The impact of neuroradiology collaboration in head and neck cancer radiotherapy peer review.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of neuroradiologist presence on head and neck cancer (HNC) radiotherapy peer review (PR) changes. METHODS: Prospective data were collected from HNC radiotherapy PR meetings; major, minor, and organ at risk (OAR) changes recorded. Differences in changes made with a neuroradiologist present were determined. χ2 tests of statistical significance were performed. Multivariate logistic regression identified potential predictors of changes. RESULTS: Prospective PR was performed in 125/160 (78%) patients undergoing radical (chemo)radiotherapy for HNC between October 2018 and September 2019. Full PR documentation was available for 120/160 meetings (75%), with a neuroradiologist present in 53/120 (44%). Overall, 51/120 (42.5%) had changes made to target volumes or OARs. When a neuroradiologist was present, 29/53 (55%) of plans had changes made, compared to 22/67 (33%) in their absence. On multivariate analysis, neuroradiologist presence significantly influenced any changes made during the PR meetings (OR 2.59; 95% CI 1.05-6.43; p = 0.039). CONCLUSION: Neuroradiologist presence at PR meetings significantly influences changes made to HNC contouring, likely improving consistency and enhancing quality assurance. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first published UK series demonstrating that a collaborative approach between radiology and oncology in PR meetings is significant in leading to contour changes for HNC.

Anatomical change during radiotherapy for head and neck cancer, and its effect on delivered dose to the spinal cord.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The impact of weight loss and anatomical change during head and neck (H&N) radiotherapy on spinal cord dosimetry is poorly understood, limiting evidence-based adaptive management strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 133 H&N patients treated with daily mega-voltage CT image-guidance (MVCT-IG) on TomoTherapy, were selected. Elastix software was used to deform planning scan SC contours to MVCT-IG scans, and accumulate dose. Planned (DP) and delivered (DA) spinal cord D2% (SCD2%) were compared. Univariate relationships between neck irradiation strategy (unilateral vs bilateral), T-stage, N-stage, weight loss, and changes in lateral separation (LND) and CT slice surface area (SSA) at C1 and the superior thyroid notch (TN), and ΔSCD2% [(DA - DP) D2%] were examined. RESULTS: The mean value for (DA - DP) D2% was -0.07 Gy (95%CI -0.28 to 0.14, range -5.7 Gy to 3.8 Gy), and the mean absolute difference between DP and DA (independent of difference direction) was 0.9 Gy (95%CI 0.76-1.04 Gy). Neck treatment strategy (p = 0.39) and T-stage (p = 0.56) did not affect ΔSCD2%. Borderline significance (p = 0.09) was seen for higher N-stage (N2-3) and higher ΔSCD2%. Mean reductions in anatomical metrics were substantial: weight loss 6.8 kg; C1LND 12.9 mm; C1SSA 12.1 cm2; TNLND 5.3 mm; TNSSA 11.2 cm2, but no relationship between weight loss or anatomical change and ΔSCD2% was observed (all r2 < 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Differences between delivered and planned spinal cord D2% are small in patients treated with daily IG. Even patients experiencing substantial weight loss or anatomical change during treatment do not require adaptive replanning for spinal cord safety.

Identifying risk factors for L'Hermitte's sign after IMRT for head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: L'Hermitte's sign (LS) after chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancer appears related to higher spinal cord doses. IMRT plans limit spinal cord dose, but the incidence of LS remains high. METHODS: One hundred seventeen patients treated with TomoTherapy™ between 2008 and 2015 prospectively completed a side-effect questionnaire (VoxTox Trial Registration: UK CRN ID 13716). Baseline patient and treatment data were collected. Radiotherapy plans were analysed; mean and maximum spinal cord dose and volumes receiving 10, 20, 30 and 40 Gy were recorded. Dose variation across the cord was examined. These data were included in a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Forty two patients (35.9%) reported LS symptoms. Concurrent weekly cisplatin did not increase LS risk (p = 0.70, OR = 1.23 {95% CI 0.51-2.34}). Of 13 diabetic participants (9 taking metformin), only 1 developed LS (p = 0.025, OR = 0.13 {95% CI 0.051-3.27}). A refined binary logistic regression model showed that patients receiving unilateral radiation (p = 0.019, OR = 2.06 {95% CI 0.15-0.84}) were more likely to develop LS. Higher V40Gy (p = 0.047, OR = 1.06 {95% CI 1.00-1.12}), and younger age (mean age 56.6 vs 59.7, p = 0.060, OR = 0.96 {95% CI 0.92-1.00}) were associated with elevated risk of LS, with borderline significance. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, concomitant cisplatin did not increase risk, and LS incidence was lower in diabetic patients. Patient age and dose gradients across the spinal cord may be important factors.

Applying physical science techniques and CERN technology to an unsolved problem in radiation treatment for cancer: the multidisciplinary 'VoxTox' research programme.

The VoxTox research programme has applied expertise from the physical sciences to the problem of radiotherapy toxicity, bringing together expertise from engineering, mathematics, high energy physics (including the Large Hadron Collider), medical physics and radiation oncology. In our initial cohort of 109 men treated with curative radiotherapy for prostate cancer, daily image guidance computed tomography (CT) scans have been used to calculate delivered dose to the rectum, as distinct from planned dose, using an automated approach. Clinical toxicity data have been collected, allowing us to address the hypothesis that delivered dose provides a better predictor of toxicity than planned dose.