The effect of prone and supine treatment positions for the pre-operative treatment of rectal cancer on organ-at-risk sparing and setup reproducibility using volumetric modulated arc therapy

Minimizing the Risk of Acute Skin Toxicity Due to Hip Prosthesis Avoidance in Prostate Radiation Therapy

Limiting the entrance dose through hip prostheses to improve dosimetric accuracy can result in unfavorable skin toxicity. We propose a volumetric modulated arc therapy solution that strikes a better balance between dose accuracy and skin dosimetry. Our current planning strategy limits the entrance dose through hip prostheses using stringent optimization objectives on an avoidance structure. Avoidance efficiency is evaluated by recalculating the plan with prosthesis density set at 20 g/cc, and evaluating the loss of target coverage from increased attenuation. We require this loss to be ≤5% of the original values. This approach has resulted in an uncommon skin toxicity for a prostate-bed patient with bilateral hip prostheses. Thus, the dosimetric tradeoffs between skin dose and prosthesis avoidance were investigated by incrementally reducing prosthesis avoidance to achieve maximum skin doses (D_max) between 30 and 50 Gy. When prosthesis avoidance is prioritized, the skin dose increases and the target dose coverage and conformity decrease. A large degradation in target coverage for plans with the lowest skin D_max of 30 to 35 Gy indicates that a significant proportion of the target dose arises from beams entering the prostheses. The plan with a skin D_max of 40 Gy provides a better compromise between skin and prosthesis entrance doses, with a <20% reduction in target coverage at an increased prosthesis density of 20 g/cm³. Skin dose needs to be considered when using prosthesis avoidance planning strategies. Allowing for a minimal dose through the prosthesis may be required to restrict skin dose and reduce the risk of toxicity.

ECOG-ACRIN Guideline for Contouring and Treatment of Early Stage Anal Cancer Using IMRT/IGRT

PURPOSE

Previous anal cancer guidelines delineate target volumes similarly for all patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal and/or perianal skin (SCCA), regardless of disease stage. The purpose of this guideline is to provide customized radiation treatment recommendations for early stage (T1-2 N0 M0) anal cancer treated with intensity modulated and image guided radiation therapy (RT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A contouring atlas and radiation treatment recommendations for the ongoing, randomized phase II trial of deintensified chemoradiation for early stage SCCA (EA2182) was created by an expert panel of radiation oncologists. A literature search was conducted to update and expand these recommendations into a guideline for routine clinical use.

RESULTS

For the majority of cases, we recommend treatment in the supine, frog leg position with the use of a customized immobilization device and daily image guided RT to ensure optimal bone and soft tissue alignment. Vaginal dilators can be used daily during RT to maximize genitalia sparing. We recommend use of a 10-mm margin on the gross tumor plus including the anal complex to create the primary clinical target volume. To define the elective lymph node clinical target volume, we recommend starting with a 7-mm expansion on blood vessels, but then further refining these volumes based on the anatomic location. A 5- to 10-mm planning target volume (PTV) margin is suggested based on institutional setup and patient-specific factors. When using a simultaneous integrated boost technique, a dose of 50.4 Gy to primary PTV and 42 Gy to lymph node PTV, both delivered over 28 fractions, with chemotherapy is appropriate for early stage anal cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This guideline provides anatomic, clinical, and technical instructions to guide radiation oncologists in the planning and delivery of intensity modulated and image guided RT for early stage SCCA.

Moving Unfavorable Small-Bowel Anatomy Away From the Prostate to Optimize Radiation Therapy Plans With the GU-Lok

Patients with localized prostate cancer comprise a large volume of treatments in radiation therapy centers. Occasionally, individual patient anatomy makes the safe delivery of an effective dose of radiation therapy challenging. We describe 2 cases of patients with a small bowel deep in the pelvis within the planning target volume with subsequent suboptimal radiation therapy treatment plans. We explore how we used the GU-Lok, a prostate immobilization device, to move the small bowel away from the prostate, and tighten target volume margins to help facilitate safe and effective treatment.

Prone treatment position as a novel option for head and neck cancer patients with unmanageable secretions

Background:

Supine orientation is the standard treatment position for radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Some patients, however, cannot tolerate this due to pooling of secretions and airway concerns, and theoretically, treatment would be better tolerated in a prone position. Here, we described the first prone treatment setup and delivery for a patient with head and neck cancer.

Methods:

A 68-year-old male patient with inoperable locally advanced, T4aN0M0, squamous cell carcinoma of the maxillary sinus was simulated, planned, and treated in prone position due to sinus congestion.

Results:

Prone position was well tolerated by the patient, who then did not require daily anaesthesia for airway secretion management. The prone dosimetry demonstrated good target coverage and normal tissue sparing. His treatment setup was found to be reproducible throughout the course of therapy.

Conclusions:

We successfully demonstrated the feasibility of prone treatment position for patients with head and neck cancer who are unable to tolerate supine position due to unmanageable secretions. Consideration should be given to prone treatment when designing both radiation therapy protocols and individual treatment plans.

A critical literature review on the use of bellyboard devices to control small bowel dose for pelvic radiotherapy

Delivering curative radiotherapy doses for rectal and gynaecological tumours has historically been complicated by the dose tolerance of the small bowel. Acute radiation-induced small bowel toxicity includes side effects such as abdominal pain, nausea and diarrhoea. With the advent of new treatment delivery modalities, such as IMRT (Intensity modulated radiotherapy) and VMAT (Volumetric modulated Arc radiotherapy), there has been an expectation that small bowel doses can be better controlled with the use of these technologies. These capabilities enable the creation of treatment plans that can better avoid critical radiosensitive organs. The purpose of this review is to look beyond advances in linear accelerator technology in seeking improvements to small bowel dose and toxicity. This review examines whether an alternative prone patient positioning approach using a bellyboard device in conjunction with IMRT and VMAT treatment delivery can reduce small bowel doses further than using these technologies with the patient in a traditional supine position.

Implantation of tissue expander prior to irradiation in the era of intensity modulated radiotherapy: impact on the management of patients with pelvic digestive cancers

PURPOSE

Before the introduction of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), few teams used to implant a pelvic tissue expander to keep the bowel away from the radiation field, so as to reduce the risk of acute and late enteritis. However, this unexpected surgery could impact patient's overall treatment and may be no more necessary in the era of modern radiotherapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study including 13 patients who underwent tissue expander implantation before radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for rectal or anal carcinoma between November 2008 and March 2019. First, we aim to show that IMRT could sometimes be insufficient to respect dosimetric constraints, and then we aim to report the impact of tissue expander implantation on the global strategy of care of patients with anal and rectal cancers.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven percent of the included patients were treated for anal neoplasms, while the remaining 23% had locally advanced rectal cancer. The median follow-up since implantation of the expander was 51 months [3.7-115]. Three patients recurred. One patient developed grade III toxicity related to the implantation of a tissue expander. The delay between diagnosis and the start of irradiation was significantly prolonged (median of 3 months), requiring unusual induction chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Implantation of tissue expander prior to chemoradiotherapy should be considered, even in the era of IMRT, when irradiated peritoneal cavity volume (V15Gy-V45Gy) far exceeds usual dose constraints. However, it impacts the global strategy of care by delaying the start of irradiation, by introducing induction chemotherapy, and rarely by causing post-operative complications.

Volumetric and dosimetric comparison of organs at risk between the prone and supine positions in postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of patient positioning on the volume of organs at risk (OARs) in or near the planning target volume (PTV) and the dose distribution in adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy for prostate cancer after prostatectomy.

Methods

Seventeen patients who received intensity-modulated radiation therapy (66 Gy in 33 fractions) as adjuvant or salvage therapy after prostatectomy were evaluated. All patients underwent CT scans in both the prone (on a belly board) and supine positions. The target volumes and OARs were delineated on each CT series. The planning target volume (PTV) was extended in every direction to generate the PTV + 0.5 cm, PTV + 1 cm, PTV + 2 cm, PTV + 3 cm, and PTV + 4 cm values. The volumes of the OARs overlapping with the PTV and the extended target volumes in the prone and supine position were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters in the prone and supine position were compared using the paired t-test.

Results

The mean overlapping volumes of the small intestine for each of the PTV values were as follows (prone position vs. supine position [mean ± SD]): PTV, 1.5 ± 5.5 cm³ vs. 7.9 ± 15.7 cm³ (P = 0.028); PTV + 0.5 cm, 2.6 ± 8.9 cm³ vs. 12.1 ± 22.6 cm³ (P = 0.028); PTV + 1 cm, 3.5 ± 11.4 cm³ vs. 17.1 ± 29.8 cm³ (P = 0.028); PTV + 2 cm, 5.6 ± 14.5 cm³ vs. 26.8 ± 46.9 cm³ (P = 0.028); and PTV + 3 cm, 9.0 ± 17.4 cm³ vs. 36.5 ± 63.2 cm³ (P = 0.019), respectively. Some of the overlapping volumes of the rectum and bladder were significantly smaller in the prone position. On the other hand, when the target volume was extended by ≥2 cm, the overlapping volumes of the femurs were significantly larger in the prone position. V15 of the rectum and mean dose and V65 of the bladder were significantly lower in the prone position.

Conclusions

This study indicated that the volumes of the small intestine, rectum, and bladder in or near the PTV decreased when the patient was placed in the prone position on a belly board in postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. The dose distribution seemed superior in the prone position to the supine position.