivalent hypofractionation regimens suitable for the IMRT SIB were obtained for high-risk prostate cancer. For example, the conventional treatment regimen of 42 x 1.8 Gy (EUD = 75.4 Gy) would be equivalent to a SIB regimen of 25 x 2.54 Gy. From the comparison of 3D VED dose distributions and dose-volume histograms between the SIB and the conventional two-phase irradiation, we found that the SIB offers better or equivalent dose conformity to prostate and pelvic nodes and better sparing to the critical structures. For example, for the 4 treatment scenarios with a prostate EUD of 75.4 Gy, the corresponding rectal EUDs are 67.1 (3D + 3D), 65.6 Gy (3D + IMRT), 63.7 Gy (IMRT + IMRT), and 62.0 Gy (SIB).

CONCLUSIONS

A new IMRT simultaneous integrated boost strategy that irradiates prostate via hypofractionation while irradiating pelvic nodes with the conventional fractionation is proposed for high-risk prostate cancer. Compared to the conventional two-phase treatment, the proposed SIB technique offers potential advantages, including better sparing of critical structures, more efficient delivery, shorter treatment duration, and better biologic effectiveness.