Volumetric modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy reduces the dose to the hippocampus in patients with pituitary adenomas and craniopharyngiomas

Impact of prostate position-based image-guidance in intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The long-term clinical impact of prostate position-based image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for localized prostate cancer remains unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively compared clinical outcomes following intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with cone-beam computed tomography-based prostate position-based IGRT (P-IGRT) or without P-IGRT (non-P-IGRT). From June 2011, we applied P-IGRT in IMRT for intermediate-risk (IR) prostate cancer (PCa) (D'Amico risk classification) (76 Gy in 38 fractions, with smaller margins). Clinical outcomes of patients who received P-IGRT between June 2011 and June 2019 were retrospectively compared with those of patients with IR PCa who received IMRT without P-IGRT between October 2002 and May 2011 in our institution (74 Gy in 37 fractions).

RESULTS

A total of 222 consecutive patients were analyzed: 114 in the P-IGRT cohort and 108 in the non-P-IGRT cohort. The median follow-up period after IMRT was 7.1 years for the P-IGRT cohort and 10.8 years for the non-P-IGRT cohort. The biochemical failure-free rate was significantly better in the P-IGRT cohort (94.9% for the P-IGRT cohort vs 82.7% for the non-P-IGRT cohort at 10 years, p = 0.041). The rate of rectal bleeding which needs intervention including the use of suppositories was significantly lower in the P-IGRT cohort (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of P-IGRT with higher doses and smaller margins was correlated with significantly better biochemical control, and a lower incidence of rectal bleeding in IMRT for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. The enhanced accuracy using P-IGRT has the potential to independently improve disease control and reduce late rectal bleeding.

Management after initial surgery of nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma: surveillance, radiotherapy or surgery?

Introduction

The first line of treatment for nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma (NFPA) is surgery. Adjuvant radiotherapy or surveillance and new treatment (second surgical operation or salvage radiotherapy) in case of recurrence are options discussed at the multidisciplinary tumor board. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic outcome for each option.

Methods

The records of 256 patients followed with NFPA between 2007 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Mean age at initial surgery was 55 years [18–86]. Post-operative MRI found a residual tumor in 87% of patients. Mean follow-up was 12.1 years [0.8–42.7].

Results

After initial surgery, 40 patients had adjuvant radiotherapy. At 5, 10 and 15 years progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly different after surgery alone (77%, 58% and 40%) compared to surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy (84%, 78% and 78%) (HR = 0.24 [0–0.53] p < 0.0005). Overall, after first, second or third surgical operation, 69 patients had adjuvant radiotherapy and 41 salvage radiotherapy. Five-year PFS was similar for adjuvant (90%) and salvage radiotherapy (97%) (p = 0.62). After a second surgical operation, 62% and 71% of patients were irradiated after 2 and 5 years respectively. The risk of corticotropic and thyrotropic deficiency rates were 38% and 59% after second or third surgical operation and 40% and 73% after radiotherapy. Brain tumors occurred in 4 patients: 1 meningioma present at initial surgery, and after radiotherapy, 1 neurinoma which appeared at 5 years, 1 glioblastoma at 13 years and 1 meningioma at 20 years.

Conclusion

Among patients treated by surgery for NFPA, a “wait-and-see” attitude should be an option since adjuvant radiotherapy is not superior to salvage radiotherapy. However, in case of recurrence or progression, the authors recommended delivery of salvage radiotherapy to avoid a second surgical operation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13014-022-02133-z.

Comparison of Absolute Dose Achievable Between Helical Tomotherapy and RapidArc in Total Dura Mater Irradiation for Child Cancer

Background and Purpose: In this study, the absolute dose achievable between helical tomotherapy (HT) plans and RapidArc (RA) plans for total dura mater irradiation (TDMI) was compared. Materials and methods: A planning study was conducted on nine children's case datasets with dura mater metastasis of neuroblastoma. The target included the entire calvarium and skull base and formed a closed volume with a certain thickness around the brain. HT and RA plans with four coplanar full arcs (RA4) with half-field technique were generated for the comparison of absolute dose achievable. In total, 30.6 Gy was prescribed as D_95% (ie, dose to 95% of PTV volume). Results: In the dosimetric comparison between the two modalities, HT provided more homogenous dose distribution than RA4 (mean HI_5−95%: 1.046 vs 1.088, P < .001). The V_107% and D_2Gy of PTV in HT versus RA4 were 3.06% versus 30.47% and 32.59 Gy versus 33.45 Gy, respectively. HT reduced the D_mean and V_5Gy of the brain, brainstem, and hippocampus by 25%–48% and 27%–56% compared with RA4, respectively. Conclusion: Both techniques could provide sufficient coverage for targets, but HT offered more homogenous dose to PTV and lower dose to the central region of the brain involving the brainstem and hippocampus. RA4 could be completed in a shorter time with lower MUs, but with relatively higher dose to the brain or hippocampus. In terms of dosimetry, HT may improve long-term cognitive decline in these young pediatric patients with TDMI.

Monte Carlo simulation of 6-MV dynamic wave VMAT deliveries by Vero4DRT linear accelerator using EGSnrc moving sources

The commissioning and benchmark of a Monte Carlo (MC) model of the 6‐MV Brainlab‐Mitsubishi Vero4DRT linear accelerator for the purpose of quality assurance of clinical dynamic wave arc (DWA) treatment plans is reported. Open‐source MC applications based on EGSnrc particle transport codes are used to simulate the medical linear accelerator head components. Complex radiotherapy irradiations can be simulated in a single MC run using a shared library format combined with BEAMnrc “source20.” Electron energy tuning is achieved by comparing measured vs simulated percentage depth doses (PDDs) for MLC‐defined field sizes in a water phantom. Electron spot size tuning is achieved by comparing measured and simulated inplane and crossplane beam profiles. DWA treatment plans generated from RayStation (RaySearch) treatment planning system (TPS) are simulated on voxelized (2.5 mm³) patient CT datasets. Planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR) dose–volume histograms (DVHs) are compared to TPS‐calculated doses for clinically deliverable dynamic volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) trajectories. MC simulations with an electron beam energy of 5.9 MeV and spot size FWHM of 1.9 mm had the closest agreement with measurement. DWA beam deliveries simulated on patient CT datasets results in DVH agreement with TPS‐calculated doses. PTV coverage agreed within 0.1% and OAR max doses (to 0.035 cc volume) agreed within 1 Gy. This MC model can be used as an independent dose calculation from the TPS and as a quality assurance tool for complex, dynamic radiotherapy treatment deliveries. Full patient CT treatment simulations are performed in a single Monte Carlo run in 23 min. Simulations are run in parallel using the Condor High‐Throughput Computing software¹ on a cluster of eight servers. Each server has two physical processors (Intel Xeon CPU E5‐2650 0 @2.00 GHz), with 8 cores per CPU and two threads per core for 256 calculation nodes.

The gimbaled-head radiotherapy system: Rise and downfall of a dedicated system for dynamic tumor tracking with real-time monitoring and dynamic WaveArc

A gimbaled-head radiotherapy device was developed by industry-academic collaborations, with a concept of robust structures whilst maintaining high flexibilities, and its clinical application started in 2008. The unique structures with multi-image guidance functions initiated 2 new treatment modalities. One is dynamic tumor tracking radiotherapy with real time monitoring (DTTRM), which enables 4-D radiotherapy without prolongation of radiotherapy treatment time. This treatment has become clinically feasible for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung cancers and liver tumors, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for pancreatic cancers. The second one is Dynamic WaveArc therapy (DWA), the non-coplanar versatility of the SBRT system by combining the gantry-ring synchronized rotation with dynamic multileaf collimator optimization. DWA opens the possibility to create patient-individualized treatment plans, allowing additional flexibility in organ at risk sparing while preserving dosimetric robust delivery. The clinical usefulness of the DWA has been preliminary shown for those tumors in the prostate, breast and skull base. Prospective clinical trials are under way with a support of the national funding of Japan for DTTRM and DWA, respectively. Marketing of the system was terminated in 2016 due to a commercial decision. However, lessons can be learned from the development process of this device that might be useful for those who have interests in new technologies and clinical applications in radiation oncology. This review article aims to summarize the developments and achievements of a gimbaled-head radiotherapy device with a focus on DTTRM and DWA.

Single-isocenter volumetric-modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy for two brain metastases

PURPOSE

A new irradiation technique, volumetric-modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy (VMDWAT), based on sequential non-coplanar trajectories, can be performed using the Vero4DRT. This planning study compared the dose distribution and treatment time between single-isocenter volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with multiple straight non-coplanar arcs and single-isocenter VMDWAT in patients with two brain metastases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients with two planning target volumes exceeding 2.0 cm³ were included. Both VMAT and VMDWAT plans were created with single isocenter and a prescribed dose of 28 Gy delivered in five fractions. Target conformity was evaluated using indices modified from the RTOG-CI (mRTOG-CI) and IP-CI (mIP-CI).

RESULTS

VMDWAT significantly improved both mRTOG-CI and mIP-CI and reduced the volume of normal brain tissue receiving 25 and 28 Gy compared to VMAT. The two modalities did not significantly differ in terms of the volume of normal brain tissue receiving 5, 10, 12, 15, and 20 Gy. The mean treatment time was significantly shorter in the VMDWAT group.

CONCLUSION

VMDWAT significantly improved dose distribution in a shorter treatment time compared to VMAT in patients treated for two brain metastases. Single-isocenter VMDWAT may thus be a promising treatment for two brain metastases.

Recent developments in non-coplanar radiotherapy

This paper gives an overview of recent developments in non-coplanar intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Modern linear accelerators are capable of automating motion around multiple axes, allowing efficient delivery of highly non-coplanar radiotherapy techniques. Novel techniques developed for C-arm and non-standard linac geometries, methods of optimization, and clinical applications are reviewed. The additional degrees of freedom are shown to increase the therapeutic ratio, either through dose escalation to the target or dose reduction to functionally important organs at risk, by multiple research groups. Although significant work is still needed to translate these new non-coplanar radiotherapy techniques into the clinic, clinical implementation should be prioritized. Recent developments in non-coplanar radiotherapy demonstrate that it continues to have a place in modern cancer treatment.

Quality assurance of non-coplanar, volumetric-modulated arc therapy employing a C-arm linear accelerator, featuring continuous patient couch rotation

PURPOSE

To perform quality assurance of non-coplanar, volumetric-modulated arc therapy featuring continuous couch rotation (CCR-VMAT) using a C-arm linear accelerator.

METHODS

We planned and delivered CCR-VMAT using the TrueBeam Developer Mode. Treatment plans were created for both a C-shaped phantom and five prostate cancer patients using seven CCR trajectories that lacked collisions; we used RayStation software (ver. 4.7) to this end. Subsequently, verification plans were generated. The mean absolute error (MAE) between the center of an MV-imaged steel ball and the radiation field was calculated using the Winston-Lutz test. The MAEs between planned and actual irradiation values were also calculated from trajectory logs. In addition, correlation coefficients (r values) among the MAEs of gantry angle, couch angle, and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) position, and mechanical parameters including gantry speed, couch speed, MLC speed, and beam output, were estimated. The dosimetric accuracies of planned and measured values were also assessed using ArcCHECK.

RESULTS

The MAEs ±2 standard deviations as revealed by the Winston-Lutz test for all trajectories were 0.3 ± 0.3 mm in two dimensions. The MAEs of the gantry, couch, and MLC positions calculated from all trajectory logs were within 0.04°, 0.08°, and 0.02 mm, respectively. Deviations in the couch angle (r = 0.98, p < 0.05) and MLC position (r = 0.86, p < 0.05) increased significantly with speed. The MAE of the beam output error was less than 0.01 MU. The mean gamma passing rate ± 2 SD (range) of the 3%/3 mm, 3%/1 mm, and 5%/1 mm was 98.1 ± 1.9% (95.7-99.6%), 87.2 ± 2.8% (80.2-96.7%), and 96.3 ± 2.8% (93.9-99.6%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

CCR-VMAT delivered via the TrueBeam Developer Mode was associated with high-level geometric and mechanical accuracy, thus affording to high dosimetric accuracy. The CCR-VMAT performance was stable regardless of the trajectory chosen.

Dosimetric advantages afforded by a new irradiation technique, Dynamic WaveArc, used for accelerated partial breast irradiation

PURPOSE

To identify dosimetric advantages of the novel Dynamic WaveArc (DWA) technique for accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), compared with non-coplanar three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (nc3D-CRT) and coplanar tangential volumetric modulated arc therapy (tVMAT) with dual arcs of 45-65°.

METHODS

Vero4DRT enables DWA by continuous gantry rotation and O-ring skewing with movement of the multi-leaf collimator. We compared the dose distributions of DWA, nc3D-CRT and tVMAT in 24 consecutive left-sided breast cancer patients treated with APBI (38.5 Gy in 10 fractions). The average doses and volumes to the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk, especially heart and left anterior descending artery (LAD) were compared among DWA, nc3D-CRT and tVMAT.

RESULTS

The doses and volumes to the PTVs did not differ significantly among the three plans. For the DWA plans, the mean dose to the heart was 0.2 ± 0.1 Gy, less than those of the nc3D-CRT and tVMAT plans. The D_2% values of the planning organ at risk volume of the LAD were 9.3 ± 10.9%, 28.2 ± 31.9% and 20.3 ± 25.7% for DWA, nc3D-CRT and tVMAT, respectively. The V_20Gy and V_10Gy of the ipsilateral lung for the DWA plans were also significantly lower.

CONCLUSIONS

DWA allowed to find a better compromise for OAR which overlapped with the PTV. Use of the DWA for APBI improved the dose distributions compared with those of nc3D-CRT and tVMAT.

Monitoring of mechanical errors and their dosimetric impact throughout the course of non-coplanar continuous volumetric-modulated arc therapy

BACKGROUND

Volumetric-modulated Dynamic WaveArc therapy (VMDWAT) is a non-coplanar continuous volumetric modulated radiation therapy (VMAT) delivery technique. Here, we monitored mechanical errors and their impact on dose distributions in VMDWAT using logfiles throughout the course of treatment.

METHODS

Fifteen patients were enrolled (2 skull base tumor patients and 13 prostate cancer patients). VMDWAT plans were created for the enrolled patients. The prescribed dose for the skull base tumor was set as 54 Gy at 1.8 Gy per fraction, and that for the prostate cancer was set as 72 to 78 Gy at 2 Gy per fraction. We acquired logfiles to monitor mechanical errors and their impact on dose distribution in each fraction. The root mean square error (RMSE) in the multi-leaf collimator (MLC), gantry angle, O-ring angle and monitor unit (MU) were calculated using logfiles throughout the course of VMDWAT for each patient. The dosimetric impact of mechanical errors throughout the course of VMDWAT was verified using a logfile-based dose reconstruction method. Dosimetric errors between the reconstructed plans and the original plans were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 517 datasets, including 55 datasets for the 2 skull base tumor patients and 462 datasets for the 13 prostate cancer patients, were acquired. The RMSE values were less than 0.1 mm, 0.2°, 0.1°, and 0.4 MU for MLC position, gantry angle, O-ring angle, and MU, respectively. For the skull base tumors, the absolute mean dosimetric errors and two standard deviations throughout the course of treatment were less than 1.4% and 1.1%, respectively. For prostate cancer, these absolute values were less than 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. The largest dosimetric error of 2.5% was observed in a skull base tumor patient. The resultant dosimetric error in the accumulated daily delivered dose distribution, in the patient with the largest error, was up to 1.6% for all dose-volumetric parameters relative to the planned dose distribution.

CONCLUSIONS

MLC position, gantry rotation, O-ring rotation and MU were highly accurate and stable throughout the course of treatment. The daily dosimetric errors due to mechanical errors were small. VMDWAT provided high delivery accuracy and stability throughout the course of treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000023870 . Registered: 1 October 2016.

Geometric and dosimetric quality assurance using logfiles and a 3D helical diode detector for Dynamic WaveArc

PURPOSE

To conduct patient-specific geometric and dosimetric quality assurance (QA) for the Dynamic WaveArc (DWA) using logfiles and ArcCHECK (Sun Nuclear Inc., Melbourne, FL, USA).

METHODS

Twenty DWA plans, 10 for pituitary adenoma and 10 for prostate cancer, were created using RayStation version 4.7 (RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden). Root mean square errors (RMSEs) between the actual and planned values in the logfiles were evaluated. Next, the dose distributions were reconstructed based on the logfiles. The differences between dose-volumetric parameters in the reconstructed plans and those in the original plans were calculated. Finally, dose distributions were assessed using ArcCHECK. In addition, the reconstructed dose distributions were compared with planned ones.

RESULTS

The means of RMSEs for the gantry, O-ring, MLC position, and MU for all plans were 0.2°, 0.1°, 0.1 mm, and 0.4 MU, respectively. Absolute means of the change in PTV D_99% were 0.4 ± 0.4% and 0.1 ± 0.1% points between the original and reconstructed plans for pituitary adenoma and prostate cancer, respectively. The mean of the gamma passing rate (3%/3 mm) between the measured and planned dose distributions was 97.7%. In addition, that between the reconstructed and planned dose distributions was 99.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated that the geometric accuracy and gamma passing rates were within AAPM 119 and 142 criteria during DWA. Dose differences in the dose-volumetric parameters using the logfile-based dose reconstruction method were also clinically acceptable in DWA.