Treatment of pancreatic cancer tumors with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using the volume at risk approach (VARA): employing dose-volume histogram (DVH) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) to evaluate small bowel toxicity

Radiation therapy of pancreatic cancers

We present the update of the recommendations of the French society of oncological radiotherapy on radiotherapy of pancreatic tumors. Currently, the use of radiation therapy for patients with pancreatic cancer is subject to discussion. In the adjuvant setting, the standard treatment is six months of chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracile, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. Chemoradiation may improve the survival of patients with incompletely resected tumours (R1). This remains to be confirmed by a prospective trial. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is a promising treatment especially for patients with borderline resectable tumours. For patients with locally advanced tumours, there is no standard. An induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation for non progressive patients reduces the rate of local relapse. Whereas in the first trials of chemoradiation large fields were used, the treated volumes have been reduced to improve tolerance. Tumour movements induced by breathing should be taken in account. Intensity modulated radiation therapy allows a reduction of doses to the organs at risk. Whereas widely used, this technique has poor evidence-based recommendation. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is also being studied, as a neoadjuvant or exclusive treatment.

Automated treatment planning as a dose escalation strategy for stereotactic radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility of automated stereotactic volumetric modulated arc therapy (SBRT-VMAT) planning using a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) approach as a dose escalation strategy for SBRT in pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Twelve patients with pancreatic cancer were retrospectively replanned. Dose prescription was 30 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) and was escalated up to 50 Gy to the boost target volume (BTV) using a SIB technique in 5 fractions. All plans were generated by Pinnacle3 Autoplanning using 6MV dual-arc VMAT technique for flattened (FF) and flattening filter-free beams (FFF). An overlap volume (OLV) between the PRV duodenum and the PTV was defined to correlate with the ability to boost the BTV. Dosimetric metrics for BTV and PTV coverage, maximal doses for serial OARs, integral dose, conformation numbers, and dose contrast indexes were used to analyze the dosimetric results. Dose accuracy was validated using the PTW Octavius-4D phantom together with the 1500 2D-array. Differences between FF and FFF plans were quantified using the Wilcoxon matched-pair signed rank.

RESULTS

Full prescription doses to the 95% of PTV and BTV can be delivered to patients with no OLV. BTV mean dose was >90% of the prescribed doses for all patients at all dose levels. Compared to FF plans, FFF plans showed significant reduced integral doses, larger number of MUs, and reduced beam-on-times up to 51% for the highest dose level. Despite plan complexity, pre-treatment verification reported a gamma pass-rate greater than the acceptance threshold of 95% for all FF and FFF plans for 3%-2 mm criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The SIB-SBRT strategy with Autoplanning was dosimetrically feasible. Ablative doses up to 50 Gy in 5 fractions can be delivered to the BTV for almost all patients respecting all the normal tissue constraints. A prospective clinical trial based on SBRT strategy using SIB-VMAT technique with FFF beams seems to be justified.

The Main Bottleneck for Non-Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma in Past Decades: A Population-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND Despite recent advancements in surgical techniques, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, the 5-year survival rate of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains an unsatisfactory ~8%. MATERIAL AND METHODS Data were extracted to identify patients with non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed in the periods 1988-1996 and 2010-2014 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The statistical analyses were performed with the log-rank test, Pearson's chi-square test, propensity score matching, and Cox regression model. RESULTS The hazard ratio (HR) of surgery was reduced from 0.454 to 0.302 in Cox regression modeling, and there was no overlapping about the 95% confidence intervals (CI) of surgery between the 2 periods. The HR values of radiotherapy, which were new prognostic factor for resectable PDAC in 2010-2014, were reduced in both the resectable and unresectable groups. The upgraded chemotherapy regimen reduced the HR values from 0.738 to 0.689 in all PADC patients, and from 0.656 to 0.588 in unresectable PDAC. The log-rank test results showed that advances in surgery significantly improved the median survival from 13 months to 32 months. Radiotherapeutic and chemotherapeutic advancements extended median survival by 12 months and 11 months, respectively, in resectable PDAC. The median survivals were extended by 3 months for both of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in unresectable PDAC. CONCLUSIONS The development of chemotherapy and radiotherapy has been slow, especially for unresectable PDAC. Although advances in surgery contributed significantly to improved survival for resectable PDAC, lack of early diagnostic tools, which lead to low resection rates, remain a barrier for all PDAC patients.

Clinical Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Chemoradiotherapy in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Analysis of 884 Patients at Facilities Specializing in Pancreatic Surgery

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), including neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (NACRT), for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) has not been elucidated. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy of NAC and NACRT for patients with BRPC.

METHODS

The study analyzed the treatment outcomes of 884 patients treated for BRPC from 2011 to 2013. Treatment results were compared between upfront surgery and NAT and between NAC and NACRT using propensity score-matching analysis. Overall survival (OS) was calculated via intention-to-treat analyses.

RESULTS

The overall resection rates for the patients who underwent NAT were significantly lower than for the patients who underwent upfront surgery (75.1% vs 93.3%; p < 0.001). However, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher for NAT than for upfront surgery (p < 0.001). Additionally, the OS for the patients who received NAT was significantly longer than for those who underwent upfront surgery (median survival time [MST], 25.7 vs 19.0 months; p = 0.015). The lymph node rate for the patients with NACRT was significantly lower than for those who underwent NAC (p < 0.001). However, the resection rate for the NACRT cases was significantly lower than for the NAC cases (p = 0.041). The local recurrence rate for the NACRT cases was significantly lower than for the NAC cases (p = 0.002). However, OS did not differ significantly between NAC and NACRT (MST, 29.2 vs 22.5 months; p = 0.130).

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed that NAT has potential benefit for patients with BRPC. Compared with NAC, NACRT decreased the rates for lymph node metastasis and local recurrence but did not improve the prognosis.

Dosimetric analysis of stereotactic rotational versus static intensity-modulated radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiation therapy is a promising treatment modality for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. To determine the optimal radiation treatment, we compared the plan characteristics of volumetric-modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy when administered with stereotactic body radiation therapy to treat pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifteen patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were treated by stereotactic body radiation therapy at a dose of 24-32Gy in four fractions with marker-guided gated volumetric-modulated arc therapy. Four dimensional-computed tomography scans were used to assess the target and surrounding normal organs. The same images, contours, and dose constraints were used for dual-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy and 9-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning. Plans were compared using dosimetric parameters and treatment performance.

RESULTS

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy required significantly lower monitor units (1726 vs. 4188; P<0.001) and shorter treatment delivery time in comparison with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (22.5min vs. 52.4min; P<0.001). Regarding target volume coverage, both modalities demonstrated comparable results (V_95%, 99.3% vs. 99.4%; P=0.796). Both modalities satisfied the dosimetric determinants for duodenal toxicity and the maximum and mean doses administered to normal organ were also statistically similar.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with 9-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy significantly reduces the number of monitoring units and treatment delivery times while administering similar dosimetric quality. Based on these results, volumetric-modulated arc therapy might be an appropriate treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer when combined with stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Radiation-induced acute toxicities after image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for patients with spinal metastases (IRON-1 trial) : First results of a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy (RT) provides an important treatment approach in the palliative care of vertebral metastases, but radiation-induced toxicities in patients with advanced disease and low performance status can have substantial implications for quality of life. Herein, we prospectively compared toxicity profiles of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) vs. conventional three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT).

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized monocentric explorative pilot trial to compare radiation-induced toxicity between IMRT and 3DCRT for patients with spinal metastases. A total of 60 patients were randomized between November 2016 and May 2017. In both cohorts, RT was delivered in 10 fractions of 3 Gy each. The primary endpoint was radiation-induced toxicity at 3 months.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 4.3 months. Two patients suffered from grade 3 acute toxicities in the IMRT arm, along with 1 patient in the 3DCRT group. At 12 weeks after treatment (t2), 1 patient reported grade 3 toxicity in the IMRT arm vs. 4 patients in the 3DCRT group. No grade 4 or 5 adverse events occurred in either group. In the IMRT arm, the most common side effects by the end of irradiation (t1) were grade 1-2 xerostomia and nausea in 8 patients each (29.6%), and dyspnea in 7 patients (25.9%). In the 3DCRT group, the most frequent adverse events (t1) were similar: grade 1-2 xerostomia (n = 10, 35.7%), esophagitis (n = 10, 35.8%), nausea (n = 10, 35.8%), and dyspnea (n = 5, 17.9%).

CONCLUSION

This is the first randomized trial to evaluate radiation-induced toxicities after IMRT versus 3DCRT in patients with vertebral metastases. This trial demonstrated an additional improvement for IMRT in terms of acute side effects, although longer follow-up is required to further ascertain other endpoints.

Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy improve survival in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving surgery: adjuvant chemotherapy alone is insufficient in the era of intensity modulation radiation therapy

In the era of intensity modulation radiation therapy (IMRT), no prospective randomized trial has evaluated the efficacy of adjuvant therapies such as adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), adjuvant sequential chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CT-RT), and adjuvant CT alone in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA). Through propensity score matching, we designed a nationwide, population-based, head-to-head cohort study to determine the effects of dissimilar adjuvant treatments on resectable PA. We minimized the confounding of various adjuvant treatment outcomes among the following resectable PA groups of patients from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database: group 1, adjuvant CCRT; group 2, adjuvant sequential CT-RT; and group 3, adjuvant CT alone. All the studied techniques are IMRTs. The matching process yielded a final cohort of 588 patients (196, 196, and 196 patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). In both univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs; 95% confidence interval [CI]) of death derived for the adjuvant CCRT and adjuvant sequential CT-RT cohorts compared with the adjuvant CT alone cohort were 0.398 (0.314-0.504) and 0.307 (0.235-0.402), respectively. A combination of adjuvant IMRT and CT for resectable PA treatment improves survival to a greater extent than does adjuvant CT alone.

The Technique of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Cholangiocarcinoma

Aims and background

Conventional radiotherapy in inoperable cholangiocarcinoma is limited by radiotolerance of the surrounding tissues. The aim of our dosimetric study was an evaluation of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of inoperable bile duct carcinoma.

Methods

Four patients with inoperable cholangiocarcinoma treated by self-expandable stent placed to the biliary tree and radiotherapy were studied. The rotational technique, conformal 3D BOX technique and intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan were compared. Dose volume histograms and the normal tissue complication probability concept were used for comparison. The stent was used for target motion verification.

Results

The intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans showed favorable dose distribution in planning target volume and remarkable sparing of organs at risk.

Conclusions

The intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique in bile duct carcinomas deserves further research and clinical evaluation.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Management of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma continues to present a challenge due to a paucity of high-quality randomized studies. Administration of adjuvant chemotherapy is widely accepted due to the high risk of systemic spread associated with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but the role of radiation therapy is less clear. This paper reviews literature associated with resectable pancreatic cancer to include prognostic factors to aid in the selection of patients appropriate for adjuvant therapies. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Evaluation of Deformable Image Registration-Based Contour Propagation From Planning CT to Cone-Beam CT

Purpose:

We evaluated the performance of organ contour propagation from a planning computed tomography to cone-beam computed tomography with deformable image registration by comparing contours to manual contouring.

Materials and Methods:

Sixteen patients were retrospectively identified based on showing considerable physical change throughout the course of treatment. Multiple organs in the 3 regions (head and neck, prostate, and pancreas) were evaluated. A cone-beam computed tomography from the end of treatment was registered to the planning computed tomography using rigid registration, followed by deformable image registration. The contours were copied on cone-beam computed tomography image sets using rigid registration and modified by 2 radiation oncologists. Contours were compared using Dice similarity coefficient, mean surface distance, and Hausdorff distance.

Results:

The mean physician-to-physician Dice similarity coefficient for all organs was 0.90. When compared to each physician’s contours, the overall mean for rigid was 0.76 (P < .001), and it was improved to 0.79 (P < .001) for deformable image registration. Comparing deformable image registration to physicians resulted in a mean Dice similarity coefficient of 0.77, 0.74, and 0.84 for head and neck, prostate, and pancreas groups, respectively; whereas, the physician-to-physician mean agreement for these sites was 0.87, 0.90, and 0.93 (P < .001, for all sites). The mean surface distance for physician-to-physician contours was 1.01 mm, compared to 2.58 mm for rigid-to-physician contours and 2.24 mm for deformable image registration-to-physician contours. The mean physician-to-physician Hausdorff distance was 11.32 mm, and when compared to any physician’s contours, the mean for rigid and deformable image registration was 12.1 mm and 12.0 mm (P < .001), respectively.

Conclusion:

The physicians had a high level of agreement via the 3 metrics; however, deformable image registration fell short of this level of agreement. The automatic workflows using deformable image registration to deform contours to cone-beam computed tomography to evaluate the changes during treatment should be used with caution.

[Radiation therapy of pancreatic cancer]

Currently, the use of radiation therapy for patients with pancreatic cancer is subject to discussion. In adjuvant setting, the standard treatment is 6 months of chemotherapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine. Chemoradiation (CRT) may improve the survival of patients with incompletely resected tumors (R1). This should be confirmed by a prospective trial. Neoadjuvant CRT is a promising treatment especially for patients with borderline resectable tumors. For patients with locally advanced tumors, there is no a standard. An induction chemotherapy followed by CRT for non-progressive patients reduces the rate of local relapse. Whereas in the first trials of CRT large fields were used, the treated volumes have been reduced to improve tolerance. Tumor movements induced by breathing should be taken in account. Intensity modulated radiation therapy allows a reduction of doses to the organs at risk. Whereas widely used, this technique is not recommended.

Dosimetric and clinical toxicity comparison of critical organ preservation with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and RapidArc for the treatment of locally advanced cancer of the pancreatic head

PURPOSE

We compared dosimetry and clinical toxicity for 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-crt), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (imrt), and RapidArc (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, U.S.A.) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (lapcc). We hypothesized that the technique with better sparing of organs at risk (oars) and better target dose distributions could lead to decreased clinical toxicity.

METHODS

The study analyzed 280 patients with lapcc who had undergone radiotherapy. The dosimetry comparison was performed using 20 of those patients. Dose-volume histograms for the target volume and the oars were compared. The clinical toxicity comparison used the 280 patients who received radiation with 3D-crt, imrt, or RapidArc.

RESULTS

Compared with 3D-crt, RapidArc and imrt both achieved a better conformal index, homogeneity index, V95%, and V110%. Compared with 3D-crt or imrt, RapidArc reduced the V10, V20, and mean dose to duodenum, the V20 of the right kidney, and the liver mean dose. Compared with 3D-crt, RapidArc reduced the V35, and V45 of duodenum, the mean dose to small bowel, and the V15 of right kidney. The incidences of grades 3 and 4 diarrhea (p = 0.037) and anorexia (p = 0.042) were lower with RapidArc than with 3D-crt, and the incidences of grades 3 and 4 diarrhea (p = 0.027) were lower with RapidArc than with imrt.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with 3D-crt or imrt, RapidArc showed better sparing of oars, especially duodenum, small bowel, and right kidney. Also, fewer acute grades 3 and 4 gastrointestinal toxicities were seen with RapidArc than with 3D-crt or imrt. A technique with better sparing of oars and better target dose distributions could result in decreased clinical toxicities during radiation treatment for lapcc.

Predictors of Hematologic Toxicity and Chemotherapy Dose Intensity in Patients Undergoing Chemoradiation for Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been shown to decrease abdominal toxicity in patients undergoing chemoradiation (CRT) for pancreatic cancer. We evaluated whether IMRT impacts the rates of hematologic toxicity and chemotherapy dose intensity in patients undergoing CRT.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer undergoing CRT between 2006 and 2012. Exclusion criteria included receipt of non-gemcitabine therapy, chemotherapy before CRT, or abnormal baseline hematologic indices. Endpoints included total gemcitabine dose received, dose intensity, unplanned dose reductions, and hematologic toxicity (WBC, ANC, platelet, and hemoglobin). Patient/treatment factors were evaluated for their relationship to the above endpoints during CRT and within the first 3 months post-CRT. Statistical analysis was performed using the Fisher exact test and regression models. Because of the multiple comparisons in the presented analysis, a false discovery rate adjustment was performed at the 5% false discovery rate level.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-eight (68.2%) patients received treatment with IMRT, and 27 (31.8%) patients were treated with 3D-conformal radiation. During CRT, there was no relationship between radiation technique and gemcitabine dose received, dose intensity, or hematologic grade 3+ toxicity. Post-CRT, there was no relationship between radiation technique and total gemcitabine dose received, dose intensity, or dose reduction. Patients receiving IMRT were more likely to have ANC grade 3+ toxicity (P=0.007) post-CRT, although this was no longer statistically significant after correction. There were no other relationships between treatment technique and hematologic toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

IMRT technique may be associated with higher hematologic toxicity in patients undergoing CRT for pancreatic cancer. Given the expanding use of CRT, additional study is needed to identify the impact of IMRT on myelosuppression in these patients.

Dose escalation with a vessel boost in pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation

PURPOSE

Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) are often treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACRT) in hopes of downstaging their disease for potential surgical resection. We hypothesized that increasing the radiation dose to the area of the tumor abutting the vessel(s) of concern would increase the rate of surgical resection in patients with borderline resectable PAC (BRPAC) and locally advanced PAC (LAPAC) treated with NACRT.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive cases of BRPAC and LAPAC treated with NACRT from January 2006 to December 2013, with or without a vessel boost (VB), at a single institution. The primary endpoints were rate of R0/R1 potentially curative surgical resection and acute toxicity. Univariate analysis with the Fisher exact test was performed to evaluate the effect of each variable. Multiple logistic regression was used to adjust for the following covariates: year of diagnosis, age, sex, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level at diagnosis, and BRPAC or LAPAC.

RESULTS

Of the 104 patients identified, 22% (n = 23) received a VB (median, 54 Gy; range, 54-64 Gy), and 78% (n = 81) received no boost (median, 50.4 Gy; range, 48.6-52.2 Gy). More patients in the VB group were treated from 2010 to 2013 (P < .001) and with intensity modulated radiation therapy (P = .002). Other baseline characteristics were balanced. After adjustment for covariates, there was a statistical trend toward increased surgical resection in patients who received a VB (odds ratio [OR], 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-8.57; P = .077). Age (≥70 years; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.16-1.05; P = .064) and LAPAC (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.09-1.09; P = .068) also trended toward significance. CA19-9 ≥47.9 U/mL (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.08-0.71; P = .010) was significant on multivariate analysis. There was no significant difference in acute or late toxicity between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In our retrospective series, dose escalation was associated with an improved surgical resection rate in BRPAC and LAPAC patients treated with NACRT, although this improvement was not statistically significant.

Comparing outcomes of stereotactic body radiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVES

Survival in patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAUPC) is poor, and local recurrence continues to be a major problem in the management of this disease. Radiotherapy (RT) using different RT techniques, including intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), may lead to different clinical outcomes for patients with LAUPC. Here, we compared SBRT with IMRT for patients with LAUPC with respect to survival rate, local control (LC) rate, and toxicity-related dose distribution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study from March 2007 to March 2011 included 41 patients with LAUPC who were divided into two groups, with 20 patients receiving SBRT and 21 patients receiving IMRT. The median follow-up time was 16 months.

RESULTS

For the IMRT and SBRT groups, the median survival times were 13 and 20 months, and 1-year overall survival (OS) rates were 70.7 and 80.0%, respectively. There was no difference in OS between the two RT techniques. RT with SBRT showed significantly better local disease-free survival than IMRT for patients with LAUPC. Tobacco use had a borderline effect on LC. Thus, further statistical analysis showed that patients who used tobacco had better LC after receiving SBRT than IMRT.

CONCLUSION

SBRT improved LC for LAUPC patients and had similar radiation toxicity compared with IMRT. Further study is required to define the effects of administered radiation dose and fractionation, as well as to further expand the sample size, to use a prospective study, and to observe the long-term efficacy of these techniques.

Ipsilateral kidney sparing in treatment of pancreatic malignancies using volumetric-modulated arc therapy avoidance sectors

Recent research has shown treating pancreatic cancer with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to be superior to either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), with respect to reducing normal tissue toxicity, monitor units, and treatment time. Furthermore, using avoidance sectors with RapidArc planning can further reduce normal tissue dose while maintaining target conformity. This study looks at the methods in reducing dose to the ipsilateral kidney, in pancreatic head cases, while observing dose received by other critical organs using avoidance sectors. Overall, 10 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Each patient had preoperative/unresectable pancreatic tumor and were selected based on the location of the right kidney being situated within the traditional 3D-CRT treatment field. The target planning target volume (286.97 ± 85.17 cm(3)) was prescribed to 50.4 Gy using avoidance sectors of 30°, 40°, and 50° and then compared with VMAT as well as 3D-CRT. Analysis of the data shows that the mean dose to the right kidney was reduced by 11.6%, 15.5%, and 21.9% for avoidance angles of 30°, 40°, and 50°, respectively, over VMAT. The mean dose to the total kidney also decreased by 6.5%, 8.5%, and 11.0% for the same increasing angles. Spinal cord maximum dose, however, increased as a function of angle by 3.7%, 4.8%, and 6.1% compared with VMAT. Employing avoidance sector angles as a complement to VMAT planning can significantly reduce high dose to the ipsilateral kidney while not greatly overdosing other critical organs.

The role of radiation therapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PCA) is associated with high rates of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Yet despite modern treatment advances, the only curative therapy remains surgical resection. The adjuvant therapeutic standard of care for PCA in the United States includes both chemotherapy and chemoradiation; however, an optimal regimen has not been established. For patients with resectable and borderline resectable PCA, recent investigation has focused efforts on evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy allows for early initiation of systemic therapy and identification of patients who harbor micrometastatic disease, thus sparing patients the potential morbidities associated with unnecessary radiation or surgery. This article critically reviews the data supporting or refuting the role of radiation therapy in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings of PCA management, with a particular focus on determining which patients may be more likely to benefit from radiation therapy.

Utilization of intensity-modulated radiation therapy and image-guided radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer: is it beneficial?

The recent development of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and improvements in image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) have provided considerable advances in the utilization of radiation therapy (RT) for the management of pancreatic cancer. IGRT allows for the reduction of treatment volumes, potentially less chance of a marginal miss, and quality assurance of gastrointestinal filling, while IMRT has been shown to reduce both sudden and late side effects compared with 3-dimensional conformal RT. Here, we review published data and provide essential recommendations on the utilization of IMRT and IGRT for the management of patients with pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with IMRT in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is an alternative to the surgery-first approach for resectable pancreatic cancer (PDA) and represents the standard of care for borderline resectable (BLR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with resectable and BLR PDA treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation using IMRT between 1/2009 and 11/2011 were reviewed. Patients were treated to a customized CTV which included the primary mass and regional vessels.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was completed in 69 patients (39 BLR and 30 resectable). Induction chemotherapy was used in 32 (82%) of the 39 patients with BLR disease prior to chemoXRT. All resectable patients were treated with chemoXRT alone. Following neoadjuvant treatment, 48 (70%) of the 69 patients underwent successful pancreatic resection with 47 (98%) being margin negative (RO). In 30 of the BLR patients who had arterial abutment or SMV occlusion, 19 (63%) were surgically resected and all had RO resections. The cumulative incidence of local failure at 1 and 2 years was 2% (95% CI 0-6%) and 9% (95% CI 0.6-17%) respectively. The median overall survival for all patients, patients undergoing resection, and patients without resection were 20, 26 and 11 months respectively. Sixteen (23%) of the 69 patients are alive without disease with a median follow-up of 47 months (36-60).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemoXRT can facilitate a margin negative resection in patients with localized PCa.

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy for pancreatic malignancies: dosimetric comparison with sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) is an iteration of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), both of which deliver highly conformal dose distributions. Studies have shown the superiority of VMAT and IMRT in comparison with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in planning target volume (PTV) coverage and organs-at-risk (OARs) sparing. This is the first study examining the benefits of VMAT in pancreatic cancer for doses more than 55.8 Gy. A planning study comparing 3D-CRT, IMRT, and VMAT was performed in 20 patients with pancreatic cancer. Treatments were planned for a 25-fraction delivery of 45 Gy to a large field followed by a reduced-volume 8-fraction external beam boost to 59.4 Gy in total. OARs and PTV doses, conformality index (CI) deviations from 1.0, monitor units (MUs) delivered, and isodose volumes were compared. IMRT and VMAT CI deviations from 1.0 for the large-field and the boost plans were equivalent (large field: 0.032 and 0.046, respectively; boost: 0.042 and 0.037, respectively; p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Both IMRT and VMAT CI deviations from 1.0 were statistically superior to 3D-CRT (large field: 0.217, boost: 0.177; p < 0.05 for all comparisons). VMAT showed reduction of the mean dose to the boost PTV (VMAT: 61.4 Gy, IMRT: 62.4 Gy, and 3D-CRT: 62.3 Gy; p < 0.05). The mean number of MUs per fraction was significantly lower for VMAT for both the large-field and the boost plans. VMAT delivery time was less than 3 minutes compared with 8 minutes for IMRT. Although no statistically significant dose reduction to the OARs was identified when comparing VMAT with IMRT, VMAT showed a reduction in the volumes of the 100% isodose line for the large-field plans. Dose escalation to 59.4 Gy in pancreatic cancer is dosimetrically feasible with shorter treatment times, fewer MUs delivered, and comparable CIs for VMAT when compared with IMRT.

Interfractional dose variations in the stomach and the bowels during breathhold intensity-modulated radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer: Implications for a dose-escalation strategy

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the interfractional dose variations in the organs-at-risk (OARs) during pancreatic breathhold intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and to assess the impacts of "planning organs-at-risk volume" (POV) structures generated by isotropically expanding the dose-limiting OARs, based on the comparison of the interfractional doses to the OARs between IMRT plans and conventional three-dimensional-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plans.

METHODS

Thirty repeat CT scans were acquired from ten consecutive patients who were receiving chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer. Six IMRT plans for each patient with two levels of prescription (45 and 51 Gy in 15 fractions) and 3 POV margin sizes (5, 7, and 10 mm) were generated based on the initial CT scan under predetermined constraints. Two 3D-CRT plans (39 and 42 Gy in 15 fractions) were simultaneously generated. The dose distribution of all of the treatment plans was recalculated with the repeat CT scans. The interfractional dose variations in the three OARs (stomach, duodenum, and small intestine) were evaluated, and the absolute volumes ≥39 Gy (V39Gy) of the OARs in the IMRT plans were compared to those in the 3D-CRT plans. Regression analyses were performed to assess the relative impact of the factors of interest on the interfractional dose variations of the OARs.

RESULTS

Substantial dose excesses to the three OARs were observed at all of the prescription dose levels and the POV margin sizes on the repeat CT scans. The safety threshold based on the mean stomach V39Gy on the recalculated 39 Gy-3D-CRT plans was 1.9 ml. Statistically significant and marginally insignificant mean V39Gy values above the safety thresholds were observed in the stomach in the 51 Gy-IMRT plans (2.6 and 2.1 ml with the 5- and 7-mm PRV margins, respectively (P = 0.015 and 0.085)). Only in the case of the 10-mm POV margin did the metric fall below the safety threshold to 1.5 ml (P = 0.634). The duodenum and the small intestine did not violate the safety thresholds (1.4 and 3.8 ml, respectively). From the multiple regression analyses, only the margin size (P < 0.001) and the POV V39Gy (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with the distribution of recalculated V39Gy for the stomach. Multiple factors, including the margin size (P = 0.020) and the POV V39Gy (P < 0.001) were associated with the recalculated V39Gy for the duodenum. However, none of the POV parameters for the small intestine were associated with the recalculated V39Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable interfractional dose variation was observed in three critical OARs. At the escalated prescription dose of breathhold IMRT, the dose variations could exceed the dose variations using 3D-CRT at the safe prescription dose level, indicating that a dose-escalation strategy based solely on the initial advantageous dose distribution in a breathhold IMRT can be problematic. Given the current limitations for predicting or coping with variation throughout the treatment course, the use of POV should be considered for safely delivering escalated doses to patients with pancreatic cancer.

Postoperative radiotherapy in periampullary cancers: a brief review

BACKGROUND

The treatment of periampullary cancers is complex and challenging. Adjuvant therapy for resected periampullary and pancreatic cancers has been the subject of intense clinical investigations for several decades. Periampullary cancer management has often been clubbed with pancreatic cancers.

DISCUSSION

Following surgery, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy has been widely accepted as standard of care in the USA, although different prospective and retrospective studies have shown conflicting results. Controversy regarding the effectiveness of chemoradiotherapy exists in the literature, both in terms of survival as well as toxicity. However, conventional postoperative radiotherapy practice needs to be reviewed in view of changes and developments in radiation techniques in the last decade. In this article, we review the management of periampullary cancers with special emphasis on the adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy.

Consolidating duodenal and small bowel toxicity data via isoeffective dose calculations based on compiled clinical data

PURPOSE

To consolidate duodenum and small bowel toxicity data from clinical studies with different dose fractionation schedules using the modified linear quadratic (MLQ) model. A methodology of adjusting the dose-volume (D,v) parameters to different levels of normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) was presented.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A set of NTCP model parameters for duodenum toxicity were estimated by the χ(2) fitting method using literature-based tolerance dose and generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) data. These model parameters were then used to convert (D,v) data into the isoeffective dose in 2 Gy per fraction, (D(MLQED2),v) and convert these parameters to an isoeffective dose at another NTCP (D(MLQED2'),v).

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 5 reports useful in making estimates of duodenum and small bowel toxicity. The NTCP model parameters were found to be TD50(1)(model) = 60.9 ± 7.9 Gy, m = 0.21 ± 0.05, and δ = 0.09 ± 0.03 Gy(-1). Isoeffective dose calculations and toxicity rates associated with hypofractionated radiation therapy reports were found to be consistent with clinical data having different fractionation schedules. Values of (D(MLQED2'),v) between different NTCP levels remain consistent over a range of 5%-20%.

CONCLUSIONS

MLQ-based isoeffective calculations of dose-response data corresponding to grade ≥2 duodenum toxicity were found to be consistent with one another within the calculation uncertainty. The (D(MLQED2),v) data could be used to determine duodenum and small bowel dose-volume constraints for new dose escalation strategies.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy planning with duodenal sparing using volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a dosimetric analysis

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) achieves excellent local control for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but may increase late duodenal toxicity. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivers intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with a rotating gantry rather than multiple fixed beams. This study dosimetrically evaluates the feasibility of implementing duodenal constraints for SBRT using VMAT vs IMRT. Non-duodenal sparing (NS) and duodenal-sparing (DS) VMAT and IMRT plans delivering 25Gy in 1 fraction were generated for 15 patients with LAPC. DS plans were constrained to duodenal Dmax of<30Gy at any point. VMAT used 1 360° coplanar arc with 4° spacing between control points, whereas IMRT used 9 coplanar beams with fixed gantry positions at 40° angles. Dosimetric parameters for target volumes and organs at risk were compared for DS planning vs NS planning and VMAT vs IMRT using paired-sample Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Both DS VMAT and DS IMRT achieved significantly reduced duodenal Dmean, Dmax, D1cc, D4%, and V20Gy compared with NS plans (all p≤0.002). DS constraints compromised target coverage for IMRT as demonstrated by reduced V95% (p = 0.01) and Dmean (p = 0.02), but not for VMAT. DS constraints resulted in increased dose to right kidney, spinal cord, stomach, and liver for VMAT. Direct comparison of DS VMAT and DS IMRT revealed that VMAT was superior in sparing the left kidney (p<0.001) and the spinal cord (p<0.001), whereas IMRT was superior in sparing the stomach (p = 0.05) and the liver (p = 0.003). DS VMAT required 21% fewer monitor units (p<0.001) and delivered treatment 2.4 minutes faster (p<0.001) than DS IMRT. Implementing DS constraints during SBRT planning for LAPC can significantly reduce duodenal point or volumetric dose parameters for both VMAT and IMRT. The primary consequence of implementing DS constraints for VMAT is increased dose to other organs at risk, whereas for IMRT it is compromised target coverage. These findings suggest clinical situations where each technique may be most useful if DS constraints are to be employed.

Beam angle selection for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer: are noncoplanar beam angles necessary?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

External beam radiation therapy with concurrent chemotherapy (CRT) is widely used for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. Noncoplanar (NCP) 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and coplanar (CP) IMRT have been reported to lower the radiation dose to organs at risk (OARs). The purpose of this article is to examine the utility of noncoplanar beam angles in IMRT for the management of pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients who were treated with CRT for unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head or neck were re-planned using CP and NCP beams in 3DCRT and IMRT with the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system.

RESULTS

Compared to CP IMRT, NCP IMRT had similar target coverage with slightly increased maximum point dose, 5,799 versus 5,775 cGy (p = 0.008). NCP IMRT resulted in lower mean kidney dose, 787 versus 1,210 cGy (p < 0.0001) and higher mean liver dose, 1,208 versus 1,061 cGy (p < 0.0001). Also, NCP IMRT resulted in similar mean stomach dose, 1,257 versus 1,248 cGy (p = 0.86) but slightly higher mean small bowel dose, 981 versus 866 cGy (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The NCP IMRT was able to significantly decrease bilateral kidney dose, but did not improve other dose-volume criteria. The use of NCP beam angles is preferred only in patients with risk factors for treatment-related kidney dysfunction.

Treatment of locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer: a 10-year experience

PURPOSE

We retrospectively analyzed the results of patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with either chemoradiation (CRT) or chemotherapy alone over the past decade.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between December 1998 and October 2009, 116 patients with LAPC were treated at our institution. Eighty-four patients received concurrent chemoradiation [RT (+) group], primarily 5-flourouracil based (70%). Thirty-two patients received chemotherapy alone [RT (-) group], the majority gemcitabine based (78%). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from date of diagnosis to date of first recurrence and to date of death or last follow-up, respectively. Univariate statistical analysis was used to determine significant prognostic factors for overall survival.

RESULTS

Median patient age was 67 years. Sixty patients were female (52%). Median follow-up was 11 months (range, 1.6-59.4 months). The RT (+) group received a median radiation dose of 50.4 Gy, was more likely to present with ECOG 0-1 performance status, and experienced less grade 3-4 toxicity. PFS was 10.9 versus 9.1 months (P=0.748) and median survival was 12.5 versus 9.1 months (P=0.998) for the RT (+) and RT (-) groups respectively (P=0.748). On univariate analysis, patients who experienced grade 3-4 toxicity had worse overall survival than those who did not (P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal management for LAPC continues to evolve. Patients who developed treatment-related grade 3-4 toxicity have a poorer prognosis. Survival rates were not statistically significant between chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy groups.

Modern radiation therapy techniques for pancreatic cancer

Radiation therapy is a rapidly evolving field, and recent technical advances have spurred an increasing number of new treatments as well as marked improvements in previously existing treatments. Despite a growing body of published evidence demonstrating that radiotherapy for the treatment of pancreatic cancer is improving in efficacy and safety, the ultimate effect on patient outcomes remains to be seen. It is an unfortunate fact that the majority of pancreatic cancer patients will ultimately have metastases and succumb to distant disease. Thus, improvements in local tumor control engendered by these recent advances will have little impact on overall survival without the coincident development of better systemic treatment regimens.

Bilateral kidney preservation by volumetric-modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) compared to conventional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in pancreatic and bile duct malignancies

Background

To compare volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans with conventional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) plans in pancreatic and bile duct cancers, especially for bilateral kidney preservation.

Methods

A dosimetric analysis was performed in 21 patients who had undergone radiotherapy for pancreatic or bile duct carcinoma at our institution. We compared 4-field 3D-CRT and 2 arcs RapidArc (RA) plans. The treatment plan was designed to deliver a dose of 50.4 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) based on the gross disease in a 1.8 Gy daily fraction, 5 days a week. Planning objectives were 95% of the PTV receiving 95% of the prescribed dose and no more than 2% of the PTV receiving more than 107%. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) for the target volume and the organs at risk (right and left kidneys, bowel tract, liver and healthy tissue) were compared. Monitor units and delivery treatment time were also reported.

Results

All plans achieved objectives, with 95% of the PTV receiving ≥ 95% of the dose (D95% for 3D-CRT = 48.9 Gy and for RA = 48.6 Gy). RapidArc was shown to be superior to 3D-CRT in terms of organ at risk sparing except for contralateral kidney: for bowel tract, the mean dose was reduced by RA compared to 3D-CRT (16.7 vs 20.8 Gy, p = 0.0001). Similar result was observed for homolateral kidney (mean dose of 4.7 Gy for RA vs 12.6 Gy for 3D-CRT, p < 0.0001), but 3D-CRT significantly reduced controlateral kidney dose with a mean dose of 1.8 Gy vs 3.9 Gy, p < 0.0007. Compared to 3D-CRT, mean MUs for each fraction was significantly increased with RapidArc: 207 vs 589, (p < 0.0001) but the treatment time was not significantly different (2 and 2.66 minutes, p = ns).

Conclusion

RapidArc allows significant dose reduction, in particular for homolateral kidney and bowel, while maintaining target coverage. This would have a promising impact on reducing toxicities.

Cost-effectiveness of modern radiotherapy techniques in locally advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy may improve the outcome of patients with pancreatic cancer but at an increased cost. In this study, the authors evaluated the cost-effectiveness of modern radiotherapy techniques in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

A Markov decision-analytic model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of 4 treatment regimens: gemcitabine alone, gemcitabine plus conventional radiotherapy, gemcitabine plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT); and gemcitabine with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Patients transitioned between the following 5 health states: stable disease, local progression, distant failure, local and distant failure, and death. Health utility tolls were assessed for radiotherapy and chemotherapy treatments and for radiation toxicity.

RESULTS

SBRT increased life expectancy by 0.20 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) at an increased cost of $13,700 compared with gemcitabine alone (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] = $69,500 per QALY). SBRT was more effective and less costly than conventional radiotherapy and IMRT. An analysis that excluded SBRT demonstrated that conventional radiotherapy had an ICER of $126,800 per QALY compared with gemcitabine alone, and IMRT had an ICER of $1,584,100 per QALY compared with conventional radiotherapy. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness to pay of $50,000 per QALY was 78% for gemcitabine alone, 21% for SBRT, 1.4% for conventional radiotherapy, and 0.01% for IMRT. At a willingness to pay of $200,000 per QALY, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 73% for SBRT, 20% for conventional radiotherapy, 7% for gemcitabine alone, and 0.7% for IMRT.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results indicated that IMRT in locally advanced pancreatic cancer exceeds what society considers cost-effective. In contrast, combining gemcitabine with SBRT increased clinical effectiveness beyond that of gemcitabine alone at a cost potentially acceptable by today's standards.

Intensity modulated radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma: a case for dose escalation and organ at risk toxicity reduction

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma remains challenging because of proximity to surrounding organs at risk (OAR). We report the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas to minimize dose to OAR while concurrently optimizing tumor dose coverage.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2000 to October 2002, 10 patients (average age 56 years) with retroperitoneal sarcoma and one with inguinal sarcoma were treated with radiation at Emory University. Prescription dose to the planning treatment volume (PTV) was commonly 50.4 at 1.8 Gy/fraction. CT simulation was used in each patient, three patients were treated with 3D-conformal treatment (3D-CRT), and the remaining eight received multi-leaf collimator-based (MLC) IMRT. IMRT treatment fields ranged from eight to 11 and average volume treated was 3498 cc. Optimal 3D-CRT plans were generated and compared with IMRT with respect to tumor coverage and OAR dose toxicity. Dose volume histograms were compared for both the 3D-CRT and IMRT plans.

RESULTS

Mean dose to small bowel decreased from 36 Gy with 3D-CRT to 27 Gy using IMRT, and tumor coverage (V95) increased from 95.3% with 3D-CRT to 98.6% using IMRT. Maximum and minimum doses delivered to the PTV were significantly increased by 6 and 22%, respectively (P = 0.011, P = 0.055). Volume of small bowel receiving > 30Gy was significantly decreased from 63.5 to 43.1% with IMRT compared with conventional treatment (P = 0.043). Seven patients developed grade 2 nausea, three developed grade 2 diarrhea, one had grade 2 skin toxicity, and one patient developed grade 3 liver toxicity (RTOG toxicity scale). No other delayed toxicities related to radiation were observed. At a median follow-up of 58 weeks, there were no local recurrences and only one patient developed disease progression with distant metastasis in the liver.

CONCLUSIONS

IMRT for retroperitoneal sarcoma allowed enhanced tumor coverage and better sparing of dose to critical normal structures such as small bowel, liver, and kidney. Escalation of dose has a positive impact on local control for retroperitoneal sarcoma; IMRT may be an effective method to achieve this goal. We are evaluating preoperative dose escalation to 59.4 Gy.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy significantly improves acute gastrointestinal toxicity in pancreatic and ampullary cancers

PURPOSE

Among patients with upper abdominal malignancies, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) can improve dose distributions to critical dose-limiting structures near the target. Whether these improved dose distributions are associated with decreased toxicity when compared with conventional three-dimensional treatment remains a subject of investigation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

46 patients with pancreatic/ampullary cancer were treated with concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) using inverse-planned IMRT. All patients received CRT based on 5-fluorouracil in a schema similar to Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 97-04. Rates of acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity for this series of IMRT-treated patients were compared with those from RTOG 97-04, where all patients were treated with three-dimensional conformal techniques. Chi-square analysis was used to determine if there was a statistically different incidence in acute GI toxicity between these two groups of patients.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of Grade 3-4 acute GI toxicity was low in patients receiving IMRT-based CRT. When compared with patients who had three-dimensional treatment planning (RTOG 97-04), IMRT significantly reduced the incidence of Grade 3-4 nausea and vomiting (0% vs. 11%, p = 0.024) and diarrhea (3% vs. 18%, p = 0.017). There was no significant difference in the incidence of Grade 3-4 weight loss between the two groups of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

IMRT is associated with a statistically significant decrease in acute upper and lower GI toxicity among patients treated with CRT for pancreatic/ampullary cancers. Future clinical trials plan to incorporate the use of IMRT, given that it remains a subject of active investigation.

A comparison of helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and 3D-conformal radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer

We assessed dosimetric differences in pancreatic cancer radiotherapy via helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy (HIMRT), linac-based IMRT, and 3D-conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) with regard to successful plan acceptance and dose to critical organs. Dosimetric analysis was performed in 16 pancreatic cases that were planned to 54 Gy; both post-pancreaticoduodenectomy (n = 8) and unresected (n = 8) cases were compared. Without volume modification, plans met constraints 75% of the time with HIMRT and IMRT and 13% with 3D-CRT. There was no statistically significantly improvement with HIMRT over conventional IMRT in reducing liver V35, stomach V45, or bowel V45. HIMRT offers improved planning target volume (PTV) dose homogeneity compared with IMRT, averaging a lower maximum dose and higher volume receiving the prescription dose (D100). HIMRT showed an increased mean dose over IMRT to bowel and liver. Both HIMRT and IMRT offer a statistically significant improvement over 3D-CRT in lowering dose to liver, stomach, and bowel. The results were similar for both unresected and resected patients. In pancreatic cancer, HIMRT offers improved dose homogeneity over conventional IMRT and several significant benefits to 3D-CRT. Factors to consider before incorporating IMRT into pancreatic cancer therapy are respiratory motion, dose inhomogeneity, and mean dose.

The role of radiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma

The prognosis for locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma remains dismal despite advances in chemotherapy and radiotherapy over the past few decades. The use of radiotherapy for pancreatic carcinoma is often disputed because of the hypothesis that patients with pancreatic cancer die from distant metastases. It is well accepted that the greatest chance for cure of pancreatic cancer involves surgical resection of the primary tumor. However, there is much controversy about the role of radiotherapy in local disease control. The aim of this Review is to discuss data from the available studies, both prospective and retrospective, that evaluate treatment options for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. We focus on the benefits associated with local therapies, including radiotherapy and surgical resection, as they relate to improved local disease control, prolonged overall survival and improved symptom control.

Efficacy and tolerability of limited field radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine in locally advanced pancreatic cancer

AIMS

Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are most commonly managed with chemotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT), which may or may not include non-involved regional lymph nodes in the clinical target volume. We present our results of CRT for LAPC using capecitabine and delivering radiotherapy to a limited radiation field that excluded non-involved regional lymph nodes from the clinical target volume.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients were studied. Patients received 50.4 Gy external beam radiotherapy in 28 fractions, delivered to a planning target volume expanded from the primary tumour and involved nodes only. Capecitabine (500-600 mg/m2) was given twice daily continuously during radiotherapy. Toxicity and efficacy data were prospectively collected.

RESULTS

Nausea, vomiting and tumour pain were the most common grade 2 toxicities. One patient developed grade 3 nausea. The median time to progression was 8.8 months, with 20% remaining progression free at 1 year. The median overall survival was 9.7 months with a 1 year survival of 30%. Of 21 patients with imaged progression, 13 (62%) progressed systemically, three (14%) had local progression, two (10%) had locoregional progression and three (14%) progressed with both local/locoregional and systemic disease.

CONCLUSION

CRT using capecitabine and limited field radiotherapy is a well-tolerated, relatively efficacious treatment for LAPC. The low toxicity and low regional progression rates support the use of limited field radiotherapy, allowing evaluation of this regimen with other anti-cancer agents.

Respiratory movement of upper abdominal organs and its effect on radiotherapy planning in pancreatic cancer

AIMS

Radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer is complicated by the frequent overlapping of the planning target volume (PTV) and the organ at risk (OAR), limiting the dose that can be safely delivered to the tumour. Individualising the margins applied to the clinical target volume (CTV) may reduce OAR irradiation without increasing the risk of geographical miss. We quantified the movement of the pancreas with respiration and evaluated whether individualised margins based on this motion reduced the dose to OARs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Planning computed tomography scans were acquired in quiet breathing, held expiration and held inspiration. Organ motion was evaluated from displacement of a reproducible point within the pancreas in all directions. Two sets of plans (standard plan: P(stan); individualised plan incorporating movement data: P(ind)) were generated for each patient. The PTV and doses to OARs were evaluated for both sets of plans.

RESULTS

The mean (standard deviation) movement of the pancreas in the superior-inferior, lateral and anterior-posterior directions were 15.3 mm (4.3), 5.2 mm (3.5) and 9.7 mm (6.1), respectively. The use of individualised margins reduced the mean PTV volume by 33.5% (9.8) (P=0.0051). The proportional reductions in the percentage of kidney receiving >10 Gy, small bowel >45 Gy and liver >30 Gy were 63.7% (P=0.0051), 29.3% (P=0.0125) and 29.2% (P=0.0107), respectively. For the same level of OAR constraints, individualised margins allowed dose escalation in six of the 10 patients to a mean dose of 63.2 Gy.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study shows a simple way of incorporating organ motion into the planning process and can be adopted by any centre without major strain on healthcare resources. The use of individualised margins reduced PTV volume and the dose to OARs. This may offer an opportunity for dose escalation to try and further improve local control.

Dose escalation with proton or photon radiation treatment for pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose was to determine the optimal radiation therapy modality (three-dimensional conformal photon-radiation therapy [3DCRT], intensity-modulated photon-radiation therapy [IMRT], or passive-scattering proton therapy [PT]) for safe dose escalation (72Gy) in pancreatic tumors in different positions relative to organs at risk (OAR) anatomy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A 3-cm pancreatic tumor was virtually translated every 5mm over 5cm laterally. We generated two plans for each of the three techniques (3DCRT, IMRT, and PT), one that adhered to target coverage objectives and another to meet OAR sparing constraints with best coverage. We evaluated distances between gross tumor volumes and isodoses and compared dose-volume histograms.

RESULTS

IMRT was more conformal in higher gradient dose regions circumferentially, but tumor positions with anteriorly located small bowel benefited more from PT. 3DCRT plans resulted in inadequate target coverage. The V(15Gy) (mean+/-SD) were as follows for the IMRT and PT plans, respectively: stomach, 48%+/-4% vs 5%+/-3% (p<0.0001); and small bowel, 61%+/-8% vs 9%+/-4% (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the optimal radiation therapy modality for safe dose escalation depends on pancreatic tumor position in relation to OAR anatomy.

Planning and delivery of intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is an advanced form of external beam radiation therapy. IMRT offers an additional dimension of freedom as compared with field shaping in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy because the radiation intensities within a radiation field can be varied according to the preferences of locations within a given beam direction from which the radiation is directed to the tumor. This added freedom allows the treatment planning system to better shape the radiation doses to conform to the target volume while sparing surrounding normal structures. The resulting dosimetric advantage has shown to translate into clinical advantages of improving local and regional tumor control. It also offers a valuable mechanism for dose escalation to tumors while simultaneously reducing radiation toxicities to the surrounding normal tissue and sensitive structures. In less than a decade, IMRT has become common practice in radiation oncology. Looking forward, the authors wonder if IMRT has matured to such a point that the room for further improvement has diminished and so it is pertinent to ask what the future will hold for IMRT. This article attempts to look from the perspective of the current state of the technology to predict the immediate trends and the future directions. This article will (1) review the clinical experience of IMRT; (2) review what we learned in IMRT planning; (3) review different treatment delivery techniques; and finally, (4) predict the areas of advancements in the years to come.

Evaluation of four-dimensional computed tomography-based intensity-modulated and respiratory-gated radiotherapy techniques for pancreatic carcinoma

PURPOSE

To compare conformal radiotherapy (CRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and respiration-gated radiotherapy (RGRT) planning techniques for pancreatic cancer. All target volumes were determined using four-dimensional computed tomography scans (4D CT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The pancreatic tumor and enlarged regional lymph nodes were contoured on all 10 phases of a planning 4D CT scan for 10 patients, and the planning target volumes (PTV(all phases)) were generated. Three consecutive respiratory phases for RGRT delivery in both inspiration and expiration were identified, and the corresponding PTVs (PTV(inspiration) and PTV(expiration)) and organ at risk volumes created. Treatment plans using CRT and IMRT, with and without RGRT, were created for each PTV.

RESULTS

Compared with the CRT plans, IMRT significantly reduced the mean volume of right kidney exposed to 20 Gy from 27.7% +/- 17.7% to 16.0% +/- 18.2% (standard deviation) (p < 0.01), but this was not achieved for the left kidney (11.1% +/- 14.2% to 5.7% +/- 6.5%; p = 0.1). The IMRT plans also reduced the mean gastric, hepatic, and small bowel doses (p < 0.01). No additional reductions in the dose to the kidneys or other organs at risk were seen when RGRT plans were combined with either CRT or IMRT, and the findings for RGRT in end-expiration and end-inspiration were similar.

CONCLUSION

4D CT-based IMRT plans for pancreatic tumors significantly reduced the radiation doses to the right kidney, liver, stomach, and small bowel compared with CRT plans. The additional dosimetric benefits from RGRT appear limited in this setting.