Advantages and limitations of navigation-based multicriteria optimization (MCO) for localized prostate cancer IMRT planning

Efficacy of inverse planning is becoming increasingly important for advanced radiotherapy techniques. This study's aims were to validate multicriteria optimization (MCO) in RayStation (v2.4, RaySearch Laboratories, Sweden) against standard intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) optimization in Oncentra (v4.1, Nucletron BV, the Netherlands) and characterize dose differences due to conversion of navigated MCO plans into deliverable multileaf collimator apertures. Step-and-shoot IMRT plans were created for 10 patients with localized prostate cancer using both standard optimization and MCO. Acceptable standard IMRT plans with minimal average rectal dose were chosen for comparison with deliverable MCO plans. The trade-off was, for the MCO plans, managed through a user interface that permits continuous navigation between fluence-based plans. Navigated MCO plans were made deliverable at incremental steps along a trajectory between maximal target homogeneity and maximal rectal sparing. Dosimetric differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans were also quantified. MCO plans, chosen as acceptable under navigated and deliverable conditions resulted in similar rectal sparing compared with standard optimization (33.7 ± 1.8Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2Gy, p = 0.117). The dose differences between navigated and deliverable MCO plans increased as higher priority was placed on rectal avoidance. If the best possible deliverable MCO was chosen, a significant reduction in rectal dose was observed in comparison with standard optimization (30.6 ± 1.4Gy vs 35.5 ± 4.2Gy, p = 0.047). Improvements were, however, to some extent, at the expense of less conformal dose distributions, which resulted in significantly higher doses to the bladder for 2 of the 3 tolerance levels. In conclusion, similar IMRT plans can be created for patients with prostate cancer using MCO compared with standard optimization. Limitations exist within MCO regarding conversion of navigated plans to deliverable apertures, particularly for plans that emphasize avoidance of critical structures. Minimizing these differences would result in better quality treatments for patients with prostate cancer who were treated with radiotherapy using MCO plans.

PET/CT imaging for target volume delineation in curative intent radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer: IAEA consensus report 2014

This document describes best practice and evidence based recommendations for the use of FDG-PET/CT for the purposes of radiotherapy target volume delineation (TVD) for curative intent treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). These recommendations have been written by an expert advisory group, convened by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to facilitate a Coordinated Research Project (CRP) aiming to improve the applications of PET based radiation treatment planning (RTP) in low and middle income countries. These guidelines can be applied in routine clinical practice of radiotherapy TVD, for NSCLC patients treated with concurrent chemoradiation or radiotherapy alone, where FDG is used, and where a calibrated PET camera system equipped for RTP patient positioning is available. Recommendations are provided for PET and CT image visualization and interpretation, and for tumor delineation using planning CT with and without breathing motion compensation.

Pre-Radiotherapy Dental Assessment of Head and Neck Oncology Patients: An Audit.

Objectives: Approximately 300 people are diagnosed with Head and Neck cancer annually in Northern Ireland. The management may include treatment by surgery or by chemotherapy and radiotherapy,
or a combination of modalities. Patients whose oral cavity, teeth, salivary glands and jaws that
will be affected by treatment, particularly radiotherapy should have a pre-treatment assessment. This should be done as early as possible to maximise the time available for dental management. However, this can be challenging owing to the complexities of cancer diagnosis, treatment planning and multidisciplinary management. At the Belfast Dental Hospital, a number of patients were referred post- radiotherapy with complications after not having received a pre-treatment assessment. The referrals for pre- treatment dental assessment were also late in patients’ multidisciplinary journey, limiting the time period
for dental input. The purpose of this audit was to examine the time period between dental assessment and commencement of radiotherapy and whether this was an adequate time frame for dental management. This audit will also examine the dental diseases present and the treatments required pre-radiotherapy. Methods: Data for this audit was collected over 4 months in 2012
by analysing the dental charts and referrals of new patients who were referred to and attended the dental head and neck oncology clinic. A standardised referral pro-forma was introduced from September 2013 to improve the referral process.
A re-audit was conducted over 4 months in 2014. Data was collected similarly as previous. The time period between dental assessment and commencement of radiotherapy was examined. The presence of dental disease and subsequent treatments required were also noted.
Results: 63 new patients were examined in the dental head and neck oncology clinic over 4 months in 2012. 48 (76.2%) were examined pre-radiotherapy. The average length of time between dental assessment and radiotherapy commencement was 11 days. A new standardised referral pro-forma was introduced in 2013. In the re-audit, 65 new patients were seen over 4 months in 2014.
60 (92.3%) patients were examined pre-radiotherapy. The average length of time between dental assessment and radiotherapy commencement was 18 days.
Conclusion: Given the high prevalence of pre-existing dental disease amongst head and neck cancer patients, prompt dental assessment and treatment is vital. Efforts aimed at improving the care pathway are on-going through the implementation of a mandatory referral pro-forma and a dedicated assessment clinic.

Modelling responses to spatially fractionated radiation fields using preclinical image-guided radiotherapy

OBJECTIVES: Radiotherapy is planned to achieve the optimal physical dose distribution to the target tumour volume whilst minimising dose to the surrounding normal tissue. Recent in vitro experimental evidence has demonstrated an important role for intercellular communication in radiobiological responses following non-uniform exposures. This study aimed to model the impact of these effects in the context of techniques involving highly modulated radiation fields or spatially fractionated treatments such as GRID therapy.

METHODS: Using the small animal radiotherapy research platform (SARRP) as a key enabling technology to deliver precision imaged-guided radiotherapy, it is possible to achieve spatially modulated dose distributions that model typical clinical scenarios. In this work, we planned uniform and spatially fractionated dose distributions using multiple isocentres with beam sizes of 0.5 - 5 mm to obtain 50% volume coverage in a subcutaneous murine tumour model, and applied a model of cellular response that incorporates intercellular communication to assess the potential impact of signalling effects with different ranges.

RESULTS: Models of GRID treatment plans which incorporate intercellular signalling showed increased cell killing within the low dose region. This results in an increase in the Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD) for GRID exposures compared to standard models, with some GRID exposures being predicted to be more effective than uniform delivery of the same physical dose.

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential impact of radiation induced signalling on tumour cell response for spatially fractionated therapies and identifies key experiments to validate this model and quantify these effects in vivo.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This study highlights the unique opportunities now possible using advanced preclinical techniques to develop a foundation for biophysical optimisation in radiotherapy treatment planning.

Visual functioning and quality of life in the subfoveal radiotherapy study (SFRADS): SFRADS report 2

Aims: To determine whether or not self reported visual functioning and quality of life in patients with choroidal neovascularisation caused by age related macular degeneration (AMD) is better in those treated with 12 Gy external beam radiotherapy in comparison with untreated subjects. Methods: A multicentre single masked randomised controlled trial of 12 Gy of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) delivered as 6x2 Gy fractions to the macula of an affected eye versus observation. Patients with AMD, aged 60 years or over, in three UK hospital units, who had subfoveal CNV and a visual acuity equal to or better than 6/60 (logMAR 1.0). Methods: Data from 199 eligible participants who were randomly assigned to 12 Gy teletherapy or observation were available for analysis. Visual function assessment, ophthalmic examination, and fundus fluorescein angiography were undertaken at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after study entry. To assess patient centred outcomes, subjects were asked to complete the Daily Living Tasks Dependent on Vision (DLTV) and the SF-36 questionnaires at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months after enrolment to the study. Cross sectional and longitudinal analyses were conducted using arm of study as grouping variable. Regression analysis was employed to adjust for the effect of baseline co-variates on outcome at 12 months and 24 months. Results: Both control and treated subjects had significant losses in visual functioning as seen by a progressive decline in mean scores in the four dimensions of the DLTV. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment and control subjects in any of dimensions of the DLTV at 12 months or 24 months after study entry. Regression analysis confirmed that treatment status had no effect on the change in DLTV dimensional scores. Conclusions: The small benefits noted in clinical measures of vision in treated eyes did not translate into better self reported visual functioning in patients who received treatment when compared with the control arm. These findings have implications for the design of future clinical trials and studies.