Out-of-field cell survival following exposure to intensity-modulated radiation fields

PURPOSE:
To determine the in-field and out-of-field cell survival of cells irradiated with either primary field or scattered radiation in the presence and absence of intercellular communication.
METHODS AND MATERIALS:
Cell survival was determined by clonogenic assay in human prostate cancer (DU145) and primary fibroblast (AGO1552) cells following exposure to different field configurations delivered using a 6-MV photon beam produced with a Varian linear accelerator.
RESULTS:
Nonuniform dose distributions were delivered using a multileaf collimator (MLC) in which half of the cell population was shielded. Clonogenic survival in the shielded region was significantly lower than that predicted from the linear quadratic model. In both cell lines, the out-of-field responses appeared to saturate at 40%-50% survival at a scattered dose of 0.70 Gy in DU-145 cells and 0.24 Gy in AGO1522 cells. There was an approximately eightfold difference in the initial slopes of the out-of-field response compared with the a-component of the uniform field response. In contrast, cells in the exposed part of the field showed increased survival. These observations were abrogated by direct physical inhibition of cellular communication and by the addition of the inducible nitric oxide synthase inhibitor aminoguanidine known to inhibit intercellular bystander effects. Additional studies showed the proportion of cells irradiated and dose delivered to the shielded and exposed regions of the field to impact on response.
CONCLUSIONS:
These data demonstrate out-of-field effects as important determinants of cell survival following exposure to modulated irradiation fields with cellular communication between differentially irradiated cell populations playing an important role. Validation of these observations in additional cell models may facilitate the refinement of existing radiobiological models and the observations considered important determinants of cell survival.

Assessing software upgrades, plan properties and patient geometry using intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) complexity metrics

Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the sensitivity of different metrics to detect differences in complexity of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans following upgrades, changes to planning parameters, and patient geometry. Correlations between complexity metrics are also assessed.

In-vitro investigation of out-of-field cell survival following the delivery of conformal, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans

The aim of this work is to determine the out-of-field survival of cells irradiated with either the primary field or scattered radiation in the presence and absence of intercellular communication following delivery of conformal, IMRT and VMAT treatment plans. Single beam, conformal, IMRT and VMAT plans were created to deliver 3 Gy to half the area of a T80 flask containing either DU-145 or AGO-1522 cells allowing intercellular communication between the in-and out-of-field cell populations. The same plans were delivered to a similar custom made phantom used to hold two T25 culture flasks, one flask in-field and one out-of-field to allow comparison of cell survival responses when intercellular communication is physically inhibited. Plans were created for the delivery of 8 Gy to the more radio-resistant DU-145 cells only in the presence and absence of intercellular communication. Cell survival was determined by clonogenic assay. In both cell lines, the out-of-field survival was not statistically different between delivery techniques for either cell line or dose. There was however, a statistically significant difference between survival out-of-field when intercellular communication was intact (single T80 culture flask) or inhibited (multiple T25 culture flasks) to in-field for all plans. No statistically significant difference was observed in-field with or without cellular communication to out-of-field for all plans. These data demonstrate out-of-field effects as important determinants of cell survival following exposure to modulated irradiation fields when cellular communication between differentially irradiated cell populations is present. This data is further evidence that refinement of existing radiobiological models to include indirect cell killing effects is required.

Investigating the influence of respiratory motion on the radiation induced bystander effect in modulated radiotherapy

Respiratory motion introduces complex spatio-temporal variations in the dosimetry of radiotherapy and may contribute towards uncertainties in radiotherapy planning. This study investigates the potential radiobiological implications occurring due to tumour motion in areas of geometric miss in lung cancer radiotherapy. A bespoke phantom and motor-driven platform to replicate respiratory motion and study the consequences on tumour cell survival in vitro was constructed. Human non-small-cell lung cancer cell lines H460 and H1299 were irradiated in modulated radiotherapy configurations in the presence and absence of respiratory motion. Clonogenic survival was calculated for irradiated and shielded regions. Direction of motion, replication of dosimetry by multi-leaf collimator (MLC) manipulation and oscillating lead shielding were investigated to confirm differences in cell survival. Respiratory motion was shown to significantly increase survival for out-of-field regions for H460/H1299 cell lines when compared with static irradiation (p <0.001). Significantly higher survival was found in the in-field region for the H460 cell line (p <0.030). Oscillating lead shielding also produced these significant differences. Respiratory motion and oscillatory delivery of radiation dose to human tumour cells has a significant impact on in- and out-of-field survival in the presence of non-uniform irradiation in this in vitro set-up. This may have important radiobiological consequences for modulated radiotherapy in lung cancer. 

Improvement in clinical step and shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy delivery accuracy on an integrated linear accelerator control system

Purpose: The dose delivery accuracy of 30 clinical step and shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy plans was investigated using the single integrated multileaf collimator controller of the Varian Truebeam linear accelerator (linac) (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) and compared with the dose delivery accuracy on a previous generation Varian 2100CD C-Series linac.

Methods and Materials: Ten prostate, 10 prostate and pelvic node, and 10 head-and-neck cases were investigated in this study. Dose delivery accuracy on each linac was assessed using Farmer ionization chamber point dose measurements, 2-dimensional planar ionization chamber array measurements, and the corresponding Varian dynamic log files. Absolute point dose measurements, fluence delivery accuracy, leaf position accuracy, and the overshoot effect were assessed for each plan.

Results: Absolute point dose delivery accuracy increased by 1.5% on the Truebeam compared with the 2100CD linac. No improvement in fluence delivery accuracy between the linacs, at a gamma criterion of 3%/3 mm was measured using the 2-dimensional ionization chamber array, with median (interquartile range) gamma passing rates of 98.99% (97.70%-99.72%) and 99.28% (98.26%-99.75%) for the Truebeam and 2100CD linacs, respectively. Varian log files also showed no improvement in fluence delivery between the linacs at 3%/3 mm, with median gamma passing rates of 99.97% (99.93%-99.99%) and 99.98% (99.94%-100%) for the Truebeam and 2100CD linacs, respectively. However, log files revealed improved leaf position accuracy and fluence delivery at 1%/1 mm criterion on the Truebeam (99.87%; 99.78%-99.94%) compared with the 2100CD linac (97.87%; 91.93%-99.49%). The overshoot effect, characterized on the 2100CD linac, was not observed on the Truebeam.

Conclusions: The integrated multileaf collimator controller on the Varian Truebeam improves clinical treatment delivery accuracy of step and shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy fields compared with delivery on a Varian C-series linac. © 2014.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with intermediate-risk localised prostate cancer: 2-year patient-reported outcomes of the randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 CHHiP trial

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) might detect more toxic effects of radiotherapy than do clinician-reported outcomes. We did a quality of life (QoL) substudy to assess PROs up to 24 months after conventionally fractionated or hypofractionated radiotherapy in the Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP) trial.

METHODS: The CHHiP trial is a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial done in 71 centres, of which 57 UK hospitals took part in the QoL substudy. Men with localised prostate cancer who were undergoing radiotherapy were eligible for trial entry if they had histologically confirmed T1b-T3aN0M0 prostate cancer, an estimated risk of seminal vesicle involvement less than 30%, prostate-specific antigen concentration less than 30 ng/mL, and a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive a standard fractionation schedule of 74 Gy in 37 fractions or one of two hypofractionated schedules: 60 Gy in 20 fractions or 57 Gy in 19 fractions. Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted block sizes of six and nine, stratified by centre and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group. Treatment allocation was not masked. UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), including Short Form (SF)-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and SF-12 quality-of-life questionnaires were completed at baseline, pre-radiotherapy, 10 weeks post-radiotherapy, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial completed accrual on June 16, 2011, and the QoL substudy was closed to further recruitment on Nov 1, 2009. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint of the QoL substudy was overall bowel bother and comparisons between fractionation groups were done at 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97182923.

FINDINGS: 2100 participants in the CHHiP trial consented to be included in the QoL substudy: 696 assigned to the 74 Gy schedule, 698 assigned to the 60 Gy schedule, and 706 assigned to the 57 Gy schedule. Of these individuals, 1659 (79%) provided data pre-radiotherapy and 1444 (69%) provided data at 24 months after radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 50·0 months (IQR 38·4-64·2) on April 9, 2014, which was the most recent follow-up measurement of all data collected before the QoL data were analysed in September, 2014. Comparison of 74 Gy in 37 fractions, 60 Gy in 20 fractions, and 57 Gy in 19 fractions groups at 2 years showed no overall bowel bother in 269 (66%), 266 (65%), and 282 (65%) men; very small bother in 92 (22%), 91 (22%), and 93 (21%) men; small bother in 26 (6%), 28 (7%), and 38 (9%) men; moderate bother in 19 (5%), 23 (6%), and 21 (5%) men, and severe bother in four (<1%), three (<1%) and three (<1%) men respectively (74 Gy vs 60 Gy, ptrend=0.64, 74 Gy vs 57 Gy, ptrend=0·59). We saw no differences between treatment groups in change of bowel bother score from baseline or pre-radiotherapy to 24 months.

INTERPRETATION: The incidence of patient-reported bowel symptoms was low and similar between patients in the 74 Gy control group and the hypofractionated groups up to 24 months after radiotherapy. If efficacy outcomes from CHHiP show non-inferiority for hypofractionated treatments, these findings will add to the growing evidence for moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules becoming the standard treatment for localised prostate cancer.

FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Prostate cancer radiotherapy: potential applications of metal nanoparticles for imaging and therapy

Prostate cancer (CaP) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in males. There have been dramatic technical advances in radiotherapy delivery, enabling higher doses of radiotherapy to primary cancer, involved lymph nodes and oligometastases with acceptable normal tissue toxicity. Despite this, many patients relapse following primary radical therapy, and novel treatment approaches are required. Metal nanoparticles are agents that promise to improve diagnostic imaging and image-guided radiotherapy and to selectively enhance radiotherapy effectiveness in CaP. We summarize current radiotherapy treatment approaches for CaP and consider pre-clinical and clinical evidence for metal nanoparticles in this condition.

Prostate cancer (CaP) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in males and is responsible for more than 10,000 deaths each year in the UK.1 Technical advances in radiotherapy delivery, including image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IG-IMRT), have enabled the delivery of higher radiation dose to the prostate, which has led to improved biochemical control. Further improvements in cancer imaging during radiotherapy are being developed with the advent of MRI simulators and MRI linear accelerators.2–4

Nanotechnology promises to deliver significant advancements across numerous disciplines.5 The widest scope of applications are from the biomedical field including exogenous gene/drug delivery systems, advanced biosensors, targeted contrast agents for diagnostic applications and as direct therapeutic agents used in combination with existing treatment modalities.6–11 This diversity of application is especially evident within cancer research, with a myriad of experimental anticancer strategies currently under investigation.

This review will focus specifically on the potential of metal-based nanoparticles to augment the efficacy of radiotherapy in CaP, a disease where radiotherapy constitutes a major curative treatment modality.12 Furthermore, we will also address the clinical state of the art for CaP radiotherapy and consider how these treatments could be best combined with nanotherapeutics to improve cancer outcomes.

A matheuristic for the selection of beam directions and dose distribution in radiotherapy planning

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

A method for automated generation of radiotherapy treatment plans for lung cancer

La radioterapia è una tecnica molto impiegata per la cura del cancro. Attualmente la somministrazione avviene principalmente attraverso la intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT, sovrapposizione di campi ad intensità modulata), un cui sviluppo recente è la volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT, irradiazione continua lungo un arco ininterrotto). La generazione di piani richiede esperienza ed abilità: un dosimetrista seleziona cost functions ed obiettivi ed un TPS ottimizza la disposizione dei segmenti ad intensità modulata. Se il medico giudica il risultato non soddisfacente, il processo riparte da capo (trial-and-error). Una alternativa è la generazione automatica di piani. Erasmus-iCycle, software prodotto presso ErasmusMC (Rotterdam, The Netherlands), è un algoritmo di ottimizzazione multicriteriale di piani radioterapici per ottimizzazione di intensità basato su una wish list. L'output consiste di piani Pareto-ottimali ad intensità modulata. La generazione automatica garantisce maggiore coerenza e qualità più elevata con tempi di lavoro ridotti. Nello studio, una procedura di generazione automatica di piani con modalità VMAT è stata sviluppata e valutata per carcinoma polmonare. Una wish list è stata generata attraverso una procedura iterativa su un gruppo ristretto di pazienti con la collaborazione di fisici medici ed oncologi e poi validata su un gruppo più ampio di pazienti. Nella grande maggioranza dei casi, i piani automatici sono stati giudicati dagli oncologi migliori rispetto ai rispettivi piani IMRT clinici generati manualmente. Solo in pochi casi una rapida calibrazione manuale specifica per il paziente si è resa necessaria per soddisfare tutti i requisiti clinici. Per un sottogruppo di pazienti si è mostrato che la qualità dei piani VMAT automatici era equivalente o superiore rispetto ai piani VMAT generati manualmente da un dosimetrista esperto. Complessivamente, si è dimostrata la possibilità di generare piani radioterapici VMAT ad alta qualità automaticamente, con interazione umana minima. L'introduzione clinica della procedura automatica presso ErasmusMC è iniziata (ottobre 2015).

High-dose (80 Gy) intensity-modulated radiation therapy with daily image-guidance as primary treatment for localized prostate cancer

to report acute and late toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated by high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with daily image-guidance.

Urethral toxicity vs. cancer control-Lessons to be learned from high-dose rate brachytherapy combined with intensity-modulated radiation therapy in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

To describe biochemical relapse-free survival (BRFS) and late toxicity after combined high-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-B) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer patients.

Acute and late toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated by dose escalated intensity modulated radiation therapy and organ tracking

BACKGROUND: To report acute and late toxicity in prostate cancer patients treated by dose escalated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and organ tracking. METHODS: From 06/2004 to 12/2005 39 men were treated by 80 Gy IMRT along with organ tracking. Median age was 69 years, risk of recurrence was low 18%, intermediate 21% and high in 61% patients. Hormone therapy (HT) was received by 74% of patients. Toxicity was scored according to the CTC scale version 3.0. Median follow-up (FU) was 29 months. RESULTS: Acute and maximal late grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was 3% and 8%, late grade 2 GI toxicity dropped to 0% at the end of FU. No acute or late grade 3 GI toxicity was observed. Grade 2 and 3 pre-treatment genitourinary (GU) morbidity (PGUM) was 20% and 5%. Acute and maximal late grade 2 GU toxicity was 56% and 28% and late grade 2 GU toxicity decreased to 15% of patients at the end of FU. Acute and maximal late grade 3 GU toxicity was 8% and 3%, respectively. Decreased late > or = grade 2 GU toxicity free survival was associated with higher age (P = .025), absence of HT (P = .016) and higher PGUM (P < .001). DISCUSSION: GI toxicity rates after IMRT and organ tracking are excellent, GU toxicity rates are strongly related to PGUM.

Assessment of Collimator Jaw Optimization in Reducing Normal Tissue Irradiation with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

Purpose: To evaluate normal tissue dose reduction in step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) on the Varian 2100 platform by tracking the multileaf collimator (MLC) apertures with the accelerator jaws. Methods: Clinical radiation treatment plans for 10 thoracic, 3 pediatric and 3 head and neck patients were converted to plans with the jaws tracking each segment’s MLC apertures. Each segment was then renormalized to account for the change in collimator scatter to obtain target coverage within 1% of that in the original plan. The new plans were compared to the original plans in a commercial radiation treatment planning system (TPS). Reduction in normal tissue dose was evaluated in the new plan by using the parameters V5, V10, and V20 in the cumulative dose-volume histogram for the following structures: total lung minus GTV (gross target volume), heart, esophagus, spinal cord, liver, parotids, and brainstem. In order to validate the accuracy of our beam model, MLC transmission measurements were made and compared to those predicted by the TPS. Results: The greatest change between the original plan and new plan occurred at lower dose levels. The reduction in V20 was never more than 6.3% and was typically less than 1% for all patients. The reduction in V5 was 16.7% maximum and was typically less than 3% for all patients. The variation in normal tissue dose reduction was not predictable, and we found no clear parameters that indicated which patients would benefit most from jaw tracking. Our TPS model of MLC transmission agreed with measurements with absolute transmission differences of less than 0.1 % and thus uncertainties in the model did not contribute significantly to the uncertainty in the dose determination. Conclusion: The amount of dose reduction achieved by collimating the jaws around each MLC aperture in step-and-shoot IMRT does not appear to be clinically significant.