Dose-intensified stereotactic body radiotherapy for painful vertebral metastases: A randomized phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this randomised study was to determine whether dose-intensified stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for painful vertebral metastases results in increased rates of pain improvement compared with conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) (control) 6 months after treatment. METHODS: This randomized, controlled phase 3 trial was conducted between November 2016 and January 2023, when it was stopped early. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older; had one or two painful, stable, or potentially unstable vertebral metastases; and had a life expectancy of 1 year or longer according to the investigator's estimates. Patients received 48.5 grays (Gy) in 10 fractions (with epidural involvement) or 40 Gy in five fractions (without epidural involvement) in the SBRT group and 30 Gy in 10 fractions or 20 Gy in five fractions in the cEBRT group, respectively. The primary end point was an improvement in the pain score at the treated site by at least 2 points (on a visual analog scale from 0 to 10 points) at 6-month follow-up. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis. RESULTS: Of 214 patients who were screened for eligibility, 63 were randomized 1:1 between SBRT (33 patients with 36 metastases) and cEBRT (30 patients with 31 metastases). The median age of all patients was 66 years, and 40 patients were men (63.5%). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the 6-month proportion of patients who had metastases with pain reduction by 2 or more points was significantly higher in the SBRT group versus the control group (69.4% vs. 41.9%, respectively; two-sided p = .02). Changes in opioid medication intake relative to baseline were nonsignificant between the groups. No differences were observed in vertebral compression fracture or adverse event rates between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-intensified SBRT improved pain score more effectively than cEBRT at 6 months.

Inter-observer variability in target delineation increases during adaptive treatment of head-and-neck and lung cancer.

Introduction: Inter-observer variability (IOV) in target volume delineation is a well-documented source of geometric uncertainty in radiotherapy. Such variability has not yet been explored in the context of adaptive re-delineation based on imaging data acquired during treatment. We compared IOV in the pre- and mid-treatment setting using expert primary gross tumour volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) delineations in locoregionally advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and (non-)small cell lung cancer [(N)SCLC]. Material and methods: Five and six observers participated in the HNSCC and (N)SCLC arm, respectively, and provided delineations for five cases each. Imaging data consisted of CT studies partly complemented by FDG-PET and was provided in two separate phases for pre- and mid-treatment. Global delineation compatibility was assessed with a volume overlap metric (the Generalised Conformity Index), while local extremes of IOV were identified through the standard deviation of surface distances from observer delineations to a median consensus delineation. Details of delineation procedures, in particular, GTV to CTV expansion and adaptation strategies, were collected through a questionnaire. Results: Volume overlap analysis revealed a worsening of IOV in all but one case per disease site, which failed to reach significance in this small sample (p-value range .063-.125). Changes in agreement were propagated from GTV to CTV delineations, but correlation could not be formally demonstrated. Surface distance based analysis identified longitudinal target extent as a pervasive source of disagreement for HNSCC. High variability in (N)SCLC was often associated with tumours abutting consolidated lung tissue or potentially invading the mediastinum. Adaptation practices were variable between observers with fewer than half stating that they consistently adapted pre-treatment delineations during treatment. Conclusion: IOV in target volume delineation increases during treatment, where a disparity in institutional adaptation practices adds to the conventional causes of IOV. Consensus guidelines are urgently needed.

Dose-intensified hypofractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy for painful spinal metastases: Results of a phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to prospectively evaluate dose-intensified hypofractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with painful spinal metastases in a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study. METHODS: Patients with 2 or fewer distinct, noncontiguous, painful, mechanically stable, unirradiated spinal metastases from a solid tumor with a Karnofsky performance status ≥ 60 were eligible. Patients with a long (Mizumoto score ≤ 4) or intermediate overall survival expectancy (Mizumoto score = 5-9) received 48.5 Gy in 10 fractions or 35 Gy in 5 fractions, respectively, with SBRT. The primary outcome was the overall (complete and partial) pain response as measured with international consensus guidelines 3 months after SBRT. RESULTS: There were 57 patients enrolled between 2012 and 2015, and 54 of these patients with 60 painful vertebral metastases were analyzed. The 3-month pain response was evaluated in 42 patients (47 lesions). An overall pain response was observed in 41 lesions (87%), and the pain response remained stable for at least 12 months. The mean maximum pain scores on a visual analogue scale significantly improved from the baseline of 6.1 (standard deviation, 2.5) to 2.0 (standard deviation, 2.3) 3 months after treatment (P < .001). The 5-level EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire quality-of-life (QOL) dimensions (self-reported mobility, usual activities, and pain/discomfort) significantly improved from the baseline to 3 months after treatment. The 12-month overall survival and local control rates were 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48%-74.8%) and 85.9% (95% CI, 76.7%-95%), respectively. Grade 3 toxicity was limited to acute pain in 1 patient (2%). No patient experienced radiation-induced myelopathy. Six patients (11%) developed progressive vertebral compression fractures (VCFs), and 8 patients (15%) developed new VCFs. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-intensified SBRT achieved durable local metastasis control and resulted in pronounced and long-term pain responses and improved QOL. Cancer 2018;124:2001-9. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Disease Control and Late Toxicity in Adaptive Dose Painting by Numbers Versus Nonadaptive Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Phase 2 Trial.

PURPOSE: Local recurrence remains the main cause of death in stage III-IV nonmetastatic head and neck cancer (HNC), with relapse-prone regions within high 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET)-signal gross tumor volume. We investigated if dose escalation within this subvolume combined with a 3-phase treatment adaptation could increase local (LC) and regional (RC) control at equal or minimized radiation-induced toxicity, by comparing adaptive 18F-FDG-PET voxel intensity-based dose painting by numbers (A-DPBN) with nonadaptive standard intensity modulated radiation therapy (S-IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This 2-center randomized controlled phase 2 trial assigned (1:1) patients to receive A-DPBN or S-IMRT (+/-chemotherapy). Eligibility: nonmetastatic HNC of oral cavity, oro-/hypopharynx, or larynx, needing radio(chemo)therapy; T1-4N0-3 (exception: T1-2N0 glottic); KPS ≥ 70; ≥18 years; and informed consent. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: 1-year LC and RC. The dose prescription for A-DPBN was intercurrently adapted in 2 steps to an absolute dose-volume limit (≤1.75 cm3 can receive >84 Gy and normalized isoeffective dose >96 Gy) as a safety measure during the study course after 4/7 A-DPBN patients developed ≥G3 mucosal ulcers. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were randomized (A-DPBN, 47; S-IMRT, 48). Median follow-up was 31 months (IQR, 14-48 months); 29 patients died (17 of cancer progression). A-DPBN resulted in superior LC compared with S-IMRT, with 1- and 2-year LC of 91% and 88% versus 78% and 75%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.13-8.71; P = .021). RC and overall survival were comparable between arms, as was overall grade (G) ≥3 late toxicity (36% vs 20%; P = .1). More ≥G3 late mucosal ulcers were observed in active smokers (29% vs 3%; P = .005) and alcohol users (33% vs 13%; P = .02), independent of treatment arm. Similarly, in the A-DPBN arm, significantly more patients who smoked at diagnosis developed ≥G3 (46% vs 12%; P = .005) and ≥G4 (29% vs 8%; P = .048) mucosal ulcers. One arterial blowout occurred after a G5 mucosal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: A-DPBN resulted in superior 1- and 2-year LC for HNC compared with S-IMRT. This supports further exploration in multicenter phase 3 trials. It will, however, be challenging to recruit a substantial patient sample for such trials, as concerns have arisen regarding the association of late mucosal ulcers when escalating the dose in continuing smokers.

Randomized self-controlled study comparing open-face vs. closed immobilization masks in fractionated cranial radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To compare patient discomfort and immobilisation performance of open-face and closed immobilization masks in cranial radiotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a single-center randomized self-controlled clinical trial. At CT simulation, an open-face and closed mask was made for each patient and treatment plans with identical dose prescription were generated for each mask. Patients were randomised to start treatment with an open-face or closed mask. Masks were switched halfway through the treatment course; every patient was their own control. Patients self-reported discomfort, anxiety and pain using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Inter- and intrafraction set-up variability was measured with planar kV imaging and a surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) system for the open-face masks. RESULTS: 30 patients with primary or metastatic brain tumors were randomized - 29 completed radiotherapy to a median total dose of 54 Gy (range 30-60 Gy). Mean discomfort VAS score was significantly lower with open-face masks (0.5, standard deviation 1.0) vs. closed masks (3.3, standard deviation 2.9), P < 0.0001. Anxiety and pain VAS scores were significantly lower with open-face masks (P < 0.0001). Closed masks caused more discomfort in infraorbital (P < 0.001) and maxillary (P = 0.02) areas. Two patients and 27 patients preferred closed or open-face masks, respectively. Interfraction longitudinal shifts and roll and yaw rotations were significantly smaller and lateral shifts were significantly larger with closed masks in combination with the laser system (P < 0.05) compared to open masks in combination with a SGRT system. Intrafraction variability did not differ between the masks. CONCLUSIONS: Open-face masks are associated with decreased patient discomfort without compromising patient positioning and immobilisation accuracy.

Systematic review of dose--volume correlates for structures related to late swallowing disturbances after radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed published dose-volume data of the structures related to late radiotherapy-induced swallowing disturbances in head-and-neck cancer to estimate their sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value and to propose minimal criteria for future studies. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search to identify dose-volume correlates with late swallowing disturbances. Study design, dose-volume data, toxicity evaluation, and statistical methods were considered in the analysis. RESULTS: Seven studies were found, among which one prospective study reported exact dose-volume correlates for individual swallowing structures. Four studies identified dose-volume correlates without reporting exact numbers. One study did not find any correlate of dose-volume data of the swallowing structures with late swallowing disturbances. Variations in patient characteristics, study design, methodology, and statistics made any comparison difficult. However, mean dose to the pharyngeus constrictor muscles appeared to be the most demonstrative predictor of late swallowing disturbances, e.g., reducing the mean dose to the pharyngeal constrictor muscles from 61-64 to 52-55 Gy resulted in fewer swallowing disturbances. There were no available data to estimate sensitivity, specificity, or predictive value of the reported dose-volume correlates. CONCLUSION: Mean dose to the pharyngeal constrictor muscles appeared to be the most important dosimetric predictor of late swallowing disturbances. Suggested dose-volume correlates require validation in prospective well-designed clinical trials, applying appropriate statistical methods that would account for possible interfering factors.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Metastases in Long Bones.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cumulative incidence of fracture and local failure and associated risk factors after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for long bone metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data from 111 patients with 114 metastases in the femur, humerus, and tibia treated with SBRT in 7 international centers between October 2011 and February 2021 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed using a competing risk regression model. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 21 months (range, 6-91 months). All but 1 patient had a Karnofsky performance status ≥70. There were 84 femur (73.7%), 26 humerus (22.8%), and 4 tibia (3.5%) metastases from prostate (45 [39.5%]), breast (22 [19.3%]), lung (15 [13.2%]), kidney (13 [11.4%]), and other (19 [16.6%]) malignancies. Oligometastases accounted for 74.8% of metastases and 28.1% were osteolytic. The most common total doses were 30 to 50 Gy in 5 daily fractions (50.9%). Eight fractures (5 in the femur, 2 in the tibia, and 1 in the humerus) were observed with a median time to fracture of 12 months (range, 0.8-33 months). In 6 out of 8 patients, fracture was not associated with local failure. The cumulative incidence of fracture was 3.5%, 6.1%, and 9.8% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. The cumulative incidence of local failure (9/110 metastases with imaging follow-up) was 5.7%, 7.2%, and 13.5% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. On multivariate analysis, extraosseous disease extension was significantly associated with fracture (P = .001; subhazard ratio, 10.8; 95% confidence interval, 2.8-41.9) and local failure (P = .02; subhazard ratio, 7.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-44.7). CONCLUSIONS: SBRT for metastases in long bones achieved high rates of durable local metastasis control without an increased risk of fracture. Similar to spine SBRT, patients with extraosseous disease extension are at higher risk of local failure and fracture.

Modern treatment for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: current status and prospects.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this article, we focus on the role of Epstein-Barr virus in the management of nasopharyngeal cancer, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and targeted therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Epstein-Barr virus DNA clearance has recently been studied for prediction of tumor response and survival. Patients with a short t1/2 of plasma Epstein-Barr virus DNA clearance had significantly higher responses and survival than those with long t1/2. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy, delivering higher doses to the tumor, results in improved local control and overall survival at lower treatment-induced toxicity. Recent reports show that re-planning during the course of radiotherapy could influence outcome and toxicity. The use of newer platinum compounds and combinations with taxanes in adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting have been investigated in phase II trials. They demonstrate acceptable toxicity profiles and promising treatment outcomes. However, antiepidermal growth factor receptor and antivascular endothelial growth factor receptor agents do not show important responses in metastatic disease and when combined with radiotherapy, toxicity is of concern. SUMMARY: Epstein-Barr virus DNA has a potential as a risk stratification marker. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is standard treatment and adaptive radiotherapy with re-planning has to be considered. Uncertainties on adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be addressed in well designed randomized trials. Currently, the role of targeted agents is not well defined.

Long-Term Results of Dose-Intensified Fractionated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) for Painful Spinal Metastases.

PURPOSE: To report long-term outcome of fractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for painful spinal metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This prospective, single-arm, multicenter phase 2 clinical trial enrolled 57 patients with 63 painful, unirradiated spinal metastases between March 2012 and July 2015. Patients were treated with 48.5 Gy in 10 SBRT fractions (long life expectancy [Mizumoto score ≤4]) or 35 Gy in 5 SBRT fractions (intermediate life expectancy [Mizumoto score 5-9]). Pain response was defined as pain improvement of a minimum of 2 points on a visual analog scale, and net pain relief was defined as the sum of time with pain response (complete and partial) divided by the overall follow-up time. RESULTS: All 57 patients received treatment per protocol; 32 and 25 patients were treated with 10- and 5-fraction SBRT, respectively. The median follow-up of living patients was 60 months (range, 33-74 months). Of evaluable patients, 82% had complete or partial pain response (responders) at 3 months' follow-up (primary endpoint), and pain response remained stable over 5 years. Net pain relief was 74% (95% CI, 65%-80%). Overall survival rates of 1, 3, and 5 years were 59.6% (95% CI, 47%-72%), 33.3% (95% CI, 21%-46%), and 21% (95% CI, 10%-32%), respectively. Freedom from local spinal-metastasis progression was 82% at the last imaging follow-up. Late grade-3 toxicity was limited to pain in 2 patients (nonresponders). There were no cases of myelopathy. SBRT resulted in long-term improvements of all dimensions of the 5-level EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire except anxiety/depression. CONCLUSIONS: Fractionated SBRT achieved durable pain response and improved quality of life at minimum late toxicity.

Evidence behind use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy: a systematic review of comparative clinical studies.

Since its introduction more than a decade ago, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has spread to most radiotherapy departments worldwide for a wide range of indications. The technique has been rapidly implemented, despite an incomplete understanding of its advantages and weaknesses, the challenges of IMRT planning, delivery, and quality assurance, and the substantially increased cost compared with non-IMRT. Many publications discuss the theoretical advantages of IMRT dose distributions. However, the key question is whether the use of IMRT can be exploited to obtain a clinically relevant advantage over non-modulated external-beam radiation techniques. To investigate which level of evidence supports the routine use of IMRT for various disease sites, we did a review of clinical studies that reported on overall survival, disease-specific survival, quality of life, treatment-induced toxicity, or surrogate endpoints. This review shows evidence of reduced toxicity for various tumour sites by use of IMRT. The findings regarding local control and overall survival are generally inconclusive.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for cervical lymph node metastases from unknown primary cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and conventional (two-dimensional) radiotherapy in the treatment of cervical lymph node metastases from unknown primary cancer (UPC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between February 2003 and September 2006, 23 patients with UPC of squamous cell carcinoma were treated with IMRT. Extended putative mucosal and bilateral nodal sites were irradiated to a median dose of 66 Gy. In 19 patients, IMRT was performed after lymph node dissection, and in 4 patients primary radiotherapy was given. The conventional radiotherapy group (historical control group) comprised 18 patients treated to a median dose of 66 Gy between August 1994 and October 2003. RESULTS: Twenty patients completed treatment. As compared with conventional radiotherapy, the incidence of Grade 3 acute dysphagia was significantly lower in the IMRT group (4.5% vs. 50%, p = 0.003). By 6 months, Grade 3 xerostomia was detected in 11.8% patients in the IMRT group vs. 53.4% in the historical control group (p = 0.03). No Grade 3 dysphagia or skin fibrosis was observed after IMRT but these were noted after conventional radiotherapy (26.7%, p = 0.01) and 26.7%, p = 0.03) respectively). With median follow-up of living patients of 17 months, there was no emergence of primary cancer. One patient had persistent nodal disease and another had nodal relapse at 5 months. Distant metastases were detected in 4 patients. The 2-year overall survival and distant disease-free probability after IMRT did not differ significantly from those for conventional radiotherapy (74.8% vs. 61.1% and 76.3% vs. 68.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Use of IMRT for UPC resulted in lower toxicity than conventional radiotherapy, and was similar in efficacy.

Positron emission tomography-guided, focal-dose escalation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using positron emission tomography (PET)-guided dose escalation, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose in head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Phase I clinical trial was designed to escalate the dose limited to the [(18)-F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography ((18)F-FDG-PET)-delineated subvolume within the gross tumor volume. Positron emission tomography scanning was performed in the treatment position. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy with an upfront simultaneously integrated boost was employed. Two dose levels were planned: 25 Gy (level I) and 30 Gy (level II), delivered in 10 fractions. Standard IMRT was applied for the remaining 22 fractions of 2.16 Gy. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2005, 41 patients were enrolled, with 23 at dose level I, and 18 at dose level II; 39 patients completed the planned therapy. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 14 months. Two cases of dose-limiting toxicity occurred at dose level I (Grade 4 dermitis and Grade 4 dysphagia). One treatment-related death at dose level II halted the study. Complete response was observed in 18 of 21 (86%) and 13 of 16 (81%) evaluated patients at dose levels I and II (p < 0.7), respectively, with actuarial 1-year local control at 85% and 87% (p = n.s.), and 1-year overall survival at 82% and 54% (p = 0.06), at dose levels I and II, respectively. In 4 of 9 patients, the site of relapse was in the boosted (18)F-FDG-PET-delineated region. CONCLUSIONS: For head and neck cancer, PET-guided dose escalation appears to be well-tolerated. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached at the investigated dose levels.

Comparison of 6 MV and 18 MV photons for IMRT treatment of lung cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare 6 MV and 18 MV photon intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Doses for a cohort of 10 patients, typical for our department, were computed with a commercially available convolution/superposition (CS) algorithm. Final dose computation was also performed with a dedicated IMRT Monte Carlo dose engine (MCDE). RESULTS: CS plans showed higher D(95%) (Gy) for the GTV (68.13 vs 67.36, p=0.004) and CTV (67.23 vs 66.87, p=0.028) with 18 than with 6 MV photons. MCDE computations demonstrated higher doses with 6 MV than 18 MV in D(95%) for the PTV (64.62 vs 63.64, p=0.009), PTV(optim) (65.48 vs 64.83, p=0.014) and CTV (66.22 vs 65.64, p=0.027). Dose inhomogeneity was lower with 18 than with 6 MV photons for GTV (0.08 vs 0.09, p=0.007) and CTV (0.10 vs 0.11, p=0.045) in CS but not MCDE plans. 6 MV photons significantly (D(33%); p=0.045) spared the esophagus in MCDE plans. Observed dose differences between lower and higher energy IMRT plans were dependent on the individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: Selection of photon energy depends on priority ranking of endpoints and individual patients. In the absence of highly accurate dose computation algorithms such as CS and MCDE, 6 MV photons may be the prudent choice.

Long-term outcome of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-guided dose painting for head and neck cancer: Matched case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to report the long-term outcome of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (18 F-FDG-PET)-guided dose painting for head and neck cancer in comparison to conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in a matched case-control study. METHODS: Seventy-two patients with nonmetastatic head and neck cancer treated with dose painting were compared with 72 control patients matched on tumor site and T classification. Either 18 F-FDG-PET-guided dose painting by contour (DPBC) or voxel intensity-based dose painting by number (DPBN) was performed; control patients underwent standard IMRT. A total median dose to the dose-painted target was 70.2-85.9 Gy/30-32 fractions versus 69.1 Gy/32 fractions with conventional IMRT. In 31 patients, dose painting was adapted to per-treatment changes in the tumor and organs-at-risk (OAR). RESULTS: Median follow-up in living dose-painting and control patients was 87.7 months (range 56.1-119.3) and 64.8 months (range 46.3-83.4), respectively. Five-year local control rates in the dose-painting patients were 82.3% against 73.6% in the control (P = .36); in patients treated to normalized isoeffective doses >91 Gy (NID2Gy) local control reached 85.7% at 5 years against 73.6% in the control group (P =.39). There was no difference in regional (P = .82) and distant control (P = .78). Five-year overall and disease-specific survival rates were 36.3% versus 38.1% (P = .50) and 56.5% versus 51.7% (P = .72), respectively. A half of the dose-painting patients developed acute grade ≥3 dysphagia (P = .004). Late grade 4 mucosal ulcers at the site of dose escalation in 9 of 72 patients was the most common severe toxicity with dose painting versus 3 of 72 patients with conventional IMRT (P = .11). Patients in the dose-painting group had increased rates of acute and late dysphagia (P = .004 and P = .005). CONCLUSION: Dose-painting strategies can be used to increase dose to specific tumor subvolumes. Five-year local, regional, and distant control rates are comparable with patients treated with conventional IMRT. Volume and intensity of dose escalation should be further tailored, given the possible increase in severe acute and chronic toxicity. Adapting treatment and decreasing dose to the swallowing structures might contribute to lower toxicity rates when applied in smaller tumor volumes. Whether adaptive DPBN can significantly improve outcomes is currently being investigated in a novel clinical trial.

Variations in target volume definition and dose to normal tissue using anatomic versus biological imaging (18 F-FDG-PET) in the treatment of bone metastases: results from a 3-arm randomized phase II trial.

INTRODUCTION: To report the impact on target volume delineation and dose to normal tissue using anatomic versus biological imaging (18 F-FDG-PET) for bone metastases. METHODS: Patients with uncomplicated painful bone metastases were randomized (1:1:1) and blinded to receive either 8 Gy in a single fraction with conventionally planned radiotherapy (ConvRT-8 Gy) or 8 Gy in a single fraction with dose-painting-by-numbers (DPBN) dose range between 6 and 10 Gy) (DPBN-8 Gy) or 16 Gy in a single fraction with DPBN (dose range between 14 and 18 Gy) (DPBN-16 Gy). The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 1 month. Volumes of the gross tumour volume (GTV) - both biological (GTVPET ) and anatomical (GTVCT ) -, planning target volume (PTV), dose to the normal tissue and maximum standardized-uptake values (SUVMAX ) were analysed (secondary endpoint). RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of the GTVCT volume did not show 18 F-FDG-uptake. On average, 20% of the GTVPET volume was outside GTVCT . The volume of normal tissue receiving 4 Gy, 6 Gy and 8 Gy was at least 3×, 6× and 13× smaller in DPBN-8 Gy compared to ConvRT-8 Gy and DPBN-16 Gy (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Positron emitting tomography-information potentially changes the target volume for bone metastases. DPBN between 6 and 10 Gy significantly decreases dose to the normal tissue compared to conventional radiotherapy.

Accuracy of patient dose calculation for lung IMRT: A comparison of Monte Carlo, convolution/superposition, and pencil beam computations.

The accuracy of dose computation within the lungs depends strongly on the performance of the calculation algorithm in regions of electronic disequilibrium that arise near tissue inhomogeneities with large density variations. There is a lack of data evaluating the performance of highly developed analytical dose calculation algorithms compared to Monte Carlo computations in a clinical setting. We compared full Monte Carlo calculations (performed by our Monte Carlo dose engine MCDE) with two different commercial convolution/superposition (CS) implementations (Pinnacle-CS and Helax-TMS's collapsed cone model Helax-CC) and one pencil beam algorithm (Helax-TMS's pencil beam model Helax-PB) for 10 intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) lung cancer patients. Treatment plans were created for two photon beam qualities (6 and 18 MV). For each dose calculation algorithm, patient, and beam quality, the following set of clinically relevant dose-volume values was reported: (i) minimal, median, and maximal dose (Dmin, D50, and Dmax) for the gross tumor and planning target volumes (GTV and PTV); (ii) the volume of the lungs (excluding the GTV) receiving at least 20 and 30 Gy (V20 and V30) and the mean lung dose; (iii) the 33rd percentile dose (D33) and Dmax delivered to the heart and the expanded esophagus; and (iv) Dmax for the expanded spinal cord. Statistical analysis was performed by means of one-way analysis of variance for repeated measurements and Tukey pairwise comparison of means. Pinnacle-CS showed an excellent agreement with MCDE within the target structures, whereas the best correspondence for the organs at risk (OARs) was found between Helax-CC and MCDE. Results from Helax-PB were unsatisfying for both targets and OARs. Additionally, individual patient results were analyzed. Within the target structures, deviations above 5% were found in one patient for the comparison of MCDE and Helax-CC, while all differences between MCDE and Pinnacle-CS were below 5%. For both Pinnacle-CS and Helax-CC, deviations from MCDE above 5% were found within the OARs: within the lungs for two (6 MV) and six (18 MV) patients for Pinnacle-CS, and within other OARs for two patients for Helax-CC (for Dmax of the heart and D33 of the expanded esophagus) but only for 6 MV. For one patient, all four algorithms were used to recompute the dose after replacing all computed tomography voxels within the patient's skin contour by water. This made all differences above 5% between MCDE and the other dose calculation algorithms disappear. Thus, the observed deviations mainly arose from differences in particle transport modeling within the lungs, and the commissioning of the algorithms was adequately performed (or the commissioning was less important for this type of treatment). In conclusion, not one pair of the dose calculation algorithms we investigated could provide results that were consistent within 5% for all 10 patients for the set of clinically relevant dose-volume indices studied. As the results from both CS algorithms differed significantly, care should be taken when evaluating treatment plans as the choice of dose calculation algorithm may influence clinical results. Full Monte Carlo provides a great benchmarking tool for evaluating the performance of other algorithms for patient dose computations.

Intensity modulated arc therapy implementation in a three phase adaptive (18)F-FDG-PET voxel intensity-based planning strategy for head-and-neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the implementation of a new intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) class solution in comparison to a 6-static beam step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (s-IMRT) for three-phase adaptive (18)F-FDG-PET-voxel-based dose-painting-by-numbers (DPBN) for head-and-neck cancer. METHODS: We developed (18)F-FDG-PET-voxel intensity-based IMAT employing multiple arcs and compared it to clinically used s-IMRT DPBN. Three IMAT plans using (18)F-FDG-PET/CT acquired before treatment (phase I), after 8 fractions (phase II) and CT acquired after 18 fractions (phase III) were generated for each of 10 patients treated with 3 s-IMRT plans based on the same image sets. Based on deformable image registration (ABAS, version 0.41, Elekta CMS Software, Maryland Heights, MO), doses of the 3 plans were summed on the pretreatment CT using validated in-house developed software. Dosimetric indices in targets and organs-at-risk (OARs), biologic conformity of treatment plans set at ≤5 %, treatment quality and efficiency were compared between IMAT and s-IMRT for the whole group and for individual patients. RESULTS: Doses to most organs-at-risk (OARs) were significantly better in IMAT plans, while target levels were similar for both types of plans. On average, IMAT ipsilateral and contralateral parotid mean doses were 14.0 % (p = 0.001) and 12.7 % (p < 0.001) lower, respectively. Pharyngeal constrictors D50% levels were similar or reduced with up to 54.9 % for IMAT compared to s-IMRT for individual patient cases. IMAT significantly improved biologic conformity by 2.1 % for treatment phases I and II. 3D phantom measurements reported an agreement of ≥95 % for 3 % and 3 mm criteria for both treatment modalities. IMAT delivery time was significantly shortened on average by 41.1 %. CONCLUSIONS: IMAT implementation significantly improved the biologic conformity as compared to s-IMRT in adaptive dose-escalated DPBN treatments. The better OAR sparing and faster delivery highly improved the treatment efficiency.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for early-stage glottic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to report on treatment outcome of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for early-stage (cT1-2 cN0 M0) squamous cell carcinoma of the glottis, as compared with patients treated with conventional radiotherapy. METHODS: Between November 2007 and December 2011, 40 consecutive patients were treated with IMRT with daily cone-beam CT position verification. The median prescription to the planning target volume (PTV) was 63 Gy/28 fractions and 67.5 Gy/30 fractions for T1 and T2 tumors, respectively. The historical control comprised 81 consecutive patients treated with conventional radiotherapy to total doses of 66 Gy/33 fractions (66 patients) and 70 Gy/35 fractions (15 patients) for T1 and T2 tumors, respectively. RESULTS: The median follow-up of living patients was 3.8 years (range, 1.0-5.0 years) in the IMRT group and 9.0 years, (range, 5.2-12.7 years) in the conventional group. Five-year actuarial local control was equal compared to the conventional group: 83% versus 74% (p = .64). Five-year actuarial ultimate local control was 100% in the IMRT group and 95% in the conventional group (p = .17). Five-year actuarial overall and disease-specific survival was 85% after IMRT versus 65% after conventional radiotherapy (p = .15) and 97% versus 89% (p = .31), respectively. Incidence and severity of acute dermatitis was significantly less during IMRT than in the control group (p < .001). Two patients receiving IMRT had late grade 3 hoarseness. CONCLUSION: IMRT is as efficient as conventional radiotherapy in terms of disease control and overall survival. It has the potential to reduce toxicity as compared to conventional radiotherapy. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E179-E184, 2016.

Dose-painting intensity-modulated proton therapy for intermediate- and high-risk meningioma.

BACKGROUND: Newly diagnosed WHO grade II-III or any WHO grade recurrent meningioma exhibit an aggressive behavior and thus are considered as high- or intermediate risk tumors. Given the unsatisfactory rates of disease control and survival after primary or adjuvant radiation therapy, optimization of treatment strategies is needed. We investigated the potential of dose-painting intensity-modulated proton beam-therapy (IMPT) for intermediate- and high-risk meningioma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Imaging data from five patients undergoing proton beam-therapy were used. The dose-painting target was defined using [68]Ga-[1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane tetraacetic acid]- d-Phe(1),Tyr(3)-octreotate ([68]Ga-DOTATATE)-positron emission tomography (PET) in target delineation. IMPT and photon intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans were generated for each patient using an in-house developed treatment planning system (TPS) supporting spot-scanning technology and a commercial TPS, respectively. Doses of 66 Gy (2.2 Gy/fraction) and 54 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction) were prescribed to the PET-based planning target volume (PTVPET) and the union of PET- and anatomical imaging-based PTV, respectively, in 30 fractions, using simultaneous integrated boost. RESULTS: Dose coverage of the PTVsPET was equally good or slightly better in IMPT plans: dose inhomogeneity was 10 ± 3% in the IMPT plans vs. 13 ± 1% in the IMRT plans (p = 0.33). The brain Dmean and brainstem D50 were small in the IMPT plans: 26.5 ± 1.5 Gy(RBE) and 0.002 ± 0.0 Gy(RBE), respectively, vs. 29.5 ± 1.5 Gy (p = 0.001) and 7.5 ± 11.1 Gy (p = 0.02) for the IMRT plans, respectively. The doses delivered to the optic structures were also decreased with IMPT. CONCLUSIONS: Dose-painting IMPT is technically feasible using currently available planning tools and resulted in dose conformity of the dose-painted target comparable to IMRT with a significant reduction of radiation dose delivered to the brain, brainstem and optic apparatus. Dose escalation with IMPT may improve tumor control and decrease radiation-induced toxicity.

Biological 18[F]-FDG-PET image-guided dose painting by numbers for painful uncomplicated bone metastases: A 3-arm randomized phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Antalgic radiotherapy for bone metastases might be improved by implementing biological information in the radiotherapy planning using (18)F-FDG-PET-CT based dose painting by numbers (DPBN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with uncomplicated painful bone metastases were randomized (1:1:1) and blinded to receive either 8Gy in a single fraction with conventionally planned radiotherapy (arm A) or 8Gy in a single fraction with DPBN (dose range between 610Gy and 10Gy) (arm B) or 16Gy in a single fraction with DPBN (dose range between 1410Gy and 18Gy) (arm C). The primary endpoint was overall pain response at 1month. The phase II trial was designed to select the experimental arm with sufficient promise of efficacy to continue to a phase III trial. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were randomized. Eight (53%), 12 (80%) and 9 patients (60%) had an overall response to treatment in arm A, B and C, respectively. The estimated odds ratio of overall response for arm B vs. A is 3.5 (95% CI: 0.44-17.71, p=0.12). The estimated odds ratio of arm C vs. A is 1.31 (95% CI: 0.31-5.58, p=0.71). CONCLUSION: A single fraction of 8Gy with DPBN will be further evaluated in a phase III-trial.