The use of a simultaneous integrated boost in spinal stereotactic body radiotherapy to reduce the risk of vertebral compression fractures: a treatment planning study

Assessment of minimum target dose as a predictor of local failure after spine SBRT

OBJECTIVES

Metastasis-directed stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has demonstrated robust clinical benefits in carefully selected patients, improving local control and even overall survival (OS). We assess a large database to determine clinical and dosimetric predictors of local failure after spine SBRT.

METHODS

Spine SBRT treatments with imaging follow-up were identified. Patients were treated with a simultaneous integrated boost technique using 1 or 3 fractions, delivering 20-24 Gy in 1 fraction to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and 16 Gy to the low dose volume (or 27-36 Gy and 21-24 Gy for 3 fraction treatments). Exclusions included: lack of imaging follow-up, proton therapy, and benign primary histologies.

RESULTS

522 eligible spine SBRT treatments (68 % single fraction) were identified in 377 unique patients. Patients had a median OS of 43.7 months (95 % confidence interval: 34.3-54.4). The cumulative incidence of local failure was 10.5 % (7.4-13.4) at 1 year and 16.3 % (12.6-19.9) at 2 years. Local control was maximized at 15.3 Gy minimum dose for single-fraction treatment (HR = 0.31, 95 % CI: 0.17 - 0.56, p < 0.0001) and confirmed via multivariable analyses. Cumulative incidence of local failure was 6.1 % (2.6-9.4) vs. 14.2 % (8.3-19.8) at 1 year using this cut-off, with comparable findings for minimum 14 Gy. Additionally, epidural and soft tissue involvement were predictive of local failure (HR = 1.77 and 2.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Spine SBRT offers favorable local control; however, minimum dose to the GTV has a strong association with local control. Achieving GTV minimum dose of 14-15.3 Gy with single fraction SBRT is recommended whenever possible.

Improvement of target coverage using automated non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy planning in stereotactic radiotherapy for cervical metastatic spinal tumors

This study aimed to compare dosimetric parameters for targets and organs at risk (OARs) between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and automated VMAT (HyperArc, HA) plans in stereotactic radiotherapy for patients with cervical metastatic spine tumors. VMAT plans were generated for 11 metastases using the simultaneous integrated boost technique to deliver 35 to 40 and 20 to 25 Gy for high dose and elective dose planning target volume (PTVHD and PTVED), respectively. The HA plans were retrospectively generated using 1 coplanar and 2 noncoplanar arcs. Subsequently, the doses to the targets and OARs were compared. The HA plans provided significantly higher (p < 0.05) D_min (77.4 ± 13.1%), D_99% (89.3 ± 8.9%), and D_98% (92.5 ± 7.7%) for gross tumor volume (GTV) than those of the VMAT plans (73.4 ± 12.2%, 84.2 ± 9.6 and 87.3 ± 8.8% for D_min, D_99% and D_98%, respectively). In addition, D_99% and D_98% for PTVHD were significantly higher in the HA plans, whereas dosimetric parameters were comparable between the HA and VMAT plans for PTVED. The D_max values for the brachial plexus, esophagus, and spinal cord were comparable, and no significant difference was observed in the D_mean for the larynx, pharyngeal constrictor, thyroid, parotid grand (left and right), and Submandibular gland (left and right). The HA plans provided significantly higher target coverage of GTV and PTVHD, with a comparable dose for OARs with VMAT plans. The results of this study may contribute to the improvement of local control in clinical practice.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for spine metastases: a review of 24 Gy in 2 daily fractions

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has proven to be a highly effective treatment for selected patients with spinal metastases. Randomized evidence shows improvements in complete pain response rates and local control with lower retreatment rates favoring SBRT, compared to conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT). While there are several reported dose-fractionation schemes for spine SBRT, 24 Gy in 2 fractions has emerged with Level 1 evidence providing an excellent balance between minimizing treatment toxicity while respecting patient convenience and financial strain.

METHODS

We provide an overview of the 24 Gy in 2 SBRT fraction regimen for spine metastases, which was developed at the University of Toronto and tested in an international Phase 2/3 randomized controlled trial.

RESULTS

The literature summarizing global experience with 24 Gy in 2 SBRT fractions suggests 1-year local control rates ranging from 83-93.9%, and 1-year rates of vertebral compression fracture ranging from 5.4-22%. Reirradiation of spine metastases that failed prior cEBRT is also feasible with 24 Gy in 2 fractions, and 1-year local control rates range from 72-86%. Post-operative spine SBRT data are limited but do support the use of 24 Gy in 2 fractions with reported 1-year local control rates ranging from 70-84%. Typically, the rates of plexopathy, radiculopathy and myositis are under 5% in those series reporting mature follow up, with no cases of radiation myelopathy (RM) reported in the de novo setting when the spinal cord avoidance structure is limited to 17 Gy in 2 fractions. However, re-irradiation RM has been observed following 2 fraction SBRT. More recently, 2-fraction dose escalation with 28 Gy, with a higher dose constraint to the critical neural tissues, has been reported suggesting improved rates of local control. This regimen may be important in those patients with radioresistant histologies, high grade epidural disease, and/or paraspinal disease.

CONCLUSION

The dose-fractionation of 24 Gy in 2 fractions is well-supported by published literature and is an ideal starting point for centers looking to establish a spine SBRT program.

Palliative radiotherapy of bone metastases in octogenarians: How do the oldest olds respond? Results from a tertiary cancer center with 288 treated patients

BACKGROUND

Accompanied by the demographic change, the number of octogenarian cancer patients with bone metastases will increase in the future. Palliative radiotherapy constitutes an effective analgesic treatment; however, as pain perception and bone metabolism change with increasing age, the analgesic efficacy of radiotherapy may be altered in elderly patients. We therefore investigated the treatment outcomes of palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in octogenarians.

METHODS

Patients between 80 and 89 years undergoing radiotherapy for bone metastases between 2009 and 2019 at a tertiary cancer center were analyzed for patterns-of-care, pain response and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression analyses were carried out to examine parameters associated with pain response, and Cox analyses were conducted to reveal prognostic parameters for OS.

RESULTS

A total of 288 patients with 516 irradiated lesions were included in the analysis. The majority (n = 249, 86%) completed all courses of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy led to pain reduction in 176 patients (61%) at the end of treatment. Complete pain relief at the first follow-up was achieved in 84 patients (29%). Bisphosphonate administration was significantly associated with higher rates of pain response at the first follow-up (p < 0.05). Median OS amounted to 9 months, and 1-year, 2-year and 3-year OS were 43%, 28% and 17%. In the multivariate analysis, ECOG (p < 0.001), Mizumoto score (p < 0.01) and Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) (p < 0.001) were independent prognosticators for OS.

CONCLUSION

Palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases constitutes a feasible and effective analgesic treatment in octogenarian patients. ECOG, Mizumoto score and SINS are prognosic variables for survival and may aid treatment decisions regarding radiotherapy fractionation in this patient group. Single-fraction radiotherapy with 8 Gy should be applied for patients with uncomplicated bone metastases and poor prognosis. Prospective trials focusing on quality of life of these very old cancer patients with bone metastases are warranted to reveal the optimal radiotherapeutic management for this vulnerable population.

ESTRO ACROP guidelines for external beam radiotherapy of patients with uncomplicated bone metastases

After liver and lungs, bone is the third most common metastatic site (Nystrom et al., 1977). Almost all malignancies can metastasize to the skeleton but 80% of bone metastases originate from breast, prostate, lung, kidney and thyroid cancer (Mundy, 2002). Introduction of effective systemic treatment in many cancers has prolonged patients' survival, including those with bone metastases. Bone metastases may significantly reduce quality of life due to related symptoms and possible complications, such as pain and neurologic compromise. The most serious complications of bone metastases are skeletal-related events (SRE), defined as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, pain, or other symptoms requiring an urgent intervention such as surgery or radiotherapy. In turn, growing access to modern diagnostic tools allows early detection of asymptomatic bone metastases that could be successfully managed with local treatment avoiding development of SRE. The treatment for bone metastases should focus on relieving existing symptoms and preventing new ones. Radiotherapy is the standard of care for patients with symptomatic bone metastases, providing durable pain relief with minimal toxicity and reasonable cost-effectiveness. Historically, the dose was prescribed in one to five fractions and delivered using simple planning techniques. While 3D-conformal radiotherapy is still widely used for treating bone metastases, introduction of highlyconformal radiotherapy techniques such as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) have opened new therapeutic possibilities that should be considered in selected patients with bone metastases.

Personalized Automation of Treatment Planning for Linac-Based Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy of Spine Cancer

Purpose/Objective(s)

Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SBRT) for vertebral metastases is a challenging treatment process. Planning automation has recently reported the potential to improve plan quality and increase planning efficiency. We performed a dosimetric evaluation of the new Personalized engine implemented in Pinnacle3 for full planning automation of SBRT spine treatments in terms of plan quality, treatment efficiency, and delivery accuracy.

Materials/Methods

The Pinnacle3 treatment planning system was used to reoptimize six patients with spinal metastases, employing two separate automated engines. These two automated engines, the existing Autoplanning and the new Personalized, are both template-based algorithms that employ a wishlist to construct planning goals and an iterative technique to replicate the planning procedure performed by skilled planners. The boost tumor volume (BTV) was defined as the macroscopically visible lesion on RM examination, and the planning target volume (PTV) corresponds with the entire vertebra. Dose was prescribed according to simultaneous integrated boost strategy with BTV and PTV irradiated simultaneously over 3 fractions with a dose of 30 and 21 Gy, respectively. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics and conformance indices were used to compare clinically accepted manual plans (MP) with automated plans developed using both Autoplanning (AP) and Personalized engines (Pers). All plans were evaluated for planning efficiency and dose delivery accuracy.

Results

For similar spinal cord sparing, automated plans reported a significant improvement of target coverage and dose conformity. On average, Pers plans increased near-minimal dose D98% by 10.4% and 8.9% and target coverage D95% by 8.0% and by 4.6% for BTV and PTV, respectively. Automated plans provided significantly superior dose conformity and dose contrast by 37%–47% and by 4.6%–5.7% compared with manual plans. Overall planning times were dramatically reduced to about 15 and 23 min for Pers and AP plans, respectively. The average beam-on times were found to be within 3 min for all plans. Despite the increased complexity, all plans passed the 2%/2 mm γ-analysis for dose verification.

Conclusion

Automated planning for spine SBRT through the new Pinnacle3 Personalized engine provided an overall increase of plan quality in terms of dose conformity and a major increase in efficiency. In this complex anatomical site, Personalized strongly reduce the tradeoff between optimal accurate dosimetry and planning time.

Pain Response After Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Versus Conventional Radiation Therapy in Patients With Bone Metastases-A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Trial Within a Prospective Cohort

PURPOSE

Pain response after conventional external beam radiation therapy (cRT) in patients with painful bone metastases is observed in 60% to 70% of patients. The aim of the VERTICAL trial was to investigate whether stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) improves pain response.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This single-center, phase 2, randomized controlled trial was conducted within the PRESENT cohort, which consists of patients referred for radiation therapy of bone metastases to our tertiary center. Cohort participants with painful bone metastases who gave broad informed consent for randomization were randomly assigned to cRT or SBRT. Only patients in the intervention arm received information about the trial and were offered SBRT (1 × 18 Gy, 3 × 10 Gy, or 5 × 7 Gy), which they could accept or refuse. Patients who refused SBRT underwent standard cRT (1 × 8 Gy, 5 × 4 Gy, or 10 × 3 Gy). Patients in the control arm were not informed. Primary endpoint was pain response at 3 months after radiation therapy. Secondary outcomes were pain response at any point within 3 months, mean pain scores, and toxicity. Data were analyzed intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP). This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02364115.

RESULTS

Between January 29, 2015, and March 20, 2019, 110 patients were randomized. ITT analysis included 44 patients in the cRT arm and 45 patients in the SBRT arm. In the intervention arm, 12 patients (27%) declined SBRT, and 7 patients (16%) were unable to complete the SBRT treatment. In ITT, 14 of 44 patients (32%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 18%-45%) in the control arm and 18 of 45 patients (40%; 95% CI, 26%-54%) in the SBRT arm reported a pain response at 3 months (P = .42). In PP, these proportions were 14 of 44 (32%; 95% CI, 18%-45%) and 12 of 23 patients (46%; 95% CI, 27%-66%), respectively (P = .55). In ITT, a pain response within 3 months was reported by 30 of 44 control patients (82%; 95% CI, 68%-90%) and 38 of 45 patients (84%; 95% CI, 71%-92%) in the SBRT arm (P = .12). In PP, these proportions were 36 of 44 (82%; 95% CI, 68%-90%) and 26 of 27 patients (96%; 95% CI; 81%-100%), respectively (P = .12). No grade 3 or 4 toxicity was observed in either arm.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT did not significantly improve pain response in patients with painful bone metastases. One in 4 patients preferred to undergo cRT over SBRT, and 1 in 5 patients starting SBRT was unable to complete this treatment. Because of this selective dropout, which can be attributed to the character of the intervention, the trial was underpowered to detect the prespecified difference in pain response.

Normal tissue complication probability of vertebral compression fracture after stereotactic body radiotherapy for de novo spine metastasis

OBJECTIVE

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for spine metastases is associated with post-treatment vertebral compression fracture (VCF). The purpose of this study is to identify clinical and radiation planning characteristics that predict post-SBRT VCF through a novel normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) analysis.

METHODS

Patients with de novo spine metastases treated with SBRT between 2009 and 2018 at a single institution were included. Those who had surgical stabilization or radiation to the same site prior to SBRT were excluded. VCF was defined as new development or progression of existing vertebral body height loss not attributable to tumor growth. Probit NTCP models were constructed and fitted using a maximum likelihood approach. A multivariate proportional hazard model was used to estimate time to VCF using the Fine and Gray method.

RESULTS

Three hundred and two vertebral segments from 193 patients were treated with a median dose of 24 Gy in 3 fractions (range 15-30 Gy in 1-5 fractions). With a median follow up of 13.9 months, local control was 89.3% at 1 year. A total of 26 SBRT-induced VCFs were observed, with 1 and 2-year cumulative incidences of 4.6% and 6.7%. NTCP modeling demonstrated a steep response of VCF risk to the dose to 80% and 50% volume of the planning target volume (PTV D80% and D50%), but not maximum dose or dose to 1 cc or 10% of PTV. D80% of 25 Gy and D50% of 28 Gy in 3 fractions corresponded to 10% VCF risk. On multivariate analysis, lower body mass index (HR 0.90 per unit increase, p = 0.04), total spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS, HR 2.44 unstable vs stable, p = 0.04), and PTV D80% (HR 1.11 for every Gy increase, p = 0.003) were associated with increased VCF risk.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT provides excellent tumor control for spinal metastases and is associated with low rate of VCF in our cohort. NTCP modeling suggests that the larger volume of spine receiving lower doses are more closely associated with post-SBRT VCF than high dose regions. Under current target delineation methods, common SBRT regimens such as 24 Gy in 2 fractions or 27 Gy in 3 fractions may be inherently associated with VCF risk of 10% or greater. Consensus contouring guidelines should be reevaluated to minimize the volume of irradiated spine in light of these new data.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Oligometastatic Patients After Conventional or Stereotactic Radiation Therapy to Bone Metastases: An Analysis of the PRESENT Cohort

PURPOSE

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has become a widely adopted treatment for patients with oligometastatic disease, despite limited evidence of superiority. We compared pain response and quality of life (QoL) in patients with oligometastatic disease treated with conventionally fractionated 3-dimensional radiation therapy (3DCRT) or SBRT to bone metastases.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We included patients with oligometastatic disease (≤5 lesions within ≤3 organs) treated within the prospective PRESENT cohort. Main outcomes were pain response, clinical local control, and QoL 2, 4, and 8 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment. Pain response was assessed only in patients who reported pain at baseline and was defined according to international consensus criteria.

RESULTS

Of 131 patients with oligometastatic disease, 66 patients were treated with 3DCRT and 65 patients with SBRT. A pain response was achieved in 81% (3DCRT) versus 84% (SBRT) with a median duration of 23 weeks (range, 1-58) and 24 weeks (range, 0-50), respectively. Reirradiation was needed in 33% versus 5% of the patients, respectively. None of the QoL subscales were significantly different between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with oligometastatic disease, SBRT to bone metastases did not improve pain response or QoL compared with 3DCRT. Reirradiation was less often needed in the SBRT group.