AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline 14.a: Yttrium-90 microsphere radioembolization.

Radioembolization using Yttrium-90 (90 Y) microspheres is widely used to treat primary and metastatic liver tumors. The present work provides minimum practice guidelines for establishing and supporting such a program. Medical physicists play a key role in patient and staff safety during these procedures. Products currently available are identified and their properties and suppliers summarized. Appropriateness for use is the domain of the treating physician. Patient work up starts with pre-treatment imaging. First, a mapping study using Technetium-99m (Tc-99m ) is carried out to quantify the lung shunt fraction (LSF) and to characterize the vascular supply of the liver. An MRI, CT, or a PET-CT scan is used to obtain information on the tumor burden. The tumor volume, LSF, tumor histology, and other pertinent patient characteristics are used to decide the type and quantity of 90 Y to be ordered. On the day of treatment, the appropriate dose is assayed using a dose calibrator with a calibration traceable to a national standard. In the treatment suite, the care team led by an interventional radiologist delivers the dose using real-time image guidance. The treatment suite is posted as a radioactive area during the procedure and staff wear radiation dosimeters. The treatment room, patient, and staff are surveyed post-procedure. The dose delivered to the patient is determined from the ratio of pre-treatment and residual waste exposure rate measurements. Establishing such a treatment modality is a major undertaking requiring an institutional radioactive materials license amendment complying with appropriate federal and state radiation regulations and appropriate staff training commensurate with their respective role and function in the planning and delivery of the procedure. Training, documentation, and areas for potential failure modes are identified and guidance is provided to ameliorate them.

Ablative 5-Fraction Stereotactic MRI-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy for Oligometastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) carries a poor prognosis and significant morbidity from local tumor progression. We investigated outcomes among oligometastatic PDAC patients treated with stereotactic magnetic resonance image-guided ablative radiotherapy (SMART) to primary disease. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multi-institutional analysis of oligometastatic PDAC at diagnosis or with metachronous oligoprogression during induction chemotherapy treated with primary tumor SMART. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), freedom from locoregional failure (FFLRF), and freedom from distant failure (FFDF). Acute and late toxicity were reported and in exploratory analyses patients were stratified by the number of metastases, SMART indication, and addition of metastasis-directed therapy. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2021, 22 patients with oligometastatic PDAC (range: 1-6 metastases) received SMART to the primary tumor with a median follow-up of 11.2 months from SMART. Nineteen patients had de novo synchronous metastatic disease and three had metachronous oligoprogression. Metastasis location most commonly was liver only (40.9%), multiple organs (27.3%), lungs only (13.6%), or abdominal/pelvic nodes (13.6%). All patients received either FOLFIRINOX (64%) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (36%) followed by SMART (median 50 Gy, 5 fractions) for local control (77%), pain control (14%), or local progression (9%). Additionally, 41% of patients received other metastasis-directed treatments. The median OS from diagnosis and SMART was 23.9 months and 11.6 months, respectively. Calculated from SMART, the median PFS was 2.4 months with 91% of patients having distant progression, and 1-year local control was 68. Two patients (9%) experienced grade 3 toxicities, gastric outlet obstruction, and gastrointestinal bleed without grade 4 or 5 toxicity. CONCLUSION: There was minimal morbidity of local disease progression after SMART in this cohort of oligometastatic PDAC. As systemic therapy options improve, additional strategies to identify patients who may derive benefits from local consolidation or metastasis-directed therapy are needed.

Multi-Institutional Outcomes of Patients Aged 75 years and Older With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Treated With 5-Fraction Ablative Stereotactic Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy (A-SMART).

PURPOSE: Treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are commonly limited for patients with advanced age due to medical comorbidities and/or poor performance status. These patients may not be candidates for more aggressive chemotherapy regimens and/or surgical resection leaving few, if any, other effective treatments. Ablative stereotactic MRI-guided adaptive radiation therapy (A-SMART) is both efficacious and safe for PDAC and can achieve excellent long-term local control, however, the appropriateness of A-SMART for elderly patients with inoperable PDAC is not well understood. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of inoperable non-metastatic PDAC patients aged 75 years or older treated on the MRIdian Linac at 2 institutions. Clinical outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and locoregional (LRC). Toxicity was graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, v5). RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were evaluated with a median age of 81 years (range, 75-91) and a median follow-up of 14 months from diagnosis. PDAC was classified as locally advanced (46.9%), borderline resectable (36.7%), or medically inoperable (16.3%). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was delivered to 84% of patients and all received A-SMART to a median 50 Gy (range, 40-50 Gy) in 5 fractions. 1 Year LRC, PFS, and OS were 88.9%, 53.8%, and 78.9%, respectively. Nine patients (18%) had resection after A-SMART and benefited from PFS improvement (26 vs 6 months, P = .01). ECOG PS <2 was the only predictor of improved OS on multivariate analysis. Acute and late grade 3 + toxicity rates were 8.2% and 4.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A-SMART is associated with encouraging LRC and OS in elderly patients with initially inoperable PDAC. This novel non-invasive treatment strategy appears to be well-tolerated in patients with advanced age and should be considered in this population that has limited treatment options.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy for borderline resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma: influence of vascular margin status and type of chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The influence of chemotherapy type and vascular margin status after sequential chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is unknown. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on BRPC patients treated with chemotherapy and 5-fraction SBRT from 2009 to 2021. Surgical outcomes and SBRT-related toxicity were reported. Clinical outcomes were estimated by Kaplan-Meier with log rank comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and SBRT to a median dose of 40 Gy prescribed to the tumor-vessel interface and median dose of 32.4 Gyto 95% of the gross tumor volume. One hundred and sixty-nine patients (56%) were resected and benefited from improved median OS (41.1 vs 15.5 months, P < 0.001). Close/positive vascular margins were not associated with worse OS or FFLRF. Type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not influence OS for resected patients, but FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved median OS in unresected patients (18.2 vs 13.1 months, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: For BRPC, the effect of a positive or close vascular margin may be mitigated by neoadjuvant therapy. Shorter duration neoadjuvant chemotherapy as well as the optimal biological effective dose of radiotherapy should be prospectively explored.

Relationship between insurance status and interhospital transfers among cancer patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between insurance status and interhospital transfers has not been adequately researched among cancer patients. Hence this study aimed for understanding this relationship using a nationally representative database. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using National Inpatient Sample (NIS) data collected during 2010-2016 and included all cancer hospitalization between 18 and 64 years of age. Interhospital transfers were compared based on insurance status (Medicare, Medicaid, private, and uninsured). Weighted multivariable logistic regressions were used to calculate the odds of interhospital transfers based on insurance status, after adjusting for many covariates. RESULTS: There were 3,580,908 weighted cancer hospitalizations, of which 72,353 (2.02%) had interhospital transfers. Uninsured patients had significantly higher rates of interhospital transfers, compared to those with Medicare (P = 0.005) and private insurance (P < 0.001). Privately insured patients had significantly lower rates of interhospital transfers, compared to those with Medicare (P < 0.001) and Medicaid (P < 0.001). Logistic regression analyses showed that the odds of having interhospital transfers were significantly higher among uninsured (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.57, 95% CI: 1.45-1.69), Medicare (aOR, 1.38, 95% CI: 1.32-1.45) and Medicaid (aOR, 1.23, 95% CI: 1.16-1.30) patients when compared to those with private insurance coverages. CONCLUSION: Among cancer patients, uninsured and Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to experience interhospital transfers. In addition to medical reasons, factors such as affordability and socioeconomic status are influencing interhospital transfer decisions, indicating existing healthcare disparities. Further studies should focus on identifying the causal associations between factors explored in this study as well as additional unexplored factors.

Magnetic Resonance Guided Radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: Expanding Opportunities for Non-Operative Management.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in men and the second most common in women worldwide, and the incidence is increasing among younger patients. 30% of these malignancies arise in the rectum. Patients with rectal cancer have historically been managed with preoperative radiation, followed by radical surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy, with permanent colostomies in up to 20% of patients. Beginning in the early 2000s, non-operative management (NOM) of rectal cancer emerged as a viable alternative to radical surgery in select patients. Efforts have been ongoing to optimize neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer, thereby increasing the number of patients potentially eligible to forgo radical surgery. Magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) has recently emerged as a treatment modality capable of intensifying preoperative radiation therapy for rectal cancer patients. This technology may also predict which patients will achieve a complete response to preoperative therapy, thereby allowing for more appropriate selection of patients for NOM. The present work seeks to illustrate the potential role MRgRT could play in personalizing rectal cancer treatment thus expanding the role of NOM in rectal cancer.

Minimal toxicity after proton beam therapy for prostate and pelvic nodal irradiation: results from the proton collaborative group REG001-09 trial.

BACKGROUND: Proton beam therapy (PBT) reduces normal organ dose compared to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMXT) for prostate cancer patients who receive pelvic radiation therapy. It is not known whether this dosimetric advantage results in less gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) toxicity than would be expected from IMXT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We evaluated treatment parameters and toxicity outcomes for non-metastatic prostate cancer patients who received pelvic radiation therapy and enrolled on the PCG REG001-09 trial. Patients who received X-ray therapy and/or brachytherapy were excluded. Of 3210 total enrolled prostate cancer patients, 85 received prostate and pelvic radiation therapy exclusively with PBT. Most had clinically and radiographically negative lymph nodes although 6 had pelvic nodal disease and one also had para-aortic involvement. Pelvic radiation therapy was delivered using either 2 fields (opposed laterals) or 3 fields (opposed laterals and a posterior beam). Median pelvic dose was 46.9 GyE (range 39.7-56) in 25 fractions (range 24-30). Median boost dose to the prostate +/- seminal vesicles was 30 GyE (range 20-41.4) in 16 fractions (range 10-24). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 14.5 months (range 2.8-49.2). Acute grade 1, 2, and 3 GI toxicity rates were 16.4, 2.4, 0%, respectively. Acute grade 1, 2, and 3 GU toxicity rates were 60, 34.1, 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer patients who receive pelvic radiation therapy using PBT experience significantly less acute GI toxicity than is expected using IMXT. Further investigation is warranted to confirm whether this favorable acute GI toxicity profile is related to small bowel sparing from PBT.

Long-term outcomes of induction chemotherapy and neoadjuvant stereotactic body radiotherapy for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Limited data are available to guide neoadjuvant treatment of borderline resectable (BRPC) and locally advanced (LAPC) pancreatic cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We updated our institutional outcomes with a neoadjuvant chemotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) approach. An IRB-approved analysis was performed of all BRPC and LAPC patients treated with our departmental treatment protocol. After staging, medically fit patients underwent chemotherapy for 2-3 months, with regimen at the discretion of the treating medical oncologist. Patients then received SBRT delivered in five consecutive daily fractions with median total radiation doses of 30 Gy to tumor and 40 Gy dose painted to tumor-vessel interfaces. This was followed by restaging imaging for possible resection. Overall survival (OS), event free survival (EFS), and locoregional control (LRC) rates were estimated and compared by Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. RESULTS: We identified 159 patients, 110 BRPC and 49 LAPC, with 14.0 months median overall follow-up. The resection and margin negative (R0) rate for BRPC patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy was 51% and 96%, respectively. Estimated median OS was 19.2 months for BRPC patients and 15.0 months for LAPC patients (p = 0.402). Median OS was 34.2 months for surgically resected patients versus 14.0 months for unresected patients (p < 0.001). Five of 21 (24%) LAPC patients receiving FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy underwent R0 resection. In LAPC, FOLFIRINOX recipients underwent R0 resection more often than other chemotherapy recipients (5 of 21 vs. 0 of 28, p = 0.011). There was a trend for improved survival in those resected LAPC patients (p = 0.09). For those not undergoing resection, one year LRC was 78%. Any grade ≥ 3 potentially radiation-related toxicity rate was 7%. CONCLUSIONS: These data underscore the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of neoadjuvant SBRT and chemotherapy for BRPC and LAPC.

TCF4 as a potential prognostic biomarker and an anticancer target in gastric cancer.

Background: Lymphoid enhancer-binding factor 1 (LEF1)/T cell factor (TCF) family members are key transcription factors in malignant tumors. In this study, the role of T cell factor 4 (TCF4) in the progression of gastric cancer (GC) cell migration and invasion was investigated. Methods: Fifty-five pairs of GC tissues and adjacent non-tumor tissues were collected for evaluating the expression of LEF1/TCF family members, which were also evaluated by the Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA) database, an online analysis platform based on The Cancer Genome Atlas and Genotype-Tissue Expression databases. Results: Through GEPIA online analysis and our experimental specimens, we found that TCF4 messenger RNA (mRNA) expression was significantly upregulated in GC tissues compared with normal non-tumor tissues. The findings from protein-protein interaction (PPI) analysis suggested that myocyte enhancer factor 2C (MEF2C) may function as a regulatory gene for TCF4 and play a role in the progression of GC. A significant increase in TCF4 mRNA expression was observed in the GC cell lines. Silencing of TCF4 led to significant inhibition of the proliferation, migration, and invasion of the MGC-803 and SGC-7901 cells. TdT-mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL)-positive staining cells were significantly increased after transfection with TCF4 small interfering (si)-RNA into GC cells. In addition, patients with GC with high TCF4 expression were associated with poor T stage, pathologic stages, histologic grade, overall survival, and recurrence-free survival, indicating that TCF4 may be a potential prognostic marker of GC. Conclusions: TCF4 potentially exerts a carcinogenic role in the progression of GC. TCF4 may serve as a prognostic indicator and therapeutic target for GC.

PD-1 inhibition combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy, to better serve patients with retroperitoneal lymph node metastases from gastrointestinal cancer.

Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is the most frequent kind of cancer to involve the retroperitoneal lymph nodes (RPLNs). Radiotherapy (RT) is common treatment of RPLN metastases in patients with GI cancer, while RT is local. Meanwhile, most patients have extra-retroperitoneal metastases. Immunotherapy plus RT have showed effective in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. However, whether the combination therapy is effective on GI cancer with RPLN metastases. In our study, we would estimate the effect of programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibition in association with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Methods: Metastatic GI cancer patients with RPLN who were treated at a single institution were retrospectively evaluated from October 2016 to April 2023, who all had measurable lesion and received any therapy of PD-1 inhibitors alone, IMRT alone or PD-1 inhibitors plus IMRT. The follow-ups were assessed by abdominal computed tomography (CT) every 2 or 3 months to progression, dose-limiting toxicity or death. Results: Among the 98 patients, 46 were treated by PD-1 inhibitors combined with IMRT, 26 were by PD-1 inhibitors only and 26 were by IMRT only. Of those, the median age 62 years (range, 25-84 years). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.5 months and median overall survival (OS) was 10.8 months across the 3 therapy groups. Univariate analysis (UVA) indicated that therapy method (P=0.032) and tumor response (P=0.035) were significantly related to PFS. In the PD-1 inhibitors plus IMRT group, 1 patient (2.2%) achieved complete response (CR), 30 (65.2%) had partial remission, and 14 (30.4%) had stable disease. There was no case with CR by IMRT or PD-1 inhibitors alone. Objective response rate (67.4%) and disease control rate (97.8%) were higher in the PD-1 inhibitors combined with IMRT group. In the PD-1 inhibitors plus IMRT and PD-1 inhibitors alone groups, hepatitis B virus (HBV)-positive patients had better OS (P=0.041) on UVA. Meanwhile, in the PD-1 inhibitors plus IMRT group, we observed superior PFS (P=0.041) and OS (P=0.049) in HBV-positive patients on UVA. Conclusions: PD-1 inhibitors plus IMRT may be a better method for advanced GI cancer patients with RPLN metastases. HBV-positive patients can benefit from either PD-1 inhibitors alone or in combination with IMRT.

MRI-Guided Adaptive Radiation Therapy.

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiation therapy (MRIgRT) has improved soft tissue contrast over computed tomography (CT) based image-guided RT. Superior visualization of the target and surrounding radiosensitive structures has the potential to improve oncological outcomes partly due to safer dose-escalation and adaptive planning. In this review, we highlight the workflow of adaptive MRIgRT planning, which includes simulation imaging, daily MRI, identifying isocenter shifts, contouring, plan optimization, quality control, and delivery. Increased utilization of MRIgRT will depend on addressing technical limitations of this technology, while addressing treatment efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and workflow training.

Letter to the Editor.

This is a Letter to the Editor in response to the manuscript titled, "Treatment planning for MR-guided SBRT of pancreatic tumors on a 1.5 T MR-Linac: A global consensus protocol" by Grimbergen et al.

Commissioning Intracranial Stereotactic Radiosurgery for a Magnetic Resonance-Guided Radiation Therapy (MRgRT) System: MR-RT Localization and Dosimetric End-to-End Validation.

PURPOSE: This is the first reporting of the MRIdian A3iTM intracranial package (BrainTxTM) and benchmarks the end-to-end localization and dosimetric accuracy for commissioning an magnetic resonace (MR)-guided stereotactic radiosurgery program. We characterized the localization accuracy between MR and radiation (RT) isocenter through an end-to-end hidden target test, relative dose profile intercomparison, and absolute dose validation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: BrainTx consists of a dedicated head coil, integrated mask immobilization system, and high-resolution MR sequences. Coil and baseplate attenuation was quantified. An in-house phantom (Cranial phantOm foR magNetic rEsonance Localization of a stereotactIc radiosUrgery doSimeter, CORNELIUS) was developed from a mannequin head filled with silicone gel, film, and MR BB with pinprick. A hidden target test evaluated MR-RT localization of the 1×1×1 mm3 TrueFISP MR and relative dose accuracy in film for a 1 cm diameter (International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)-X/IEC-Y) and 1.5 cm diameter (IEC-Y/IEC-Z) spherical target. Two clinical cases (irregular-shaped target and target abutting brainstem) were mapped to the CORNELIUS phantom for feasibility assessment. A 2-dimensional (2D)-gamma compared calculated and measured dose for spherical and clinical targets with 1 mm/1% and 2 mm/2% criteria, respectively. A small-field chamber (A26MR) measured end-to-end absolute dose for a 1 cm diameter target. RESULTS: Coil and baseplate attenuation were 0.7% and 2.7%, respectively. The displacement of MR to RT localization as defined through the pinprick was 0.49 mm (IEC-X), 0.27 mm (IEC-Y), and 0.51 mm (IEC-Z) (root mean square 0.76 mm). The reproducibility across IEC-Y demonstrated high fidelity (<0.02 mm). Gamma pass rates were 97.1% and 95.4% for 1 cm and 1.5 cm targets, respectively. Dose profiles for an irregular-shaped target and abutting organ-at-risk-target demonstrated pass rates of 99.0% and 92.9%, respectively. The absolute end-to-end dose difference was <1%. CONCLUSIONS: All localization and dosimetric evaluation demonstrated submillimeter accuracy, per the TG-142, TG-101, MPPG 9.a. criteria for SRS/SRT systems, indicating acceptable delivery capabilities with a 1 mm setup margin.

Quality assurance of an established online adaptive radiotherapy program: patch and software upgrade.

Introduction: The ability to dynamically adjust target contours, derived Boolean structures, and ultimately, the optimized fluence is the end goal of online adaptive radiotherapy (ART). The purpose of this work is to describe the necessary tests to perform after a software patch installation and/or upgrade for an established online ART program. Methods: A patch upgrade on a low-field MR Linac system was evaluated for post-software upgrade quality assurance (QA) with current infrastructure of ART workflow on (1) the treatment planning system (TPS) during the initial planning stage and (2) the treatment delivery system (TDS), which is a TPS integrated into the delivery console for online ART planning. Online ART QA procedures recommended for post-software upgrade include: (1) user interface (UI) configuration; (2) TPS beam model consistency; (3) segmentation consistency; (4) dose calculation consistency; (5) optimizer robustness consistency; (6) CT density table consistency; and (7) end-to-end absolute ART dose and predicted dose measured including interruption testing. Differences of calculated doses were evaluated through DVH and/or 3D gamma comparisons. The measured dose was assessed using an MR-compatible A26 ionization chamber in a motion phantom. Segmentation differences were assessed through absolute volume and visual inspection. Results: (1) No UI configuration discrepancies were observed. (2) Dose differences on TPS pre-/post-software upgrade were within 1% for DVH metrics. (3) Differences in segmentation when observed were small in general, with the largest change noted for small-volume regions of interest (ROIs) due to partial volume impact. (4) Agreement between TPS and TDS calculated doses was 99.9% using a 2%/2-mm gamma criteria. (5) Comparison between TPS and online ART plans for a given patient plan showed agreement within 2% for targets and 0.6 cc for organs at risk. (6) Relative electron densities demonstrated comparable agreement between TPS and TDS. (7) ART absolute and predicted measured end-to-end doses were within 1% of calculated TDS. Discussion: An online ART QA program for post-software upgrade has been developed and implemented on an MR Linac system. Testing mechanics and their respective baselines may vary across institutions, but all necessary components for a post-software upgrade QA have been outlined and detailed. These outlined tests were demonstrated feasible for a low-field MR Linac system; however, the scope of this work may be applied and adapted more broadly to other online ART platforms.

Establishing Updated Safety Standards for Independent 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT Treatment Planning in Radioembolization.

PURPOSE: Significant improvements within radioembolization imaging and dosimetry permit the development of an accurate and personalized pretreatment plan using technetium 99m-labeled macroaggregated albumin (99mTc-MAA) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) combined with anatomical CT (SPECT/CT). Despite these potential advantages, the clinical transition to pretreatment protocols with SPECT/CT is hindered by their unknown safety constraints. This study aimed to address this issue by establishing novel dose limits for 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT to enable quantitative pretreatment planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Stratification criteria to determine images most viable for dosimetry analysis were created from a cohort of 85 patients. SPECT/CT, cone beam CT, and activity calculations derived from the local deposition method were used to create an accurate pretreatment protocol. Planar and SPECT/CT images were compared using linear regression and modified Bland-Altman analyses to convert accepted planar dose limits to SPECT/CT. To validate these new dose limits, activity calculations based on SPECT/CT were compared with those calculated with the body surface area and planar methods for three treatment plans. RESULTS: A total of 38 of 85 patients were deemed viable for dosimetry analysis. SPECT yielded greater lung shunt fractions (LSFs) than planar imaging when LSFs were <4.89%, whereas SPECT yielded lower LSFs than planar imaging when LSFs were >4.89%. Planar to SPECT/CT dose conversions were 0.76×, 0.70×, and 0.55× for the whole liver, normal liver, and lungs, respectively. Patients with SPECT LSFs ≤4.89% were safely treated with the direct application of planar lung dose limits. Activity calculations with the newly established SPECT/CT dose limits were greater than those of the body surface area method by a median range of 33.1% to 61.9% and were lower than planar-based activity calculations by a median range of 12.5% to 13.7% for the whole liver and by 29.4% to 32.2% for the normal liver. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a safe method for translating dose limits from 99mTc-MAA planar imaging to SPECT/CT. A robust pretreatment protocol was further developed guided by the current knowledge in the field. Established SPECT/CT dose limits safely treated 97.5% of patients and permitted the application of independent pretreatment planning with 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT.

Multi-institutional experience of MR-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy for adrenal gland metastases.

Purpose: While dose escalation is associated with improved local control (LC) for adrenal gland metastases (AGMs), the proximity of gastrointestinal (GI) organs-at-risk (OARs) limits the dose that can be safely prescribed via CT-based stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). The advantages of magnetic resonance-guided SBRT (MRgSBRT), including tumor tracking and online plan adaptation, facilitate safe dose escalation. Methods: This is a multi-institutional review of 57 consecutive patients who received MRgSBRT on a 0.35-T MR linac to 61 AGMs from 2019 to 2021. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and LC, and the Cox proportional hazards model was utilized for univariate analysis (UVA). Results: Median follow up from MRgSBRT was 16.4 months (range [R]: 1.1-39 months). Median age was 67 years (R: 28-84 years). Primary histologies included non-small cell lung cancer (N = 38), renal cell carcinoma (N = 6), and melanoma (N = 5), amongst others. The median maximum diameter was 2.7 cm (R: 0.6-7.6 cm), and most AGMs were left-sided (N = 32). The median dose was 50 Gy (R: 30-60 Gy) in 5-10 fractions with a median BED10 of 100 Gy (R: 48-132 Gy). 45 cases (74 %) required adaptation for at least 1 fraction (median: 4 fractions, R: 0-10). Left-sided AGMs required adaptation in at least 1 fraction more frequently than right-sided AGMs (88 % vs 59 %, p = 0.018). There were 3 cases of reirradiation, including 60 Gy in 10 fractions (N = 1) and 40 Gy in 5 fractions (N = 2). One-year LC, PFS, and OS were 92 %, 52 %, and 78 %, respectively. On UVA, melanoma histology predicted for inferior 1-year LC (80 % vs 93 %, p = 0.012). There were no instances of grade 3+ toxicity. Conclusions: We demonstrate that MRgSBRT achieves favorable early LC and no grade 3 + toxicity despite prescribing a median BED10 of 100 Gy to targets near GI OARs.

PTCOG Gastrointestinal Subcommittee Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Malignancies Consensus Statement.

Purpose: Radiotherapy delivery in the definitive management of lower gastrointestinal (LGI) tract malignancies is associated with substantial risk of acute and late gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary, dermatologic, and hematologic toxicities. Advanced radiation therapy techniques such as proton beam therapy (PBT) offer optimal dosimetric sparing of critical organs at risk, achieving a more favorable therapeutic ratio compared with photon therapy. Materials and Methods: The international Particle Therapy Cooperative Group GI Subcommittee conducted a systematic literature review, from which consensus recommendations were developed on the application of PBT for LGI malignancies. Results: Eleven recommendations on clinical indications for which PBT should be considered are presented with supporting literature, and each recommendation was assessed for level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Detailed technical guidelines pertaining to simulation, treatment planning and delivery, and image guidance are also provided. Conclusion: PBT may be of significant value in select patients with LGI malignancies. Additional clinical data are needed to further elucidate the potential benefits of PBT for patients with anal cancer and rectal cancer.

Clinical application of an institutional fractionated stereotactic radiosurgery (FSRS) program for brain metastases delivered with MRIdianⓇ BrainTx™.

Single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated SRS (FSRS) are well established strategies for patients with limited brain metastases. A broad spectrum of modern dedicated platforms are currently available for delivering intracranial SRS/FSRS; however, SRS/FSRS delivered using traditional CT-based platforms relies on the need for diagnostic MR images to be coregistered to planning CT scans for target volume delineation. Additionally, the on-board image guidance on traditional platforms yields limited inter-fraction and intra-fraction real-time visualization of the tumor at the time of treatment delivery. MR Linacs are capable of obtaining treatment planning MR and on-table MR sequences to enable visualization of the targets and organs-at-risk and may subsequently help identify anatomical changes prior to treatment that may invoke the need for on table treatment adaptation. Recently, an MR-guided intracranial package (MRIdian A3i BrainTxTM) was released for intracranial treatment with the ability to perform high-resolution MR sequences using a dedicated brain coil and cranial immobilization system. The objective of this report is to provide, through the experience of our first patient treated, a comprehensive overview of the clinical application of our institutional program for FSRS adaptive delivery using MRIdian's A3i BrainTx system-highlights include reviewing the imaging sequence selection, workflow demonstration, and details in its delivery feasibility in clinical practice, and dosimetric outcomes.

Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance Analysis of Alliance A021501: Preoperative mFOLFIRINOX or mFOLFIRINOX Plus Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Borderline Resectable Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas.

PURPOSE: Alliance A021501 is the first randomized trial to evaluate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this post hoc study, we reviewed the quality of radiation therapy (RT) delivered. METHODS AND MATERIALS: SBRT (6.6 Gy × 5) was intended but hypofractionated RT (5 Gy × 5) was permitted if SBRT specifications could not be met. Institutional credentialing through the National Cancer Institute-funded Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) was required. Rigorous RT quality assurance (RT QA) was mandated, including pretreatment review by a radiation oncologist. Revisions were required for unacceptable deviations. Additionally, we performed a post hoc RT QA analysis in which contours and plans were reviewed by 3 radiation oncologists and assigned a score (1, 2, or 3) based on adequacy. A score of 1 indicated no deviation, 2 indicated minor deviation, and 3 indicated a major deviation that could be clinically significant. Clinical outcomes were compared by treatment modality and by case score. RESULTS: Forty patients were registered to receive RT (1 planned but not treated) at 27 centers (18 academic and 9 community). Twenty-three centers were appropriately credentialed for moving lung/liver targets and 4 for static head and neck only. Thirty-two of 39 patients (82.1%) were treated with SBRT and 7 (17.9%) with hypofractionated RT. Five cases (13%) required revision before treatment. On post hoc review, 23 patients (59.0%) were noted to have suboptimal contours or plan coverage, 12 (30.8%) were scored a 2, and 11 (28.2%) were scored a 3. There were no apparent differences in failure patterns or surgical outcomes based on treatment technique or post hoc case score. Details related to on-treatment imaging were not recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Despite rigorous QA, we encountered variability in simulation, contouring, plan coverage, and dose on trial. Although clinical outcomes did not appear to have been affected, findings from this analysis serve to inform subsequent PDAC SBRT trial designs and QA requirements.

Quality and Safety Considerations for Adaptive Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO White Paper: ASTRO ART Safety White Paper.

PURPOSE: Adaptive radiation therapy (ART) is the latest topic in a series of white papers published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology addressing quality processes and patient safety. ART widens the therapeutic index by improving precision of radiation dose to targets, allowing for dose escalation and/or minimization of dose to normal tissue. ART is performed via offline or online methods; offline ART is the process of replanning a patient's treatment plan between fractions, whereas online ART involves plan adjustment with the patient on the treatment table. This is achieved with in-room imaging capable of assessing anatomical changes and the ability to reoptimize the treatment plan rapidly during the treatment session. Although ART has occurred in its simplest forms in clinical practice for decades, recent technological developments have enabled more clinical applications of ART. With increased clinical prevalence, compressed timelines and associated complexity of ART, quality and safety considerations are an important focus area. METHODS: ASTRO convened an interdisciplinary task force to provide expert consensus on key workflows and processes for ART. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters selecting "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus. Content not meeting this threshold was removed or revised. SUMMARY: Establishing and maintaining an adaptive program requires a team-based approach, appropriately trained and credentialed specialists as well as significant resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A comprehensive quality assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to make sure all forms of ART are performed in a safe and effective manner. Patient safety when delivering ART is everyone's responsibility and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must demonstrate a clear commitment to working together to deliver the highest levels of quality and safety.