Comparison of helical and TomoDirect techniques with simultaneous integrated boost in early breast cancer patients

Background

The aim of the study was to perform dosimetric comparisons of helical (H) and TomoDirect (TD) plans for whole-breast irradiation (WBI) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in early-stage breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving surgery.

Materials and methods

Fifty patients, 25 with left-side and 25 with right-side tumors, were determined for a treatment planning system for a total dose of 50.4Gy in 1.8Gy per fraction to WBI, with a SIB of 2.3Gy per fraction delivered to the tumor bed. The planning target volume (PTV) doses and the conformity (CI) and homogeneity indices (HI) for PTVbreast and PTVboost, as well as organ-at-risk (OAR) doses and treatment times, were compared between the H and TD plans.

Results

All plans met the PTV coverage criteria for the H plan, except for mean V107 of PTVbreast for TD plan. The H plan yielded better homogeneity and conformity of dose distribution compared to the TD plan. The ipsilateral mean lung doses were not significantly different between the two plans. The TD plans is advantageous for mean doses to the heart, contralateral breast and lung, spinal cord, and esophagus than the H plans. In both the H and TD plans, the right-sided breast patients had lower heart dose parameters than the left-sided breast patients. The TD plan is superior to the H plan in sparing the contralateral breast and lung by decreasing low-dose volumes.

Conclusions

While the OAR dose advantages of TD are appealing, shorter treatment times or improved dose homogeneity and conformity for target volume may be advantageous for H plan.

AAPM Task Group Report 306: Quality control and assurance for tomotherapy: An update to Task Group Report 148

Since the publication of AAPM Task Group (TG) 148 on quality assurance (QA) for helical tomotherapy, there have been many new developments on the tomotherapy platform involving treatment delivery, on-board imaging options, motion management, and treatment planning systems (TPSs). In response to a need for guidance on quality control (QC) and QA for these technologies, the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee commissioned TG 306 to review these changes and make recommendations related to these technology updates. The specific objectives of this TG were (1) to update, as needed, recommendations on tolerance limits, frequencies and QC/QA testing methodology in TG 148, (2) address the commissioning and necessary QA checks, as a supplement to Medical Physics Practice Guidelines (MPPG) with respect to tomotherapy TPS and (3) to provide risk-based recommendations on the new technology implemented clinically and treatment delivery workflow. Detailed recommendations on QA tests and their tolerance levels are provided for dynamic jaws, binary multileaf collimators, and Synchrony motion management. A subset of TPS commissioning and QA checks in MPPG 5.a. applicable to tomotherapy are recommended. In addition, failure mode and effects analysis has been conducted among TG members to obtain multi-institutional analysis on tomotherapy-related failure modes and their effect ranking.

Impact of Respiratory Motion on the Skin Dose for Breast Cancer in Tomotherapy: A Study in the In-house Moving Phantom

Purpose: The dose expansion methods as the skin flash and virtual bolus were used to solve intrafraction movement for breast planning due to breathing motion. We investigated the skin dose in each planning method by using optically stimulated luminescence on an in-house moving phantom for breast cancer treatment in tomotherapy. The impact of respiratory motion on skin dose between static and dynamic phantom's conditions was evaluated. Methods: A phantom was developed with movement controlled by the respirator for generating the respiratory waveforms to simulate respiratory motion. Five optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters were placed on the phantom surface to investigate the skin dose for the TomoDirect and TomoHelical under static and dynamic conditions. Eight treatment plans were generated with and without skin flash or virtual bolus by varying the thickness. The difference in skin dose between the two phantom conditions for each plan was explored. Results: All plans demonstrated a skin dose of more than 87% of the prescription dose under static conditions. However, the skin dose was reduced to 84.1% (TomoDirect) and 78.9% (TomoHelical) for dynamic conditions. The treatment plans without skin flash or virtual bolus showed significant skin dose differences under static and dynamic conditions by 4.83% (TomoDirect) and 9.43% (TomoHelical), whereas the skin flash with two leaves (TomoDirect 2L) or virtual bolus of at least 1.0 cm thickness (VB1.0) application compensated the skin dose in case of intrafraction movements by presenting a skin dose difference of less than 2% between the static and dynamic conditions. Conclusion: The skin dose was reduced under dynamic conditions due to breathing motion. The skin flash method with TomoDirect 2L or virtual bolus application with 1.0 cm thickness was useful for maintaining skin dose following the prescription by compensating for intrafraction movement due to respiratory motion for breast cancer in tomotherapy.

Dose verification of virtual bolus application for helical tomotherapy

The objective of the study is to verify the dose delivered on helical tomotherapy based on treatment plan with varying virtual bolus (VB) thickness. The target was localized on the ArcCHECK image by 3 mm margin from the phantom surface. The dimension of target, which includes the ArcCHECK's detectors, with the 4.0 cm width and length 12.0 cm along the phantom The 5 treatment plans were generated, 1 plan without VB application (NoVB) and the 4 plans with varying of VB thickness on the phantom surface by 0.5 cm (VB0.5), 1.0 cm (VB1.0), 1.5 cm (VB1.5), and 2.0 cm (VB2.0), in treatment planning but absent during irradiation. For measurement analysis, the ionization chamber and the ArcCHECK detectors were used for point dose and dose distribution by investigating the percentage of dose difference and the gamma passing rate. The VB thickness 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 cm showed acceptable value with less than 2% for dose difference by 0.37% (VB0.5), -0.11% (VB1.0) and -0.37% (VB1.5) at the center of ArcCHECK. The accuracy of dose distribution showed an acceptable gamma passing rate of 99.8% (VB0.5), 100% (VB1.0), and 90.2% (VB1.5) for gamma criteria by 3%/3mm for absolute dose analysis. However, the gamma passing rate of VB2.0 down to 71.2% of absolute mode for gamma criteria by 3%/3mm. The treatment plans with VB thickness less than 15 mm deliver doses that are comparable to treatment plans without virtual bolus based on gamma analysis. However, the deviation showed a trend increasing when VB thickness increased. The VB2.0 was not acceptable for point dose and dose distribution verification by more than 2% dose difference and less than 90% of gamma passing rate.

Dosimetric comparison of TomoDirect, helical tomotherapy, and volumetric modulated arc therapy for postmastectomy treatment

Purpose

To compare dose to the targets and organs at risk (OARs) in different situations for postmastectomy patients who require radiation to the chest wall with or without regional nodal irradiation when using three treatment techniques.

Methods and materials

Thirty postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) patients previously treated by helical tomotherapy (HT) at our institution were identified for the study. The treatment targets were classified in three situations which consisted of, the chest wall (CW) only, the chest wall plus supraclavicular lymph nodes (CW + SPC), and the chest wall plus supraclavicular and whole axillary lymph nodes irradiation (CW + SPC+AXLN). The volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans and Tomodirect (TD) plans were created for each patient and compared with HT treatment plans which had been treated. The target coverage, dose homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), and dose to OARs were analyzed. The quality scores were used to evaluate the appropriate technique for each situation from multiparameter results.

Results

The HT and VMAT plans showed the advantage of target coverage and OARs sparing for the chest wall with regional nodal irradiation with the higher plan quality scores when compared with TD plans. However, TD plans demonstrated superiority to contralateral breast sparing for the chest wall without regional nodal situation reaching the highest of planned quality scores. HT plans showed better HI, CI, and target coverage (P < 0.01) than TD and VMAT plans for all patient situations. Volumetric modulated arc therapy plans generated better contralateral breast and heart sparing at a lower dose than HT.

Conclusion

The arc‐based techniques, HT and VMAT plans, provided an advantage for complex targets in terms of target coverage and OARs sparing. However, the static beam TD plan was superior for contralateral organ sparing meanwhile achieving good target coverage for the chest wall without regional node situations.

Minimizing a Tricky Situation in Breast Irradiation with Helical Tomotherapy

We report on a patient with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant intensity-modulated whole breast and lymph node irradiation with static angle tomotherapy (TomoDirect), who experienced a traumatic ipsilateral humeral fracture and was able to continue radiotherapy with helical tomotherapy and daily dosimetric monitoring by means of the Planned Adaptive module.

Bilateral Breast Radiation Delivered with Static Angle Tomotherapy (TomoDirect): Clinical Feasibility and Dosimetric Results of a Single Patient

We herein report on a case of synchronous bilateral breast cancer patient undergoing adjuvant intensity-modulated whole breast with static angle tomotherapy (TomoDirect). The patient was treated with a hypofractionated schedule employing a simultaneous integrated boost approach. Radiotherapy schedule was 45 Gy/20 fractions (2.25 Gy daily) to the bilateral whole breast and 50 Gy/20 fractions (2.5 Gy daily) to the 2 lumpectomy cavities. Treatment was delivered over 4 weeks. Dosimetric results were robust with consistent target coverage and adequate normal tissue avoidance. Treatment was generally well-tolerated and acute toxicity profile was mild. The present report highlights the promising clinical feasibility of TomoDirect for bilateral breast irradiation.

The sensitivity of ArcCHECK-based gamma analysis to manufactured errors in helical tomotherapy radiation delivery

Three‐dimensional measurement arrays are an efficient means of acquiring a distribution of data for patient plan delivery QA. However, the tie between plan integrity and traditional gamma‐based analysis of these data are not clear. This study explores the sensitivity of such analysis by creating errors in Helical Tomotherapy delivery and measuring the passing rates with an ArcCHECK cylindrical diode array. Errors were introduced in each of the couch speed, leaf open time, and gantry starting position in increasing magnitude while the resulting gamma passing rates were tabulated. The error size required to degrade the gamma passing rate to 90% or below was on average a 3% change in couch speed, 5° in gantry synchronization, or a 5 ms in leaf closing speed for a 3%/3 mm Van Dyk gamma analysis. This varied with plan type, with prostate plans exhibiting less sensitivity than head and neck plans and with gamma analysis criteria, but in all cases the error magnitudes were large compared to actual machine tolerances. These findings suggest that the sensitivity of ArcCHECK‐based gamma analysis to single‐mode errors in tomotherapy plans is dependent upon plan and analysis type and at traditional passing thresholds unable to detect small defects in the plan.

PACS number: 87.55.Qr

Palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases from solid tumors delivered with static ports of tomotherapy (TomoDirect): feasibility and clinical results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility and response to palliative radiotherapy delivered with static ports of tomotherapy--TomoDirect (TD) in patients affected with painful bone metastases from solid tumors.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 130 patients (185 osseous lesions) was treated between 2010 and 2013 with TD. Three fractionation schedules were employed according to clinical decision-making (3 Gy × 10; 4 Gy × 5; 8 Gy × 1). Pain response was investigated at 2 weeks and 2 months (for evaluable patients). The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) was used to assess pain. Response rates to radiotherapy were calculated following the criteria of the International Bone Metastases Consensus Group (IBMCG), accounting for the use of concomitant analgesics (response: complete or partial; non-response: stable pain, pain progression or "other"). Analgesic consumption was recalculated into the daily oral morphine-equivalent dose (OMED).

RESULTS

Most of the patients had 1-2 bone metastases (91); those with multiple lesions mostly had a metachronous presentation (60%). Synchronous lesions were mainly approached with multiple plans (63%). Most treatments employed 3-4 fields (77%). Treatment times ranged from 255 to 939 s depending on fractionation, fields, and target lesions number. At 2 weeks, the median self-reported worst pain decreased significantly as median oral morphine-equivalent dose regardless of fractionation used. The response rate according to the IBMCG-based response categories ranged from 45 to 55%. Pain relief duration seems (response at 2 months) slightly inferior with the single fraction approach, with a higher re-treatment rate. At 2 weeks, the median self-reported worst pain and OMED significantly decreased regardless of fractionation (response rate: 49-55%). Pain relief decreased at 2 months, especially for single fraction (higher re-treatment rate).

CONCLUSION

TD is a valid option to deliver palliative radiotherapy for painful bone metastases from solid tumors.

Intensity-modulated adjuvant whole breast radiation delivered with static angle tomotherapy (TomoDirect): a prospective case series

PURPOSE

To report the 2-year outcomes of whole breast intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) after conserving surgery for early breast cancer (EBC) delivered with static angle tomotherapy (TomoDirect) (TD).

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 120 EBC patients underwent whole breast IMRT with TD between 2010 and 2012. Radiation was delivered to a conventionally fractionated whole breast total dose of 50 Gy with TD, followed by a sequential conventionally fractionated tumor bed boost dose of 10-16 Gy with helical tomotherapy (HT). Clinical endpoints include acute and late toxicity, cosmesis, quality of life and local control.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 24 months (range 12-36 months); maximum detected acute skin toxicity was G0 22 %; G1 63 %; G2 12 % and G3 3 %. Predictors of acute dermatitis were as follows: volume of the whole breast minus boost volume receiving 105, 110 and 115 % of prescription dose, whole breast and boost volume, breast thickness and soft tissue thickness. Late skin toxicity was mild with no >G2 events. Cosmesis was good/excellent in 91.7 % of patients and fair/poor in 8.3 %. Quality of life was preserved over time, but for fatigue, transiently increased.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant whole breast IMRT delivered sequentially with both TD and HT provides consistent clinical results. An observed unintended excessive dose outside the tumor bed might increase acute toxicity and eventually affect long-term clinical endpoints. The incorporation of the boost dose within the whole breast phase employing a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) approach might mitigate this issue.