Comparative study on dosimetry of VMAT and IMRT in assisted radiotherapy after radical resection of rectal cancer

Dosimetric effect of collimator rotation on intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy for rectal cancer radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are the main radiotherapy techniques for treating and managing rectal cancer. Collimator rotation is one of the crucial parameters in radiotherapy planning, and its alteration can cause dosimetric variations. This study assessed the effect of collimator rotation on the dosimetric results of various IMRT and VMAT plans for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Computed tomography (CT) images of 20 male patients with rectal cancer were utilized for IMRT and VMAT treatment planning with various collimator angles. Nine different IMRT techniques (5, 7, and 9 coplanar fields with collimator angles of 0°, 45°, and 90°) and six different VMAT techniques (1 and 2 full coplanar arcs with collimator angles of 0°, 45°, and 90°) were planned for each patient. The dosimetric results of various treatment techniques for target tissue (conformity index [CI] and homogeneity index [HI]) and organs at risk (OARs) sparing (parameters obtained from OARs dose-volume histograms [DVH]) as well as radiobiological findings were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

The 7-fields IMRT technique demonstrated lower bladder doses (V40Gy, V45Gy), unaffected by collimator rotation. The 9-fields IMRT and 2-arcs VMAT (excluding the 90-degree collimator) had the lowest V35Gy and V45Gy. A 90-degree collimator rotation in 2-arcs VMAT significantly increased small bowel and bladder V45Gy, femoral head doses, and HI values. Radiobiologically, the 90-degree rotation had adverse effects on small bowel NTCP (normal tissue complication probability). No superiority was found for a 45-degree collimator rotation over 0 or 30 degrees in VMAT techniques.

CONCLUSION

Collimator rotation had minimal impact on dosimetric parameters in IMRT planning but is significant in VMAT techniques. A 90-degree rotation in VMAT, particularly in a 2-full arc technique, adversely affects PTV homogeneity index, bladder dose, and small bowel NTCP. Other evaluated collimator angles did not significantly affect VMAT dosimetrical or radiobiological outcomes.

Plan quality and treatment efficiency assurance of two VMAT optimization for cervical cancer radiotherapy

To investigate the difference of the fluence map optimization (FMO) and Stochastic platform optimization (SPO) algorithm in a newly-introduced treatment planning system (TPS).

METHODS

34 cervical cancer patients with definitive radiation were retrospectively analyzed. Each patient has four plans: FMO with fixed jaw plans (FMO-FJ) and no fixed jaw plans (FMO-NFJ); SPO with fixed jaw plans (SPO-FJ) and no fixed jaw plans (SPO-NFJ). Dosimetric parameters, Modulation Complexity Score (MCS), Gamma Pass Rate (GPR) and delivery time were analyzed among the four plans.

RESULTS

For target coverage, SPO-FJ plans are the best ones (P ≤ 0.00). FMO plans are better than SPO-NFJ plans (P ≤ 0.00). For OARs sparing, SPO-FJ plans are better than FMO plans for mostly OARs (P ≤ 0.04). Additionally, SPO-FJ plans are better than SPO-NFJ plans (P ≤ 0.02), except for rectum V45Gy. Compared to SPO-NFJ plans, the FMO plans delivered less dose to bladder, rectum, colon V40Gy and pelvic bone V40Gy (P ≤ 0.04). Meanwhile, the SPO-NFJ plans showed superiority in MU, delivery time, MCS and GPR in all plans. In terms of delivery time and MCS, the SPO-FJ plans are better than FMO plans. FMO-FJ plans are better than FMO-NFJ plans in delivery efficiency. MCSs are strongly correlated with PCTV length, which are negatively with PCTV length (P ≤ 0.03). The delivery time and MUs of the four plans are strongly correlated (P ≤ 0.02). Comparing plans with fixed or no fixed jaw in two algorithms, no difference was found in FMO plans in target coverage and minor difference in Kidney_L Dmean, Mu and delivery time between PCTV width≤15.5 cm group and >15.5 cm group. For SPO plans, SPO-FJ plans showed more superiority in target coverage and OARs sparing than the SPO-NFJ plans in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SPO-FJ plans showed superiority in target coverage and OARs sparing, as well as higher delivery efficiency in the four plans.

Assessment of Radiation-Induced Bladder and Bowel Cancer Risks after Conventionally and Hypo-Fractionated Radiotherapy for the Preoperative Management of Rectal Carcinoma

Preoperative management of rectal carcinoma can be performed by employing either conventionally or hypo-fractionated Radiotherapy (CFRT or HFRT, respectively), delivered by Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) or Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans, employing 6 MV or 10 MV photon beams. This study aims to dosimetrically and radiobiologically compare all available approaches, with emphasis on the risk of radiation-induced second cancer to the bladder and bowel. Computed Tomography (CT) scans and relevant radiotherapy contours from 16 patients were anonymized and analyzed retrospectively. For each case, CFRT of 25 × 2 Gy and HFRT of 5 × 5 Gy were both considered. IMRT and VMAT plans using 6 MV and 10 MV photons were prepared. Plan optimization was performed, considering all clinically used plan quality indices and dose–volume constraints for the critical organs. Resulting dose distributions were analyzed and compared. Moreover, the Lifetime Attributable Risk (LAR) for developing radiation-induced bladder and bowel malignancies were assessed using a non-linear mechanistic model, assuming patient ages at treatment of 45, 50, 55 and 60 years. All 128 plans created were clinically acceptable. Risk of second bladder cancer reached 0.26% for HFRT (5 × 5 Gy) and 0.19% for CFRT (25 × 2 Gy) at the age of 45. Systematically higher risks were calculated for HFRT (5 × 5 Gy) as compared to CFRT (25 × 2 Gy), with 6 MV photons resulting in slightly increased LAR, as well. Similar or equal bowel cancer risks were calculated for all techniques and patient ages investigated (range 0.05–0.14%). This work contributes towards radiotherapy treatment protocol selection criteria for the preoperative irradiation of rectal carcinoma. However, more studies are needed to establish the associated radiation-induced risk of each RT protocol.

Efficacy and Safety of Preoperative Radiotherapy Versus Chemoradiotherapy in Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of preoperative radiotherapy (RT) combined with surgery and preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) combined with surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched to collect published randomized controlled trials of preoperative radiotherapy or preoperative CRT combined with surgery for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer. Studies were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and quality was evaluated; RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 7 related studies involving 3100 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer were evaluated. The pathological complete response rate, negative lymph node rate, R0 resection rate, and incidence of grade III/IV adverse reactions were lower in the RT group than in the CRT group. In the absence of postoperative chemotherapy, the 5-year local recurrence rate of RT was higher than that of CRT, but there was no significant difference between the groups among those who underwent postoperative chemotherapy. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to the 5-year survival rate, anal-preserving rate, or incidence of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative CRT is better than preoperative RT for the treatment of advanced rectal cancer, though the adverse reaction rate is higher.

Simultaneous Integrated Boost Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Rectal Cancer: Long-Term Results after Protocol-Based Treatment

Background

Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) is an advanced form of radiotherapy (RT) technology. The purpose of this study was to report long-term treatment outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing VMAT-SIB based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

Methods

Between January 2016 and January 2018, a total of 22 patients with operable stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma were recruited for the pre-designed VMAT-SIB RT protocol. All patients underwent standard diagnostic and staging work-up. The RT target volumes included the following areas: PTV1 = mesorectum that contained gross tumors and enlarged lymph node regions and PTV2 = mesorectum and regional lymphatics from L4-5/S1 to 3-4 cm below the tumor or levator ani muscle, excluding PTV1. The VMAT-SIB dose prescription was as follows: PTV1 = 52.5 Gy/daily 2.1 Gy/25 fractions, PTV2 = 45 Gy/daily 1.8 Gy/25 fractions.

Results

The mean age of the study population was 64 (range, 18-84) years, and 15 (68.2%) patients were male. Radical operation (total mesorectal excision) was performed by either low anterior resection, ultralow anterior resection, or abdominal perineal resection. All five (22.7%) of the patients with confirmed increasing serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level at diagnosis showed normalization of serum CEA level after the planned treatment. Among 20 patients who underwent preoperative CRT and surgery, tumor down staging in T- and N-stages was achieved in 10 patients (50%) and 13 patients (65%), respectively, with 20% of ypT0/Tis. With a median follow-up of 54.2 (range, 22.6-61.1) months, the 5-year disease-free survival, overall survival, and local control rates were 64.6%, 81.8%, and 84.4%, respectively. Five patients developed distant metastasis and one developed local recurrence as a first event. Two cases with anastomosis site leakage, three with adhesive ileus, and two with abscess formation were observed during postoperative periods.

Conclusions

The current VMAT-SIB-based CRT protocol provided acceptable treatment and toxicity outcomes.

Comparison of combinations of irradiation techniques and jaw conditions in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for lung cancer

Purpose

To assist in the selection of a suitable combination of an irradiation technique and jaw condition in intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric‐modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) for lung cancer treatment plans.

Materials and methods

Thirty patients with lung cancer who underwent radiotherapy were enrolled retrospectively. They were categorized as having central lung cancer, peripheral lung cancer with mediastinal lymph node metastasis (peripheral E lung cancer), and peripheral lung cancer without mediastinal lymph node metastasis (peripheral N lung cancer). Four treatment plans were designed for each patient: fixed jaw and adaptive jaw IMRT technique (FJ‐IMRT and JA‐IMRT), and fixed jaw and jaw tracking VMAT technique (FJ‐VMAT and JT‐VMAT). The dose parameters of the four group plans were compared and analyzed.

Results

Compared to FJ‐IMRT, JA‐IMRT significantly reduced the mean dose (D_mean) and volume percentage of 5 Gy (V_5Gy) of the total lung in central and peripheral N lung cancer. Similarly, compared to FJ‐VMAT, JT‐VMAT provided better protection to most organs at risk (OARs), particularly for total lung and heart. In comparison with IMRT, VMAT significantly improved the conformity index (CI) of the planning target volume for the three lung cancer classifications, and it reduced the dose of almost all OARs except V_5Gy and D_mean of the total lung. Moreover, the mean monitor units of the VMAT groups were far lower than the IMRT groups.

Conclusion

Based on the dosimetric findings and considering clinical data published on lung and heart side effects, we propose recommendations on the preferred treatment technique based on tumor location and pulmonary function. For central lung cancer with normal pulmonary function, we advise JT‐VMAT techniques. Conversely, for central lung cancer with poor pulmonary function, we recommend JA‐IMRT techniques. We advocate JA‐IMRT for peripheral E lung cancer. For peripheral N lung cancer, JT‐VMAT techniques are strongly recommended.

Evaluation of abches and volumetric modulated arc therapy under deep inspiration breath-hold technique for patients with left-sided breast cancer: A retrospective observational study

Radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy has clinical benefits including reducing local recurrence and improving overall survival. Deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) technique using the Abches system is an easy and practical method to reduce radiation dose to the heart and lungs. This retrospective study was proposed to investigate the dosimetric difference between Abches system and free breathing technique in treating left-sided breast cancer.Eligible patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scans to acquire both free breathing (FB) and DIBH technique data using the Abches. For each patient, both FB and DIBH image sets were planned based on the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Radiation dose to the heart, ipsilateral lung, and contralateral lung was compared between the Abches system and FB.No significant differences in the planning target volume (PTV) (674.58 vs 665.88 cm, P = .29), mean dose (52.28 vs 52.03 Gy, P = .13), and volume received at the prescribed dose (Vpd) (94.66% vs 93.92%, P = .32) of PTV were observed between the FB and DIBH plans. Significant differences were found in mean heart (6.71 Gy vs 4.21 Gy, P < .001), heart V5 (22.73% vs 14.39%, P = .002), heart V20 (10.96% vs. 5.62%, P < .001), mean left lung (11.51 vs 10.07 Gy, P = .01), left lung V20 (22.88% vs 19.53%, P = .02), left lung V30 (18.58 vs 15.27%, P = .005), and mean right lung dose (.89 vs 72 Gy, P = .03).This is the first report on reduced mean left lung, mean right lung dose, and V20 of left lung using VMAT and Abches. The combination of Abches and VMAT can practically and efficiently reduce extraradiation doses to the heart and lungs.