Improving radiotherapy planning for large volume lung cancer: a dosimetric comparison between hybrid-IMRT and RapidArc

Comparison of photon intensity modulated, hybrid and volumetric modulated arc radiation treatment techniques in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Background and purpose

There is no consensus on the best photon radiation technique for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study quantified the differences between commonly used treatment techniques in NSCLC to find the optimal technique.

Materials and methods

Treatment plans were retrospectively generated according to clinical guidelines for 26 stage III NSCLC patients using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), hybrid, and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMATC, and VMATV5 optimized for lower lung and heart dose). Plans were evaluated for target coverage, organs at risk dose (including heart substructures) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP).

Results

The comparison showed significant and largest median differences (>1 Gy or >5%) in favor of IMRT for the mediastinal envelope and heart (maximum dose), in favor of the hybrid technique for the lungs (V5Gy of the total lungs and V5Gy of the contralateral lung) and in favor of VMATC for the heart (Dmean), most of the substructures of the heart, and the spinal cord (maximum dose). The VMATV5 technique had significantly lower heart dose compared to the hybrid technique and significantly lower lung dose compared to the VMATC, combining both advantages in one technique. The mean ΔNTCP did not exceed the 2 percent point (pp) for grade 5 (mortality), and 10 pp for grade ≥2 toxicities (radiation pneumonitis and acute esophageal toxicity), but ΔNTCP was mostly in favor of VMATC/V5 for individual patients.

Conclusion

This planning study showed that VMATV5 was preferred as it achieved low lung and heart doses, as well as low NTCPs, simultaneously.

The use of Hybrid Techniques in Whole-Breast Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review

Objectives The development of new techniques in radiotherapy (RT) provides a better planned target volume (PTV) dose distribution while further improving the protection of organs at risk (OARs). The study aims to present the dosimetric results of studies using hybrid techniques in whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT). Methods: This systematic literature review was conducted by scanning the relevant literature in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Among the parameters are dose values for PTV and OARs beam contribute ratios, the value of monitors, and treatment times for different RT techniques. Initially, 586 articles were identified; 196 duplicate articles were removed leaving 391 articles for screening. Three-hundred and thirty-seven irrelevant articles were excluded, leaving 54 studies assessed for eligibility. A total of 22 articles met the search criteria to evaluate dosimetric results of hybrid and other RT techniques in WBRT. Results: According to the dosimetric data of the studies, hybrid intensity-modulated RT (H-IMRT) and hybrid volumetric-modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT) techniques give dosimetrically advantageous results in WBRT compared to other RT techniques. Conclusion: Hybrid techniques using appropriate beams contribute value and show great promise in improving dosimetric results in WBRT. However, there is a need for new studies showing the long-term clinical results of hybrid RT.

Relationship between Treatment Plan Dosimetry, Toxicity, and Survival following Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, with or without Chemotherapy, for Stage III Inoperable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Simple Summary

Various radiotherapy treatment methods are available for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A multidisciplinary tumor board review is recommended to determine the best treatment strategy. In fit patients with inoperable tumors, concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) is preferred over sequential CRT (sCRT), due to better survival. Nonetheless, the use of cCRT in stage III NSCLC varies significantly, with concerns about treatment toxicity being a contributory factor. Many reports describing the relationship between overall survival, toxicity, and dosimetry in patients with locally advanced NSCLC are based on clinical trials, with strict criteria for patient selection, including good performance status, pulmonary function, etc. These trials have not always mandated the use of IMRT/VMAT. We therefore performed an institutional analysis to study the relationship between dosimetric parameters and overall survival and toxicity in patients with stage III NSCLC treated with IMRT/VMAT-based techniques in routine clinical practice.

Abstract

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) is the preferred treatment for stage III NSCLC because surgery containing multimodality treatment is often not appropriate. Alternatives, often for less fit patients, include sequential CRT and RT alone. Many reports describing the relationship between overall survival (OS), toxicity, and dosimetry are based on clinical trials, with strict criteria for patient selection. We performed an institutional analysis to study the relationship between dosimetric parameters, toxicity, and OS in inoperable patients with stage III NSCLC treated with (hybrid) IMRT/VMAT-based techniques in routine clinical practice. Eligible patients had undergone treatment with radical intent using cCRT, sCRT, or RT alone, planned to a total dose ≥ 50 Gy delivered in ≥15 fractions. All analyses were performed for two patient groups, (1) cCRT (n = 64) and (2) sCRT/RT (n = 65). The toxicity rate differences between the two groups were not significant, and OS was 29 and 17 months, respectively. For sCRT/RT, no dosimetric factors were associated with OS, whereas for cCRT, PTV-volume, esophagus V50 Gy, and contralateral lung V5 Gy were associated. cCRT OS was significantly lower in patients with esophagitis ≥ G2. The overall rate of ≥G3 pneumonitis was low (3%), and the rate of high-grade esophagitis the OS in this real-world patient population was comparable to those reported in clinical trials. Based on this hypothesis-generating data, more aggressive esophageal sparing merits consideration. Institutional auditing and benchmarking of the planning strategy, dosimetry, and outcome have an important role to play in the continuous quality improvement process.

Factors influencing multi-disciplinary tumor board recommendations in stage III non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

Treatment patterns in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) vary considerably between countries, for reasons that are not well understood. We studied factors influencing treatment decision-making at thoracic multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDT's) and outcome for patients treated between 2015-2017, at a regional network comprising 5 hospitals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Details of all patients, including comorbidities, with stage III NSCLC were collected in an ethics-approved database. Weekly MDT's were conducted. The preferred radical intent treatments (RIT) for suitable patients were assumed to be concurrent chemoradiotherapy and/or surgery and other therapies were non-radical intent treatments (n-RIT).

RESULTS

Of 197 patients identified, 95 % were discussed at an MDT. RIT were recommended in 61 % of patients, but only 48 % finally received RIT. The estimated median OS was significantly better for patients undergoing RIT (28.3 months, CI-95 % 17.3-39.3), versus those who did not (11.2 months, CI-95 % 8.0-14.3). Patient age ≥70 years and a WHO-PS ≥2 were the most important predictors of not recommending RIT. Deaths due to progressive lung cancer within 2 years were observed in 36, 26 and 29 % of patients who received RIT, sequential chemoradiotherapy or radical radiotherapy. Corresponding comorbidity related deaths within 2 years were 3, 12 and 38 %.

CONCLUSION

A large number of patients who underwent MDT review were considered too old or not fit for RIT. More effective and better tolerated systemic treatments are required for patients presenting with stage III NSCLC.

The Dosimetric Comparisons of CRT, IMRT, ARC, CRT+IMRT, and CRT+ARC of Postoperative Radiotherapy in IIIA-N2 Stage Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients

Currently, studies about PORT in stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC patients in recent years have mostly adopted the conformal radiation therapy (CRT) technique, while other modern techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT, hereinafter referred to as ARC), helical tomotherapy (HT), and so forth are also developing quickly. In this paper, we intended to compare the dosimetric characteristics of CRT, IMRT, ARC, CRT+IMRT, and CRT+ARC of PORT in stage IIIA-N2 NSCLC patients. Ten patients with stage IIIA-N2 completely resected NSCLC, whom were treated by PORT in the radiotherapy department of our hospital from January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2018, were randomly selected in this study. For each patient, the CRT plan, IMRT plan, ARC plan, CRT+IMRT plan, and CRT+ARC plan were designed separately on the same set of CT images. The isodose distribution and dose-volume histogram (DVH) of the five plans were compared to determine the dosimetric parameters of the targets, OAR (organs at risk), and the normal tissue (defined as body subtracted to PTV (planning target volume), B-P). No plan had absolute dosimetry advantages than any other plans. In clinical practice, the plans could be chosen according to their dosimetry characteristics.

Detailed evaluation of an automated approach to interactive optimization for volumetric modulated arc therapy plans

PURPOSE

Interactive optimization during treatment planning requires intermittent adjustment of organ-at-risk (OAR) objectives relative to the dose-volume histogram line. This is a labor-intensive process and the resulting plans are prone to variations in quality. The authors' in-house developed approach to automated interactive optimization (AIO) automatically moves the mouse cursor to adjust the position of on-screen optimization objectives. This allows for the use of more objectives per OAR and results in a more frequent and consistent adjustment of these objectives during optimization. The authors report a detailed evaluation of AIO performance in support of its implementation for routine head and neck cancer (HNC) planning and an evaluation for locally advanced lung cancer (LC) planning which requires a different optimization strategy.

METHODS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy AIO plans (APs) were created for 70 HNC patients with a simultaneously integrated boost and 20 LC patients and benchmarked against their respective manually interactively optimized plans (MPs). The same set of optimization objectives and priorities was used for all APs, although planning target volume (PTV) optimization priorities could be increased manually in a subsequent "continue previous optimization" calculation. HNC plans were benchmarked using mean dose to individual and composite OARs and elective/boost PTV (PTVE/PTVB) volumes receiving 95% and 107% of the prescription dose (V95% and V107%, respectively). A clinician performed blinded comparison of 20 APs and respective MPs. LC plans were compared using PTV V95%/V107%, contralateral lung (CL) volume receiving 5 Gy (V5Gy), total lung (TL)-PTV V5Gy/V20Gy, and esophagus and heart V40Gy/V60Gy/mean doses.

RESULTS

For HNC, statistically significant improvements in sparing of all OARs, except for the ipsilateral submandibular gland and trachea, were obtained in the APs compared to MPs. Average mean dose to oral cavity, composite salivary, and swallowing structures were 25.4/23.8, 24.2/23.2, and 29.5/25.5 Gy, respectively, for the MPs/APs. PTV heterogeneity was similar: in the APs, PTVB V95% was 0.2% higher while PTV B/PTV E V107% was 0.4%/1.0% lower. In 19 out of 20 HNC patients, the clinician preferred the AP, mainly because of better OAR sparing and PTV dose homogeneity. For LC, APs had a significantly lower CL V5Gy (6.1%), heart mean dose/V60Gy (0.9 Gy/1.2%) and esophagus mean dose/V60Gy (0.9 Gy/2.8%), a nonsignificantly higher TL V20Gy (1.4%), and a slight, but significantly higher dose deposition to the body. PTV dose coverage and homogeneity were similar in the APs and MPs. AIO was considered sufficiently robust for clinical use in LC.

CONCLUSIONS

HNC and LC APs were at least as good as, and often of improved quality over MPs. To date, AIO has been clinically implemented for HNC planning.

Clinical Application of a Hybrid RapidArc Radiotherapy Technique for Locally Advanced Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Radiation treatment planning for locally advanced lung cancer can be technically challenging, as delivery of ≥60 Gy to large volumes with concurrent chemotherapy is often associated with significant risk of normal tissue toxicity. We clinically implemented a novel hybrid RapidArc technique in patients with lung cancer and compared these plans with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and RapidArc-only plans.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Hybrid RapidArc was used to treat 11 patients with locally advanced lung cancer having bulky mediastinal adenopathy. All 11 patients received concurrent chemotherapy. All underwent a 4-dimensional computed tomography planning scan. Hybrid RapidArc plans concurrently combined static (60%) and RapidArc (40%) beams. All cases were replanned using 3- to 5-field 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and RapidArc technique as controls.

RESULTS

Significant reductions in dose were observed in hybrid RapidArc plans compared to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans for total lung V20 and mean (-2% and -0.6 Gy); contralateral lung mean (-2.92 Gy); and esophagus V60 and mean (-16.0% and -2.2 Gy; all P < .05). Contralateral lung doses were significantly lower for hybrid RapidArc plans compared to RapidArc-only plans (all P < .05). Compared to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, heart V60 and mean dose were significantly improved with hybrid RapidArc (3% vs 5%, P = .04 and 16.32 Gy vs 16.65 Gy, P = .03). However, heart V40 and V45 and maximum spinal cord dose were significantly lower with RapidArc plans compared to hybrid RapidArc plans. Conformity and homogeneity were significantly better with hybrid RapidArc plans compared to 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy plans ( P < .05). Treatment was well tolerated, with no grade 3+ toxicities.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first report on the clinical application of hybrid RapidArc in patients with locally advanced lung cancer. Hybrid RapidArc permitted safe delivery of 60 to 66 Gy to large lung tumors with concurrent chemotherapy and demonstrated advantages for reduction in low-dose lung volumes, esophageal dose, and mean heart dose.

A critical review of recent developments in radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality, and radiotherapy plays a key role in both curative and palliative treatments for this disease. Recent advances include stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), which is now established as a curative-intent treatment option for patients with peripheral early-stage NSCLC who are medically inoperable, or at high risk for surgical complications. Improved delivery techniques have facilitated studies evaluating the role of SABR in oligometastatic NSCLC, and encouraged the use of high-technology radiotherapy in some palliative settings. Although outcomes in locally advanced NSCLC remain disappointing for many patients, future progress may come about from an improved understanding of disease biology and the development of radiotherapy approaches that further reduce normal tissue irradiation. At the moment, the benefits, if any, of radiotherapy technologies such as proton beam therapy remain unproven. This paper provides a critical review of selected aspects of modern radiotherapy for lung cancer, highlights the current limitations in our understanding and treatment approaches, and discuss future treatment strategies for NSCLC.

Optimizing the flattening filter free beam selection in RapidArc®-based stereotactic body radiotherapy for Stage I lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

To optimize the flattening filter-free (FFF) beam selection in stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment for Stage I lung cancer in different fraction schemes.

METHODS

Treatment plans from 12 patients suffering from Stage I lung cancer were designed using the 6XFFF and 10XFFF beams in different fraction schemes of 4 × 12, 3 × 18 and 1 × 34 Gy. Plans were evaluated mainly in terms of organs at risk (OARs) sparing, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) estimation and treatment efficiency.

RESULTS

Compared with the 10XFFF beam, 6XFFF beam showed statistically significant lower dose to all the OARs investigated. The percentage of NTCP reduction for both lung and chest wall was about 10% in the fraction schemes of 4 × 12 and 3 × 18 Gy, whereas only 7.4% and 2.6% was obtained in the 1 × 34 Gy scheme. For oesophagus, heart and spinal cord, the reduction was greater with the 6XFFF beam, but their absolute estimates were <10(-6)%. The mean beam-on time for 6XFFF and 10XFFF beams at 4 × 12, 3 × 18 and 1 × 34 Gy schemes were 2.2 ± 0.2 vs 1.5 ± 0.1, 3.3 ± 0.9 vs 2.0 ± 0.5 and 6.3 ± 0.9 vs 3.5 ± 0.4 min, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The 6XFFF beam obtains better OARs sparing and lower incidence of NTCP in SBRT treatment of Stage I lung cancer, whereas the 10XFFF beam improves the treatment efficiency. To balance the OARs sparing and intrafractional variation owing to the prolonged treatment time, the authors recommend using the 6XFFF beam in the 4 × 12 and 3 × 18 Gy schemes but the 10XFFF beam in the 1 × 34 Gy scheme.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study optimizes the FFF beam selection in different fraction schemes in SBRT treatment of Stage I lung cancer.