Comparison of Estimated Late Toxicities between IMRT and IMPT when Treating Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Preoperatively with Ultra-Hypofractionation

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

While preoperative radiation did not improve abdominal recurrence-free survival for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) in the randomized STRASS trial, it did reduce rates of local recurrence. The risk of radiation-associated toxicity is substantial, with 77% of irradiated patients experiencing grade ≥3 lymphopenia in STRASS. Thus, finding methods to mitigate the issues of delaying surgery and irradiating normal tissue may provide a path towards affording the benefits of radiation while limiting its downside. One potential solution involves the use of hypofractionation to limit delay from radiation initiation to surgery, and proton therapy to limit dose to surrounding organs at risk (OARs). We conducted a dosimetric comparison of preoperative ultra-hypofractionated intensity-modulated photon radiotherapy (IMRT) and proton therapy (IMPT) for RPS, comparing estimated rates of late toxicity using published normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy IMRT and IMPT plans were generated on 10 RPS patients previously treated with preoperative radiation. The prescription was 25 Gy radiobiological equivalent (GyE) to the clinical target volume (CTV) and 30 GyE to the margin-at-risk, all in five fractions. Proton doses were calculated using a radiobiological effective dose of 1.1. NTCPs were calculated for each OAR as a function of equivalent uniform dose. The ΔNTCP (difference in absolute NTCP between IMRT and IMPT plans) for each of the toxicity domains was calculated. Student T-tests were used to compare differences in dosimetric and NTCP outcomes.

RESULTS

CTV coverage was met for all IMRT and IMPT plans with >99% of CTVs receiving ≥100% of prescription doses. The following endpoints were significantly lower with IMPT than IMRT: mean doses to liver, bone, and all analyzed genitourinary and gastrointestinal OARs; bowel, kidney, and bone V5-V20; stomach V15; liver V5; maximum doses to stomach, spinal canal, and body; and whole-body integral dose. No OAR endpoint was significantly higher with IMPT. The average ΔNTCP for grade 3 bowel ulceration/perforation and renal toxicity was 1.9% (p = .037) and 43.0% (p = .023), respectively, favoring IMPT. Using a model-based selection threshold of any ΔNTCP >10%, 50% (n = 5) of patients would be eligible for IMPT.

CONCLUSION

IMPT maintained target coverage while significantly reducing dose to adjacent OARs and integral dose compared to IMRT. This translated to significantly lower risks of estimated late gastrointestinal and renal toxicities with IMPT. Further investigation is warranted to validate these findings and potential clinical benefit in the management of RPS. A prospective trial treating RPS with preoperative ultra-hypofractionated IMPT at our institution is currently being pursued (NCT05302570).