Ototoxicity evaluation in medulloblastoma patients treated with involved field boost using intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): a retrospective review

Background: Ototoxicity is a known side effect of combined radiation therapy and cisplatin chemotherapy for the treatment of medulloblastoma. the delivery of an involved field boost by intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) may reduce the dose to the inner ear when compared with conventional radiotherapy. the dose of cisplatin may also affect the risk of ototoxicity. A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the impact of involved field boost using IMRT and cisplatin dose on the rate of ototoxicity.Methods: Data from 41 medulloblastoma patients treated with IMRT were collected. Overall and disease-free survival rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method Hearing function was graded according to toxicity criteria of Pediatric Oncology Group (POG). Doses to inner ear and total cisplatin dose were correlated with hearing function by univariate and multivariate data analysis.Results: After a mean follow-up of 44 months (range: 14 to 72 months), 37 patients remained alive, with two recurrences, both in spine with CSF involvement, resulting in a disease free-survival and overall survival of 85.2% and 90.2%, respectively. Seven patients (17%) experienced POG Grade 3 or 4 toxicity. Cisplatin dose was a significant factor for hearing loss in univariate analysis (p < 0.03). in multivariate analysis, median dose to inner ear was significantly associated with hearing loss (p < 0.01). POG grade 3 and 4 toxicity were uncommon with median doses to the inner ear bellow 42 Gy (p < 0.05) and total cisplatin dose of less than 375 mg/m(2) (p < 0.01).Conclusions: IMRT leads to a low rate of severe ototoxicity. Median radiation dose to auditory apparatus should be kept below 42 Gy. Cisplatin doses should not exceed 375 mg/m(2).

Temporal characterization and in vitro comparison of cell survival following the delivery of 3D-conformal, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)

A phantom was designed and implemented for the delivery of treatment plans to cells in vitro. Single beam, 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) plans, inverse planned five-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), nine-field IMRT, single-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and dual-arc VMAT plans were created on a CT scan of the phantom to deliver 3 Gy to the cell layer and verified using a Farmer chamber, 2D ionization chamber array and gafchromic film. Each plan was delivered to a 2D ionization chamber array to assess the temporal characteristics of the plan including delivery time and 'cell's eye view' for the central ionization chamber. The effective fraction time, defined as the percentage of the fraction time where any dose is delivered to each point examined, was also assessed across 120 ionization chambers. Each plan was delivered to human prostate cancer DU-145 cells and normal primary AGO-1522b fibroblast cells. Uniform beams were delivered to each cell line with the delivery time varying from 0.5 to 20.54 min. Effective fraction time was found to increase with a decreasing number of beams or arcs. For a uniform beam delivery, AGO-1552b cells exhibited a statistically significant trend towards increased survival with increased delivery time. This trend was not repeated when the different modulated clinical delivery methods were used. Less sensitive DU-145 cells did not exhibit a significant trend towards increased survival with increased delivery time for either the uniform or clinical deliveries. These results confirm that dose rate effects are most prevalent in more radiosensitive cells. Cell survival data generated from uniform beam deliveries over a range of dose rates and delivery times may not always be accurate in predicting response to more complex delivery techniques, such as IMRT and VMAT.

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.

Inverse planned constant dose rate volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as an efficient alternative to five-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate

Purpose: The aim of this work was to determine if volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans, created for constant dose-rate (cdrVMAT) delivery are a viable alternative to step and shoot five-field intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Materials and methods: The cdrVMAT plans, inverse planned on a treatment planning system with no solution to account for couch top or rails, were created for delivery on a linear accelerator with no variable dose rate control system. A series of five-field IMRT and cdrVMAT plans were created using dual partial arcs (gantry rotating between 260° and 100°) with 4° control points for ten prostate patients with the average rectal constraint incrementally increased. Pareto fronts were compared for the planning target volume homogeneity and average rectal dose between the two techniques for each patient. Also investigated were tumour control probability and normal tissue complication probability values for each technique. The delivery parameters [monitor units (MU) and time] and delivery accuracy of the IMRT and VMAT plans were also compared. Results: Pareto fronts showed that the dual partial arc plans were superior to the five-field IMRT plans, particularly for the clinically acceptable plans where average rectal doses were less for rotational plans (p = 0·009) with no statistical difference in target homogeneity. The cdrVMAT plans had significantly more MU (p = 0·005) but the average delivery time was significantly less than the IMRT plans by 42%. All clinically acceptable cdrVMAT plans were accurate in their delivery (gamma 99·2 ± 1·1%, 3%3 mm criteria). Conclusions Accurate delivery of dual partial arc cdrVMAT avoiding the couch top and rails has been demonstrated.

EVALUATION OF INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY (IMRT) DELIVERY ERROR DUE TO IMRT TREATMENT PLAN COMPLEXITY AND IMPROPERLY MATCHED DOSIMETRY DATA

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a technique that delivers a highly conformal dose distribution to a target volume while attempting to maximally spare the surrounding normal tissues. IMRT is a common treatment modality used for treating head and neck (H&N) cancers, and the presence of many critical structures in this region requires accurate treatment delivery. The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) acts as both a remote and on-site quality assurance agency that credentials institutions participating in clinical trials. To date, about 30% of all IMRT participants have failed the RPC’s remote audit using the IMRT H&N phantom. The purpose of this project is to evaluate possible causes of H&N IMRT delivery errors observed by the RPC, specifically IMRT treatment plan complexity and the use of improper dosimetry data from machines that were thought to be matched but in reality were not. Eight H&N IMRT plans with a range of complexity defined by total MU (1460-3466), number of segments (54-225), and modulation complexity scores (MCS) (0.181-0.609) were created in Pinnacle v.8m. These plans were delivered to the RPC’s H&N phantom on a single Varian Clinac. One of the IMRT plans (1851 MU, 88 segments, and MCS=0.469) was equivalent to the median H&N plan from 130 previous RPC H&N phantom irradiations. This average IMRT plan was also delivered on four matched Varian Clinac machines and the dose distribution calculated using a different 6MV beam model. Radiochromic film and TLD within the phantom were used to analyze the dose profiles and absolute doses, respectively. The measured and calculated were compared to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy. All deliveries met the RPC acceptance criteria of ±7% absolute dose difference and 4 mm distance-to-agreement (DTA). Additionally, gamma index analysis was performed for all deliveries using a ±7%/4mm and ±5%/3mm criteria. Increasing the treatment plan complexity by varying the MU, number of segments, or varying the MCS resulted in no clear trend toward an increase in dosimetric error determined by the absolute dose difference, DTA, or gamma index. Varying the delivery machines as well as the beam model (use of a Clinac 6EX 6MV beam model vs. Clinac 21EX 6MV model), also did not show any clear trend towards an increased dosimetric error using the same criteria indicated above.

Implications of Intercellular Signaling for Radiation Therapy: A Theoretical Dose-Planning Study

Purpose
Recent in vitro results have shown significant contributions to cell killing from signaling effects at doses that are typically used in radiation therapy. This study investigates whether these in vitro observations can be reconciled with in vivo knowledge and how signaling may have an impact on future developments in radiation therapy.
Methods and Materials
Prostate cancer treatment plans were generated for a series of 10 patients using 3-dimensional conformal therapy, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy techniques. These plans were evaluated using mathematical models of survival following modulated radiation exposures that were developed from in vitro observations and incorporate the effects of intercellular signaling. The impact on dose-volume histograms and mean doses were evaluated by converting these survival levels into "signaling-adjusted doses" for comparison.
Results
Inclusion of intercellular communication leads to significant differences between the signalling-adjusted and physical doses across a large volume. Organs in low-dose regions near target volumes see the largest increases, with mean signaling-adjusted bladder doses increasing from 23 to 33 Gy in IMRT plans. By contrast, in high-dose regions, there is a small decrease in signaling-adjusted dose due to reduced contributions from neighboring cells, with planning target volume mean doses falling from 74 to 71 Gy in IMRT. Overall, however, the dose distributions remain broadly similar, and comparisons between the treatment modalities are largely unchanged whether physical or signaling-adjusted dose is compared. Conclusions Although incorporating cellular signaling significantly affects cell killing in low-dose regions and suggests a different interpretation for many phenomena, their effect in high-dose regions for typical planning techniques is comparatively small. This indicates that the significant signaling effects observed in vitro are not contradicted by comparison with clinical observations. Future investigations are needed to validate these effects in vivo and to quantify their ranges and potential impact on more advanced radiation therapy techniques.

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.

Intensity modulated radiation therapy or stereotactic fractionated radiotherapy for infratentorial ependymoma in children: a multicentric study

This study was to evaluate the treatment dosimetry, efficacy and toxicity of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) in the management of infratentorial ependymoma. Between 1999 and 2007, seven children (median age, 3.1 years) with infratentorial ependymoma were planned with either IMRT (3 patients) or SFRT (4 patients), the latter after conventional posterior fossa irradiation. Two children underwent gross total resection. Median prescribed dose was 59.4 Gy (range, 55.8-60). The median follow-up for surviving patients was 4.8 years (range, 1.3-8). IMRT (median dose, 59.4 Gy) and FSRT (median dose, 55.8 Gy) achieved similar optimal target coverage. Percentages of maximum doses delivered to the cochleae (59.5 vs 85.0% Gy; P = 0.05) were significantly inferior with IMRT, when compared to FSRT planning. Percentages of maximum doses administered to the pituitary gland (38.2 vs 20.1%; P = 0.05) and optic chiasm (38.1 vs 14.1%; P = 0.001) were, however, significantly higher with IMRT, when compared to FSRT planning. No recurrences were observed at the last follow-up. The estimated 3-year progression-free survival and overall survival were 87.5 and 100%, respectively. No grade >1 acute toxicity was observed. Two patients presented late adverse events (grade 2 hypoacousia) during follow-up, without cognitive impairment. IMRT or FSRT for infratentorial ependymomas is effective and associated with a tolerable toxicity level. Both treatment techniques were able to capitalize their intrinsic conformal ability to deliver high-dose radiation. Larger series of patients treated with these two modalities will be necessary to more fully evaluate these delivery techniques.

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.

Association of urethral toxicity with dose exposure in combined high-dose-rate brachytherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION: To report acute and late toxicities in patients with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer treated with combined high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-B) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 2003 to September 2005, 64 men were treated with a single implant HDR-B with 21 Gy given in three fractions, followed by 50 Gy IMRT along with organ tracking. Median age was 66.1 years, and risk of recurrence was intermediate in 47% of the patients or high in 53% of the patients. Androgen deprivation therapy was received by 69% of the patients. Toxicity was scored according to the CTCAE version 3.0. Median follow-up was 3.1 years. RESULTS: Acute grade 3 genitourinary (GU) toxicity was observed in 7.8% of the patients, and late grades 3 and 4 GU toxicity was observed in 10.9% and 1.6% of the patients. Acute grade 3 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was experienced by 1.6% of the patients, and late grade 3 GI toxicity was absent. The urethral V(120) (urethral volume receiving > or =120% of the prescribed HDR-B dose) was associated with acute (P=.047) and late > or = grade 2 GU toxicities (P=.049). CONCLUSIONS: Late grades 3 and 4GU toxicity occurred in 10.9% and 1.6% of the patients after HDR-B followed by IMRT in association with the irradiated urethral volume. The impact of V(120) on GU toxicity should be validated in further studies.

Is a 3-mm intrafractional margin sufficient for daily image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy of prostate cancer?

PURPOSE: To determine whether a 3-mm isotropic target margin adequately covers the prostate and seminal vesicles (SVs) during administration of an intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment fraction, assuming that daily image-guided setup is performed just before each fraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In-room computed tomographic (CT) scans were acquired immediately before and after a daily treatment fraction in 46 patients with prostate cancer. An eight-field IMRT plan was designed using the pre-fraction CT with a 3-mm margin and subsequently recalculated on the post-fraction CT. For convenience of comparison, dose plans were scaled to full course of treatment (75.6 Gy). Dose coverage was assessed on the post-treatment CT image set. RESULTS: During one treatment fraction (21.4+/-5.5 min), there were reductions in the volumes of the prostate and SVs receiving the prescribed dose (median reduction 0.1% and 1.0%, respectively, p<0.001) and in the minimum dose to 0.1 cm(3) of their volumes (median reduction 0.5 and 1.5 Gy, p<0.001). Of the 46 patients, three patients' prostates and eight patients' SVs did not maintain dose coverage above 70 Gy. Rectal filling correlated with decreased percentage-volume of SV receiving 75.6, 70, and 60 Gy (p<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The 3-mm intrafractional margin was adequate for prostate dose coverage. However, a significant subset of patients lost SV dose coverage. The rectal volume change significantly affected SV dose coverage. For advanced-stage prostate cancers, we recommend to use larger margins or improve organ immobilization (such as with a rectal balloon) to ensure SV coverage.

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.