A Multicenter Study of Clinical to Planning Target Volume Margins for Adjuvant Partial Breast Irradiation Delivered on the 1.5T MR-Linear Accelerator

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Adjuvant partial breast irradiation (APBI) for early-stage breast cancer patients delivered on a conventional Linac commonly uses a clinical to planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margin of 10 mm. Published data suggest this margin could be reduced using an MR-guided workflow. This study quantifies the CTV to PTV margin for APBI delivered on the 1.5T MR-Linac (MRL) using an Adapt to Position (ATP) workflow.

MATERIALS/METHODS

All target contouring was done as per the IMPORT LOW trial and MRL Consortium guidelines. The CTV is the tumor bed defined by surgical clips including postsurgical changes. A single center cohort of ten patients was used to assess delineation error on ProKnow DS v1.28.0 by measuring CTV contour displacements on the CT planning scans (pCT) delineated by five breast radiation oncologists. All other error components were measured on treatment planning software on another single center cohort of ten patients. Target deformation error was measured as surgical clip displacements between the pCT and daily pre-treatment (pre-Tx) MRI scans. Intrafraction motion was determined by the CTV displacement between pre- and post-treatment MRIs (post-Tx) in available paired images from five patients. Matching error was estimated as the interobserver variation of three MRL radiographers registering the pCT with daily pre-Tx MRI. Technical delivery accuracy was estimated using the results from routine quality assurance measurements. Beam penumbral width (p) was estimated from the clinical treatment plans. The systematic (Σ) and random errors (σ) for each component were calculated in the left/right (X), superior/inferior (Y) and anterior/posterior (Z) directions. The contribution of these errors to the PTV margin, M was calculated using van Herk's formula with α and β being 2.50 and 1.64 respectively.

RESULTS

For APBI using an MRL ATP workflow, a CTV-PTV margin of 5.7 to 7.6 mm is required to achieve a 90% confidence of CTV coverage by the 95% isodose. Individual error components are in. Table 1 delineation error remains the largest component of error.

CONCLUSION

A minimum CTV-PTV margin of 6-8 mm is required for APBI using an MRL ATP workflow. Although smaller than margins used in conventional Linacs, the clinical benefits (in terms of fibrosis risk) of treating APBI patients on an MRL are likely to be modest. Further margin reductions may be possible using an "Adapt to Shape" workflow with daily online recontouring.

MRI-guided adaptive radiotherapy for prostate cancer: When do we need to account for intra-fraction motion?

A shift of the daily plan can mitigate target position changes that occur between daily MR acquisition and treatment for MR-linac radiotherapy, but increases the session time. We demonstrated that our workflow strategy and decision-making process, to determine whether a subsequent shift is necessary, is appropriate.

Feasibility of magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy for the treatment of bladder cancer

Whole bladder magnetic resonance image-guided radiotherapy using the 1.5 Telsa MR-linac is feasible. Full online adaptive planning workflow based on the anatomy seen at each fraction was performed. This was delivered within 45 min. Intra-fraction bladder filling did not compromise target coverage. Patients reported acceptable tolerance of treatment.

Retrospective audit of inter-fraction motion for pelvic node radiotherapy in prostate cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic lymph nodes move independently to the prostate. When delivering radiotherapy to prostate and pelvic lymph nodes, daily inter- and intra-fraction anatomical changes need to be accounted for. Planning target volume (PTV) margins, grown from the pelvic lymph node clinical target volume need to be determined, to account for this variation in position.

METHODS

Twenty patients who had daily online image guided radiotherapy to prostate and pelvic lymph nodes between April and December 2018 were selected. Ten pre-treatment verification images using cone beam CT from each patient were registered to pelvic bone anatomy, prostate soft tissue or fiducial markers and pelvic lymph node soft tissue to assess the accuracy of treatment delivery. Population systematic and random errors and PTV margins were calculated.

RESULTS

PTV margins of 0.4 cm, 0.4 cm and 0.7 cm left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI) and anterior-posterior (AP) respectively were derived for the pelvic lymph nodes when registering to prostate. PTV margins of 0.3 cm, 0.2 cm and 0.4 cm LR, SI and AP respectively were derived for the pelvic lymph nodes when registering to bone. There was a posterior systematic shift of the prostate during the treatment course.

CONCLUSION

There is differential motion of pelvic lymph nodes to prostate and in the era of prostate and pelvic radiotherapy for patients with node positive prostate cancer; there is increasing importance in the accuracy of dose delivery to the involved lymph node. Hence, this group of patients may benefit from personalised radiotherapy PTV margins, especially if the involved pelvic lymph node is within the anterior part of the clinical target volume.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Optimisation of dose delivery to the pelvic lymph nodes when prioritising the prostate in prostate and pelvic lymph node image guided radiotherapy.