Split-Volume Treatment Planning of Multiple Consecutive Vertebral Body Metastases for Cyberknife Image-Guided Robotic Radiosurgery

Comparison of whole versus partial vertebral body stereotactic body radiation therapy for spinal metastases

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the difference in clinical outcomes for patients with metastatic spine disease treated with a whole versus partial vertebral body contouring approach. A retrospective study was performed for the clinical outcomes of 154 metastatic lesions to the spine in 117 patients treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using the Cyberknife(TM) Robotic Radiosurgery System. Each patient was treated with a single session of radiotherapy using either a whole (WB) or a partial vertebral body contour approach (PB). The primary endpoint was re-treatment rate and the secondary endpoints were pain status, neurologic status, toxicity, tumor control, and survival. The WB group had a lower re-treatment rate (11% (WB) vs. 18.6% (PB), p=0.285). Prior surgery status (β=1.953, OR=7.052, p<0.001) was correlated to the re-treatment rate. Trends for local tumor control were distinct for both treatment groups (X(2)=3.380, p-value=0.066). Treatment group (β=-1.1017, OR=0.362, p=0.029) was significantly correlated to the local tumor control rate. The 2-year survival was 25.7% in WB and 20.9% in PB (p=0.741). Contouring the whole vertebral body for stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment of metastatic spinal lesions shows potential benefits by reducing the risk of recurrence, improving symptomatic relief and providing improved local tumor control.

Target splitting non-coplanar RapidArc radiation therapy for a diffuse sebaceous carcinoma of the scalp: a novel delivery technique

Background and purpose

To compare conventional lateral photon-electron, fixed-beam intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), coplanar and non-coplanar RapidArc for the treatment of a diffuse sebaceous gland carcinoma of the scalp.

Methods

Comprehensive dosimetry comparisons were performed among 3D-CRT, IMRT and various RapidArc plans. Target coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and doses to organs at risk (OAR) were calculated. Monitor unites (MUs) and delivery time of each treatment were also recorded to evaluate the execution efficiency. The influence of target splitting technique and non-coplanar planning on plan quality was discussed.

Results

IMRT was superior to 3D-CRT concerning targets’ coverage at the sacrifice of larger irradiated brain volumes to low doses. CIs and HIs were better in coplanar RapidArc and non-coplanar RapidArc plans than 3D-CRT and IMRT. Best dose coverage and sparing of OARs were achieved in non-coplanar plans using target splitting technique. Treatment delivery time was longest in the IMRT plan and shortest in the coplanar RapidArc plan without target splitting. The 3%/3 mm gamma test pass rates were above 95% for all the plans.

Conclusions

Target splitting technique and non-coplanar arcs are recommended for total scalp irradiation.

Treatment Planning and Delivery Evaluation of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Spinal Tumours: Impact of Arc Discretization in Planning System

The purpose of this study was to compare single arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for spine SBRT in terms of target coverage, organ at risk (OAR) sparing and delivery performance. VMAT plans with 91 control points (VMAT-91CP) were generated for 15 spine metastases patients previously treated with a nine-field IMRT technique. VMAT and IMRT plans were compared based on target coverage, maximum spinal cord dose, maximum plan dose and volume of normal tissue receiving 20% to 80% of the prescribed dose. Treatment delivery time and monitor units (MU) were measured to determine delivery efficiency. To assess the impact of arc discretization in the treatment planning system (TPS), the VMAT-91CP plans were modified by almost doubling the number of CPs (VMAT-181CP). Planned-to-delivered dose agreement for both techniques was assessed using two types of 3D detector arrays. VMAT-91CP target coverage was equivalent to IMRT while maintaining or improving spinal cord sparing. This was achieved without increasing the volume of normal tissue receiving low or intermediate dose levels. Planned-to-delivered dose agreement equivalent to IMRT was achieved with VMAT, but required decreasing the CP angular spacing from 4° to 2° (VMAT-181CP plans). On average, VMAT-181CP plans reduced delivery time by 53% compared to IMRT. Single-arc VMAT for spine SBRT improved delivery efficiency while maintaining target coverage and OAR sparing compared to IMRT. VMAT plans generated with a CP gantry angular spacing of 2° is recommended to avoid a discretization effect in the TPS and ensure acceptable planned-to-delivered dose agreement.

Local tumor control after retreatment of spinal metastasis using stereotactic body radiotherapy; comparison with initial treatment group

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate local control rates after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in recurrent spinal metastasis after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and new spinal metastatic lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective review of medical records and radiological data was performed on 54 retreatment and 131 initial SBRT patients. To compare various fractionation schedules, the biologically effective dose (BED) was applied. SBRT dose was calculated with linear-quadratic model and normalized to a 2-Gy equivalent dose (nBED, α/β =2 Gy for spinal cord, α/β =10 Gy for tumor). Doses to a point within the spinal cord that received the maximum dose (Pmax) were checked. Local control failure was defined as progression by imaging study. Overall survival, progression free survival, delivered radiation dose to tumor and spinal cord, and spinal cord Pmax nBED were compared in two groups.

RESULTS

The mean delivered radiation doses to tumor margin during SBRT were 51.1 Gy2/10 (retreatment) and 50.7 Gy2/10 (initial treatment). Mean survival was 29.6 months (overall)/20.7 months (retreatment)/ 32.4 months (initial treatment). Mean progression free period was 23.9 months (overall)/18.0 months (retreatment)/ 26.0 months (initial treatment). Radiological control rates of retreatment and initial treatment group were 96%/95% at six months, 81%/89% at 12 months and 79%/90% at 24 months. Among 54 retreatment lesions, 13 lesions showed local control failure during follow-up. With regard to spinal cord radiation dose during SBRT, Spinal cord Pmax nBED was 46.2 Gy2/2 (retreatment) and 48.7 Gy2/2 (initial treatment). In retreatment group, total nBED to spinal cord was a mean of 83.4 Gy2/2. There was no case of radiation myelopathy detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Retreatment of spinal metastases using SBRT provided effective local control without neurological complications.

Comparison between prone and supine patient setup for spine stereotactic body radiosurgery

This paper investigates the dosimetric characteristics of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment plans of spine patients in the prone position compared to the supine position. A feasibility study for treating spine patients in the prone position using a fiducial-less tracking method is presented. One patient with a multilevel spinal metastasis was simulated for SBRT treatment in both the supine and prone position. CT scans of the patient were acquired, and treatment plans were created using the CyberKnife® planning platform. The potential advantage of the prone setup as a function of lesion location and number of vertebral bodies involved was studied for targets extending over 1, 2 and 3 consecutive vertebral bodies in the thoracic and lumbar spine. The same process was repeated on an anthropomorphic phantom. A dose of 30 Gy in 5 fractions was prescribed to 95% of the tumor volume and the dose to the cord was limited to 25 Gy. To investigate the feasibility of a fiducial-less tracking method in the prone setup, the patient was positioned prone on the treatment table and the spine motion was monitored as a function of time. Patient movement with the respiratory cycle was reduced by means of a belly-board. Plans in the prone and supine position achieved similar tumor coverage and sparing of the critical structures immediately adjacent to the spine (such as cord and esophagus). However, the prone plans systematically resulted in a lower dose to the normal structures located in the anterior part of the body (such as heart for thoracic cases; stomach, lower gastrointestinal tract and liver for lumbar cases). In addition, prone plans resulted in a lower number of monitor units compared to supine plans.

The use of RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy to deliver stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic body radiotherapy to intracranial and extracranial targets

Twenty-three targets in 16 patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) were analyzed in terms of dosimetric homogeneity, target conformity, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, monitor unit (MU) usage, and beam-on time per fraction using RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs. multifield sliding-window intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Patients underwent computed tomography simulation with site-specific immobilization. Magnetic resonance imaging fusion and optical tracking were incorporated as clinically indicated. Treatment planning was performed using Eclipse v8.6 to generate sliding-window IMRT and 1-arc and 2-arc RapidArc plans. Dosimetric parameters used for target analysis were RTOG conformity index (CI(RTOG)), homogeneity index (HI(RTOG)), inverse Paddick Conformity Index (PCI), D(mean) and D5-D95. OAR sparing was analyzed in terms of D(max) and D(mean). Treatment delivery was evaluated based on measured beam-on times delivered on a Varian Trilogy linear accelerator and recorded MU values. Dosimetric conformity, homogeneity, and OAR sparing were comparable between IMRT, 1-arc RapidArc and 2-arc RapidArc plans. Mean beam-on times ± SD for IMRT and 1-arc and 2-arc treatments were 10.5 ± 7.3, 2.6 ± 1.6, and 3.0 ± 1.1 minutes, respectively. Mean MUs were 3041, 1774, and 1676 for IMRT, 1-, and 2-arc plans, respectively. Although dosimetric conformity, homogeneity, and OAR sparing were similar between these techniques, SRS and SBRT fractions treated with RapidArc were delivered with substantially less beam-on time and fewer MUs than IMRT. The rapid delivery of SRS and SBRT with RapidArc improved workflow on the linac with these otherwise time-consuming treatments and limited the potential for intrafraction organ and patient motion, which can cause significant dosimetric errors. These clinically important advantages make image-guided RapidArc useful in the delivery of SRS and SBRT to intracranial and extracranial targets.

Apparatus-dependent dosimetric differences in spine stereotactic body radiotherapy

The purpose of this investigation was to study apparatus-dependent dose distribution differences specific to spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment planning. This multi-institutional study was performed evaluating an image-guided robotic radiosurgery system (CK), intensity modulated protons (IMP), multileaf collimator (MLC) fixed-field IMRT with 5 mm (11 field), 4 mm (9 field), and 2.5 mm (8- and 9-field) leaf widths and intensity modulated volumetric arc therapy (IMVAT) with a 2.5 mm MLC. Treatment plans were systematically developed for targets consisting of one, two and three consecutive thoracic vertebral bodies (VBs) with the esophagus and spinal cord contoured as the organs at risk. It was found that all modalities achieved acceptable treatment planning constraints. However, following normalization fixed field IMRT with a 2.5 mm MLC, IMVAT and IMP systems yielded the smallest ratio of maximum dose divided by the prescription dose (MD/PD) for one-, two- and three-VB PTVs (ranging from 1.1-1.16). The 2.5 mm MLC 9-field IMRT, IMVAT and CK plans resulted in the least dose to 0.1 cc volumes of spinal cord and esophagus. CK plans had the greatest degree of target dose inhomogeneity. As the level of complexity increased with an increasing number of vertebral bodies, distinct apparatus features such as the use of a high number of beams and a finer leaf size MLC were favored. Our study quantified apparatus-dependent dose-distribution differences specific to spine SBRT given strict, but realistic, constraints and highlights the need to benchmark physical dose distributions for multi-institutional clinical trials.

Technique for stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastases

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging technique for spinal tumours that is a natural succession to brain radiosurgery. The spine is an ideal site for SBRT due to its relative immobility and the potential clinical benefits of high dose delivery, particularly to optimise local control and avoid disease progression that can result in spinal cord compression. However, the proximity of the tumour to the spinal cord, with the potential for radiation myelopathy if the dose is delivered inaccurately or if the spinal cord dose limit is set too high, demands technical accuracy with radiation myelopathy a feared complication. Spine SBRT has been delivered with either a robotic-based linac system such as the Cyberknife, or with linac-based systems equipped with a multileaf collimator and image guidance system. Regardless of the technology, spine SBRT demands sophisticated treatment planning and delivery. This case-based technical review outlines the SBRT apparatus, planning and treatment delivery in use at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Advances in technology for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) refers to a single radiation treatment delivering a high dose to an intra-cranial target localized in three-dimensions by CT and/or MRI imaging. Traditionally, immobilization of the patient's head has been achieved using a rigid stereotactic head frame as the key step in allowing for accurate dose delivery. SRS has been delivered by both Cobalt-60 (Gamma Knife) and linear accelerator (linac) technologies for many decades. The focus of this review is to highlight recent advances and major innovations in SRS technologies relevant to clinical practice and developments allowing for non-invasive frame SRS.