Cine MRI-based analysis of intrafractional motion in radiation treatment planning of head and neck cancer patients

Planning target volume margin in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy: Estimations derived from own data and literature

Planning target volume (PTV) to deliver the desired dose to the clinical target volume (CTV) accounts for systematic (∑) and random (σ) errors during the planning and execution of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). As these errors vary at different departments, this study was conducted to determine the 3-dimensional PTV (PTV3D) margins for head and neck cancer (HNC) at our center. The same was also estimated from reported studies for a comparative assessment. A total of 77 patients with HNCs undergoing IMRT were included. Of these, 39 patients received radical RT and 38 received postoperative IMRT. An extended no action level protocol was implemented using on-board imaging. Shifts in the mediolateral (ML), anteroposterior (AP), and superoinferior (SI) directions of each patient were recorded for every fraction. PTV margins in each direction (ML, AP, SI) and PTV3D were calculated using van Herk's equation. Weighted PTV3D was also computed from the ∑ and σ errors in each direction published in the literature for HNC. Our patients were staged T2-4 (66/77) and N0 (39/77). In all, 2280 on-board images were acquired, and daily shifts in each direction were recorded. The PTV margins in the ML, AP, and SI directions were computed as 3.2 mm, 2.9 mm, and 2.6 mm, respectively. The PTV3D margin was estimated to be 6.5 mm. This compared well with the weighted median PTV3D of 7.2 mm (range: 3.2 to 9.9) computed from the 16 studies reported in the literature. To ensure ≥95% CTV dose coverage in 90% of HNC patients, PTV3D margin for our department was estimated as 6.5 mm. This agrees with the weighted median PTV3D margin of 7.2 mm computed from the 16 published studies in HNCs. Site-specific PTV3D margin estimations should be an integral component of the quality assurance protocol of each department to ensure adequate coverage of dose to CTV during IMRT.

Prospects for online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) for head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study is to examine the impact of kV-CBCT-based online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) on dosimetric parameters in comparison to image-guided-radiotherapy (IGRT) in consecutive patients with tumors in the head and neck region from a prospective registry.

METHODS

The study comprises all consecutive patients with tumors in the head and neck area who were treated with kV-CBCT-based online ART or IGRT-modus at the linear-accelerator ETHOS™. As a measure of effectiveness, the equivalent-uniform-dose was calculated for the CTV (EUDCTV) and organs-at-risk (EUDOAR) and normalized to the prescribed dose. As an important determinant for the need of ART the interfractional shifts of anatomic landmarks related to the tongue were analyzed and compared to the intrafractional shifts. The latter determine the performance of the adapted dose distribution on the verification CBCT2 postadaptation.

RESULTS

Altogether 59 consecutive patients with tumors in the head-and-neck-area were treated from 01.12.2021 to 31.01.2023. Ten of all 59 patients (10/59; 16.9%) received at least one phase within a treatment course with ART. Of 46 fractions in the adaptive mode, irradiation was conducted in 65.2% of fractions with the adaptive-plan, the scheduled-plan in the remaining. The dispersion of the distributions of EUDCTV-values from the 46 dose fractions differed significantly between the scheduled and adaptive plans (Ansari-Bradley-Test, p = 0.0158). Thus, the 2.5th percentile of the EUDCTV-values by the adaptive plans amounted 97.1% (95% CI 96.6-99.5%) and by the scheduled plans 78.1% (95% CI 61.8-88.7%). While the EUDCTV for the accumulated dose distributions stayed above 95% at PTV-margins of ≥ 3 mm for all 8 analyzed treatment phases the scheduled plans did for margins ≥ 5 mm. The intrafractional anatomic shifts of all 8 measured anatomic landmarks were smaller than the interfractional with overall median values of 8.5 mm and 5.5 mm (p < 0.0001 for five and p < 0.05 for all parameters, pairwise comparisons, signed-rank-test). The EUDOAR-values for the larynx and the parotid gland were significantly lower for the adaptive compared with the scheduled plans (Wilcoxon-test, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The mobile tongue and tongue base showed considerable interfractional variations. While PTV-margins of 5 mm were sufficient for IGRT, ART showed the potential of decreasing PTV-margins and spare dose to the organs-at-risk.