First fully automated planning solution for robotic radiosurgery - comparison with automatically planned volumetric arc therapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: For conventional radiotherapy treatment units, automated planning can significantly improve plan quality. For robotic radiosurgery, systems for automatic generation of clinically deliverable plans do not yet exist. For prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), few studies have systematically compared VMAT with robotic treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The multi-criteria autoplanning optimizer, developed at our institute, was coupled to the commercial treatment planning system of our robotic treatment unit, for fully automated generation of clinically deliverable plans (autoROBOT). The system was then validated by comparing autoROBOT plans with manually generated plans. Next, the autoROBOT system was used for systematic comparisons between autoROBOT plans and VMAT plans, that were also automatically generated (autoVMAT). CTV-PTV margins of 3 mm were used for autoROBOT (clinical routine) and autoVMAT plan generation. For autoVMAT, an extra plan was generated with 5 mm margin (often applied for VMAT). Plans were generated for a 4 × 9.5 Gy fractionation scheme. RESULTS: Compared to manual planning, autoROBOT improved rectum D[Formula: see text] (16%), V[Formula: see text] (75%) and D[Formula: see text] (41%), and bladder D[Formula: see text] (37%) (all p [Formula: see text] .002), with equal PTV coverage. In the autoROBOT and autoVMAT comparison, both with 3 mm margin, rectum doses were lower for autoROBOT by 5% for rectum D[Formula: see text] (p=.002), 33% for V[Formula: see text] (p=.001) and 4% for D[Formula: see text] (p=.05), with comparable PTV coverage and other OAR sparing. With 5 mm margin for VMAT, 18/20 plans had a PTV coverage lower than requested (<95%) and all plans had higher rectum doses than autoROBOT (mean percentage differences of 13% for D[Formula: see text], 69% for V[Formula: see text] and 32% for D[Formula: see text] (all p<.001)). CONCLUSIONS: The first system for fully automated generation of clinically deliverable robotic plans was built. Autoplanning did largely enhance robotic plan quality, compared to manual planning. Using autoplanning for both the robotic system and VMAT, superiority of non-coplanar robotic treatment compared to coplanar VMAT for prostate SBRT was demonstrated.

Fully automated VMAT treatment planning for advanced-stage NSCLC patients.

PURPOSE: To develop a fully automated procedure for multicriterial volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment planning (autoVMAT) for stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with curative intent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After configuring the developed autoVMAT system for NSCLC, autoVMAT plans were compared with manually generated clinically delivered intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for 41 patients. AutoVMAT plans were also compared to manually generated VMAT plans in the absence of time pressure. For 16 patients with reduced planning target volume (PTV) dose prescription in the clinical IMRT plan (to avoid violation of organs at risk tolerances), the potential for dose escalation with autoVMAT was explored. RESULTS: Two physicians evaluated 35/41 autoVMAT plans (85%) as clinically acceptable. Compared to the manually generated IMRT plans, autoVMAT plans showed statistically significant improved PTV coverage (V95% increased by 1.1% ± 1.1%), higher dose conformity (R50 reduced by 12.2% ± 12.7%), and reduced mean lung, heart, and esophagus doses (reductions of 0.9 Gy ± 1.0 Gy, 1.5 Gy ± 1.8 Gy, 3.6 Gy ± 2.8 Gy, respectively, all p < 0.001). To render the six remaining autoVMAT plans clinically acceptable, a dosimetrist needed less than 10 min hands-on time for fine-tuning. AutoVMAT plans were also considered equivalent or better than manually optimized VMAT plans. For 6/16 patients, autoVMAT allowed tumor dose escalation of 5-10 Gy. CONCLUSION: Clinically deliverable, high-quality autoVMAT plans can be generated fully automatically for the vast majority of advanced-stage NSCLC patients. For a subset of patients, autoVMAT allowed for tumor dose escalation.

Hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for patients with prostate cancer (HYPRO): acute toxicity results from a randomised non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In 2007, we began the randomised phase 3 multicentre HYPRO trial to investigate the effect of hypofractionated radiotherapy compared with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy on relapse-free survival in patients with prostate cancer. Here, we examine whether patients experience differences in acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary adverse effects. METHODS: In this randomised non-inferiority phase 3 trial, done in seven radiotherapy centres in the Netherlands, we enrolled intermediate-risk or high-risk patients aged between 44 and 85 years with histologically confirmed stage T1b-T4 NX-0MX-0 prostate cancer, a PSA concentration of 60 ng/mL or lower, and WHO performance status of 0-2. A web-based application was used to randomly assign (1:1) patients to receive either standard fractionation with 39 fractions of 2 Gy in 8 weeks (five fractions per week) or hypofractionation with 19 fractions of 3·4 Gy in 6·5 weeks (three fractions per week). Randomisation was done with minimisation procedure, stratified by treatment centre and risk group. The primary endpoint is 5-year relapse-free survival. Here we report data for the acute toxicity outcomes: the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute and late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Non-inferiority of hypofractionation was tested separately for genitourinary and gastrointestinal acute toxic effects, with a null hypothesis that cumulative incidences of each type of adverse event were not more than 8% higher in the hypofractionation group than in the standard fractionation group. We scored acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxic effects according to RTOG-EORTC criteria from both case report forms and patients' self-assessment questionnaires, at baseline, twice during radiotherapy, and 3 months after completion of radiotherapy. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Patient recruitment has been completed. This study is registered with www.controlled-trials.com, number ISRCTN85138529. FINDINGS: Between March 19, 2007, and Dec 3, 2010, 820 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with standard fractionation (n=410) or hypofractionation (n=410). 3 months after radiotherapy, 73 (22%) patients in the standard fractionation group and 75 (23%) patients in the hypofractionation group reported grade 2 or worse genitourinary toxicity; grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity was noted in 43 (13%) patients in the standard fractionation group and in 42 (13%) in the hypofractionation group. Grade 4 acute genitourinary toxicity was reported for two patients, one (<1%) in each group. No grade 4 acute gastrointestinal toxicities were observed. We noted no significant difference in cumulative incidence by 120 days after radiotherapy of grade 2 or worse acute genitourinary toxicity (57·8% [95% CI 52·9-62·7] in the standard fractionation group vs 60·5% (55·8-65·3) in the hypofractionation group; difference 2·7%, 90% CI -2·99 to 8·48; odds ratio [OR] 1·12, 95% CI 0·84-1·49; p=0·43). The cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute gastrointestinal toxicity by 120 days after radiotherapy was higher in patients given hypofractionation (31·2% [95% CI 26·6-35·8] in the standard fractionation group vs 42·0% [37·2-46·9] in the hypofractionation group; difference 10·8%, 90% CI 5·25-16·43; OR 1·6; p=0·0015; non-inferiority not confirmed). INTERPRETATION: Hypofractionated radiotherapy was not non-inferior to standard fractionated radiotherapy in terms of acute genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity for men with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer. In fact, the cumulative incidence of grade 2 or worse acute gastrointestinal toxicity was significantly higher in patients given hypofractionation than in those given standard fractionated radiotherapy. Patients remain in follow-up for efficacy endpoints. FUNDING: The Dutch Cancer Society.

A taskforce for national improvement of innovation implementation in radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous research among Dutch radiotherapy centres (RTCs) showed that 69% of innovations was simultaneously implemented in 7/19 centres, with a success rate of 51%. However, no structure to share lessons learned about the implementation process existed. Therefore, a national Taskforce Implementation (TTI) was raised to stimulate efficient implementation of innovations. The aim of the current study was to develop and pilot-evaluate a website for facilitating mutual learning on implementation issues. MATERIAL AND METHODS: First, we made an inventory in all Dutch RTCs on their 10 most valuable innovations between 2019 and 2022. In-depth interviews, structured according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, were performed on the four most mentioned topics. A website was built, and pilot evaluated 1 year after the launch, using a qualitative survey amongst the TTI members. RESULTS: In 13/18 centres, 19 interviews were conducted on 1) automation, 2) patient participation, 3) adaptive radiotherapy 4) surface guided radiotherapy and tracking. Most innovations (13/16) were implemented with a delay, with many comparable challenges: e.g. shortage of personnel (7/16) and prioritization of projects (9/16). The website allows users to upload and search for projects, including implementation experiences. After 1 year, 14 projects were uploaded. The qualitative evaluation was largely positive with room for improvement, i.e.75 % would recommend the website to others. CONCLUSION: This study showed that RTCs experience comparable challenges when implementing innovations, thereby underlining the need for a platform to share implementation-lessons learned. The first concept of this platform was evaluated positively.

The added value of a new high-performance ring-gantry CBCT imaging system for prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A novel Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) named HyperSight provides superior CBCT image quality compared to conventional ring gantry CBCT imaging, and it is suitable for dose calculations for prostate cancer, but it comes with considerable additional costs. The aim of this study was to determine the added value of HyperSight CBCT imaging compared to conventional CBCT imaging in terms of organ visibility in the male pelvic region. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty prostate cancer patients were included in this prospective clinical study. For each patient three CBCT pairs, consisting of HyperSight and conventional CBCT scans acquired on consecutive days, were included. CBCT scans were evaluated by four observers in terms of visibility of the prostate, bladder, rectum and seminal vesicles. Visibility was scored on a 1-to-5 scale and by annotating axial slices where the organs were hard to delineate. Lastly, observers indicated whether the CBCT scans were of sufficient quality for an online adaptive radiation therapy workflow. RESULTS: All four organs were better visible on HyperSight CBCT scans compared to conventional CBCT scans. The mean visibility scores increased from 3.1 to 4.5 on a 1--5 scale of and the mean number of annotated slices reduced from 4.5 to 1.1. 99% Of the HyperSight CBCT scans were considered suitable for an online adaptive workflow vs 25-83% for the conventional CBCT scans. CONCLUSION: HyperSight CBCT scans yielded a visibility of prostate, bladder, rectum and seminal vesicles comparable to planning CT scans and, can replace a repeat planning CT scan in case of anatomical changes requiring a new treatment plan.

Corrigendum to "Evaluation of image-guided and surface-guided radiotherapy for breast cancer patients treated in deep inspiration breath-hold: A single institution experience" [Tech. Innov. Patient Support Radiat. Oncol. 21 (2022) 51-57].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2022.02.001.].

Advances in radiotherapy and its impact on second primary cancer risk: A multi-center cohort study in prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Modelling studies suggest that advanced intensity-modulated radiotherapy may increase second primary cancer (SPC) risks, due to increased radiation exposure of tissues located outside the treatment fields. In the current study we investigated the association between SPC risks and characteristics of applied external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) protocols for localized prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: We collected EBRT protocol characteristics (2000-2016) from five Dutch RT institutes for the 3D-CRT and advanced EBRT era (N = 7908). From the Netherlands Cancer Registry we obtained patient/tumour characteristics, SPC data, and survival information. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) were calculated for pelvis and non-pelvis SPC. Nationwide SIRs were calculated as a reference, using calendar period as a proxy to label 3D-CRT/advanced EBRT. RESULTS: From 2000-2006, 3D-CRT with 68-78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, delivered with 10-23 MV and weekly portal imaging was the most dominant protocol. By the year 2010 all institutes routinely used advanced EBRT (IMRT, VMAT, tomotherapy), mainly delivering 78 Gy in 2 Gy fractions, using various kV/MV imaging protocols. Sixteen percent (N = 1268) developed ≥ 1 SPC. SIRs for pelvis and non-pelvis SPC (all institutes, advanced EBRT vs 3D-CRT) were 1.17 (1.00-1.36) vs 1.39 (1.21-1.59), and 1.01 (0.89-1.07) vs 1.03 (0.94-1.13), respectively. Nationwide non-pelvis SIR was 1.07 (1.01-1.13) vs 1.02 (0.98-1.07). Other RT protocol characteristics did not correlate with SPC endpoints. CONCLUSION: None of the studied RT characteristics of advanced EBRT was associated with increased out-of-field SPC risks. With constantly evolving EBRT protocols, evaluation of associated SPC risks remains important.

Integrated multicriterial optimization of beam angles and intensity profiles for coplanar and noncoplanar head and neck IMRT and implications for VMAT.

PURPOSE: To quantify improved salivary gland sparing for head and neck cancer patients using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans based on integrated computerized optimization of beam orientations and intensity profiles. To assess if optimized nonzero couch angles also improve VMAT plans. METHODS: Our in-house developed algorithm iCycle was used for automated generation of multicriterial optimized plans with optimized beam orientations and intensity profiles, and plans with optimized profiles for preselected beam arrangements. For 20 patients, five IMRT plans, based on one "wish-list," were compared: (i) and (ii) seven- and nine-beam equiangular coplanar plans (iCycle(7equi), iCycle(9equi)), (iii) and (iv) nine-beam plans with optimized coplanar and noncoplanar beam orientations (iCycle(copl), iCycle(noncopl)), and (v) a nine-beam coplanar plan with optimized gantry angles and one optimized couch rotation (iCycle(couch)). VMAT plans without and with this optimized couch rotation were evaluated. RESULTS: iCycle(noncopl) resulted in the best salivary gland sparing, while iCycle(couch) yielded similar results for 18 patients. For iCycle(7equi), submandibular gland NTCP values were on average 5% higher. iCycle(9equi) performed better than iCycle(7equi). iCycle(copl) showed further improvement. Application of the optimized couch angle from iCycle(couch) also improved NTCP values in VMAT plans. CONCLUSIONS: iCycle allows objective comparison of competing planning strategies. Integrated optimization of beam profiles and angles can significantly improve normal tissue sparing, yielding optimal results for iCycle(noncopl).

Software-controlled, highly automated intrafraction prostate motion correction with intrafraction stereographic targeting: System description and clinical results.

PURPOSE: A new system for software-controlled, highly automated correction of intrafraction prostate motion," intrafraction stereographic targeting" (iSGT), is described and evaluated. METHODS: At our institute, daily prostate positioning is routinely performed at the start of treatment beam using stereographic targeting (SGT). iSGT was implemented by extension of the SGT software to facilitate fast and accurate intrafraction motion corrections with minimal user interaction. iSGT entails megavoltage (MV) image acquisitions with the first segment of selected IMRT beams, automatic registration of implanted markers, followed by remote couch repositioning to correct for intrafraction motion above a predefined threshold, prior to delivery of the remaining segments. For a group of 120 patients, iSGT with corrections for two nearly lateral beams was evaluated in terms of workload and impact on effective intrafraction displacements in the sagittal plane. RESULTS: SDs of systematic (Σ) and random (σ) displacements relative to the planning CT measured directly after initial SGT setup correction were <0.5 and <0.8 mm, respectively. Without iSGT corrections, effective Σ and σ for the 11-min treatments would increase to Σ(eff) < 1.1 mm and σ(eff) < 1.2 mm. With the iSGT procedure with an action level of 4 mm, effective positioning errors were reduced to Σ(eff) < 0.8 mm and σ(eff) < 1.0 mm, with 23.1% of all fractions requiring a correction. Computer simulations demonstrated that with an action level of 2 mm, the errors would have been reduced to Σ(eff) < 0.6 mm and σ(eff) < 0.7 mm, requiring corrections in 82.4% of the fractions. Because iSGT is highly automated, the extra time added by iSGT is <30 s if a correction is required. CONCLUSIONS: Without increasing imaging dose, iSGT successfully reduces intrafraction prostate motion with minimal workload and increase in fraction time. An action level of 2 mm is recommended.

Evaluation of image-guided and surface-guided radiotherapy for breast cancer patients treated in deep inspiration breath-hold: A single institution experience.

INTRODUCTION: Nowadays, deep inspiratory breath-hold is a common technique to reduce heart dose in left-sided breast radiotherapy. This study evaluates the evolution of the breath-hold technique in our institute, from portal imaging during dose delivery to continuous monitoring with surface-guided radiotherapy (SGRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Setup data and portal imaging results were analyzed for 98 patients treated before 2014, and SGRT data for 228 patients treated between 2018 and 2020. For the pre-SGRT group, systematic and random setup errors were calculated for different correction protocols. Residual errors and reproducibility of breath-holds were evaluated for both groups. The benefit of using SGRT for initial positioning was evaluated for another cohort of 47 patients. RESULTS: Online correction reduced the population mean error from 3.9 mm (no corrections) to 1.4 mm. Despite online setup correction, deviations greater than 3 mm were observed in about 10% and 20% of the treatment beams in ventral-dorsal and cranial-caudal directions, respectively. However, these percentages were much smaller than with offline protocols or no corrections. Mean absolute differences between breath-holds within a fraction were smaller in the SGRT-group (1.69 mm) than in the pre-SGRT-group (2.10 mm), and further improved with addition of visual feedback (1.30 mm). SGRT for positioning did not improve setup accuracy, but slightly reduced the time for imaging and setup correction, allowing completion within 3.5 min for 95% of fractions. CONCLUSION: For accurate radiotherapy breast treatments using deep inspiration breath-hold, daily imaging and correction is required. SGRT provides accurate information on patient positioning during treatment and improves patient compliance with visual feedback.

Inclusion of the treatment couch in portal dose image prediction for high precision EPID dosimetry.

PURPOSE: When comparing predicted portal dose images (PDIs) to PDIs acquired by an EPID during treatment delivery, differences are often observed. These differences may be partially attributed to beam attenuation by parts of the treatment couch not taken into account in the PDI prediction. In order to improve the agreement, a model for the treatment couch was derived and included in the PDI prediction. METHODS: A CT scan was used to model the couch top. The model for the couch top base was derived by iteratively matching the predicted and measured PDIs for gantry angles of 0 degree, 45 degrees, and 90 degrees. For PDI prediction, the modeled treatment couch was added to the CT scan of a patient or phantom by using the recorded couch positions from the record and verify system. To validate the couch model, PDI measurements were performed for a range of couch positions and gantry angles, both with and without an anatomical phantom in the beam. RESULTS: After including the couch model in the PDI prediction for beams passing through the couch without phantom, the mean local dose differences between measured and predicted PDIs were reduced from up to 5.5% to less than 1.0% at each gantry angle. Similar results were obtained for measurements with a lung phantom on the couch. Although the couch model was originally derived by using a 6 MV photon beam, the results showed that it is also applicable for a 10 MV beam. CONCLUSIONS: A model of the treatment couch was derived and included in the PDI prediction, yielding a substantially improved agreement between measured and predicted PDIs, which makes interpretation of the observed deviations more straightforward.

Complementing Prostate SBRT VMAT With a Two-Beam Non-Coplanar IMRT Class Solution to Enhance Rectum and Bladder Sparing With Minimum Increase in Treatment Time.

PURPOSE: Enhance rectum and bladder sparing in prostate SBRT with minimum increase in treatment time by complementing dual-arc coplanar VMAT with a two-beam non-coplanar IMRT class solution (CS). METHODS: For twenty patients, an optimizer for automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization (BAO) was used to generate dual-arc VMAT plans, supplemented with five non-coplanar IMRT beams with individually optimized orientations (VMAT+5). In all plan generations, reduction of high rectum dose had the highest priority after obtaining adequate PTV coverage. A CS with two most preferred directions in VMAT+5 and largest rectum dose reductions compared to dual-arc VMAT was then selected to define VMAT+CS. VMAT+CS was compared with automatically generated i) dual-arc coplanar VMAT plans (VMAT), ii) VMAT+5 plans, and iii) IMRT plans with 30 patient-specific non-coplanar beam orientations (30-NCP). Plans were generated for a 4 x 9.5 Gy fractionation scheme. Differences in PTV doses, healthy tissue sparing, and computation and treatment delivery times were quantified. RESULTS: For equal PTV coverage, VMAT+CS, consisting of dual-arc VMAT supplemented with two fixed, non-coplanar IMRT beams with fixed Gantry/Couch angles of 65°/30° and 295°/-30°, significantly reduced OAR doses and the dose bath, compared to dual-arc VMAT. Mean relative differences in rectum Dmean, D1cc, V40GyEq and V60GyEq were 19.4 ± 10.6%, 4.2 ± 2.7%, 34.9 ± 20.3%, and 39.7 ± 23.2%, respectively (all p<0.001). There was no difference in bladder D1cc, while bladder Dmean reduced by 17.9 ± 11.0% (p<0.001). Also, the clinically evaluated urethra D5%, D10%, and D50% showed small, but statistically significant improvements. All patient VX with X = 2, 5, 10, 20, and 30 Gy were reduced with VMAT+CS, with a maximum relative reduction for V10Gy of 19.0 ± 7.3% (p<0.001). Total delivery times with VMAT+CS only increased by 1.9 ± 0.7 min compared to VMAT (9.1 ± 0.7 min). The dosimetric quality of VMAT+CS plans was equivalent to VMAT+5, while optimization times were reduced by a factor of 25 due to avoidance of individualized BAO. Compared to VMAT+CS, the 30-NCP plans were only favorable in terms of dose bath, at the cost of much enhanced optimization and delivery times. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed two-beam non-coplanar class solution to complement coplanar dual-arc VMAT resulted in substantial plan quality improvements for OARs (especially rectum) and reduced irradiated patient volumes with minor increases in treatment delivery times.

Impact of Advanced Radiotherapy on Second Primary Cancer Risk in Prostate Cancer Survivors: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: External Beam Radiotherapy (EBRT) techniques dramatically changed over the years. This may have affected the risk of radiation-induced second primary cancers (SPC), due to increased irradiated low dose volumes and scatter radiation. We investigated whether patterns of SPC after EBRT have changed over the years in prostate cancer (PCa) survivors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PCa survivors diagnosed between 1990-2014 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients treated with EBRT were divided in three time periods, representing 2-dimensional Radiotherapy (RT), 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT), and the advanced RT (AdvRT) era. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and absolute excess risks (AER) were calculated to estimate relative and excess absolute SPC risks. Sub-hazard ratios (sHRs) were calculated to compare SPC rates between the EBRT and prostatectomy cohort. SPCs were categorized by subsite and anatomic region. RESULTS: PCa survivors who received EBRT had an increased risk of developing a solid SPC (SIR=1.08; 1.05-1.11), especially in patients aged <70 years (SIR=1.13; 1.09-1.16). Pelvic SPC risks were increased (SIR=1.28; 1.23-1.34), with no obvious differences between the three EBRT eras. Non-pelvic SPC were only significantly increased in the AdvRT era (SIR=1.08; 1.02-1.14), in particular for the 1-5 year follow-up period. Comparing the EBRT cohort to the prostatectomy cohort, again an increased pelvic SPC risk was found for all EBRT periods (sHRs= 1.61, 1.47-1.76). Increased non-pelvic SPC risks were present for all RT eras and highest for the AdvRT period (sHRs=1.17, 1.06-1.29). CONCLUSION: SPC risk in patients with EBRT is increased and remained throughout the different EBRT eras. The risk of developing a SPC outside the pelvic area changed unfavorably in the AdvRT era. Prolonged follow-up is needed to confirm this observation. Whether this is associated with increased irradiated low-dose volumes and scatter, or other changes in clinical EBRT practice, is the subject of further research.

Dosimetric validation of a commercial Monte Carlo based IMRT planning system.

PURPOSE: Recently a commercial Monte Carlo based IMRT planning system (Monaco version 1.0.0) was released. In this study the dosimetric accuracy of this new planning system was validated. METHODS: Absolute dose profiles, depth dose curves, and output factors calculated by Monaco were compared with measurements in a water phantom. Different static on-axis and off-axis fields were tested at various source-skin distances for 6, 10, and 18 MV photon beams. Four clinical IMRT plans were evaluated in a water phantom using a linear diode detector array and another six IMRT plans for different tumor sites in solid water using a 2D detector array. In order to evaluate the accuracy of the dose engine near tissue inhomogeneities absolute dose distributions were measured with Gafchromic EBT film in an inhomogeneous slab phantom. For an end-to-end test a four-field IMRT plan was applied to an anthropomorphic lung phantom with a simulated tumor peripherally located in the right lung. Gafchromic EBT film, placed in and around the tumor area, was used to evaluate the dose distribution. RESULTS: Generally, the measured and the calculated dose distributions agreed within 2% dose difference or 2 mm distance-to-agreement. But mainly at interfaces with bone, some larger dose differences could be observed. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study, the authors concluded that the dosimetric accuracy of Monaco is adequate for clinical introduction.

Lower doses to hippocampi and other brain structures for skull-base meningiomas with intensity modulated proton therapy compared to photon therapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy of skull-base meningiomas is challenging due to the close proximity of multiple sensitive organs at risk (OARs). This study systematically compared intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) based on automated treatment planning. Differences in OARs sparing, with specific focus on the hippocampi, and low-dose delivery were quantified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients, target diameter >3 cm, were included. Automated plan generation was used to calculate a VMAT plan with three non-coplanar arcs, an IMRT plan with nine non-coplanar beams with optimized gantry and couch angles, and an IMPT plan with three patient-specific selected non-coplanar beams. A prescription dose of 50.4 GyRBE in 28 fractions was used. The same set of constraints and prioritized objectives was used. All plans were rescaled to the same target coverage. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the statistical significance of differences in OAR dose parameters between planning techniques. RESULTS: Compared to VMAT and IMRT, IMPT significantly improved dose conformity to the target volume. Consequently, large dose reductions in OARs were observed. With respect to VMAT, the mean dose and D40% in the bilateral hippocampus were on average reduced by 48% and 74%, respectively (p ≤ 0.005). With IMPT, the mean dose in the normal brain and volumes receiving 20-30 Gy were up to 47% lower (p ≤ 0.01). When comparing IMPT and IMRT, even larger dose differences in those OARs were observed. CONCLUSION: For skull-base meningiomas IMPT allows for a considerable dose reduction in the hippocampi, normal brain and other OARs compared to both non-coplanar VMAT and IMRT, which may lead to a clinically relevant reduction of late neurocognitive side effects.

The Risk of Second Primary Cancers in Prostate Cancer Survivors Treated in the Modern Radiotherapy Era.

PURPOSE: Concerns have been raised that modern intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) may be associated with increased second primary cancer risks (SPC) compared to previous three-dimensional conformal radiation techniques (3DCRT), due to increased low dose volumes and more out-of-field ionizing dose to peripheral tissue further away from the target. We assessed the impact of treatment technique on SPC risks in a cohort of prostate cancer (PCa) survivors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study cohort comprised 1,561 PCa survivors aged 50-79 years at time of radiotherapy, treated between 2006-2013 (N=707 IMRT, N=854 3DCRT). Treatment details were extracted from radiotherapy systems and merged with longitudinal data of the Netherlands Cancer Registry to identify SPCs. Primary endpoint was the development of a solid SPC (excluding skin cancer) in peripheral anatomical regions, i.e. non-pelvic. Applied latency period was 12 months. SPC rates in the IMRT cohort (total cohort and age subgroups) were compared to 1) the 3DCRT cohort by calculating Sub-Hazard Ratios (sHR) using a competing risk model, and 2) to the general male population by calculating Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIR). Models were adjusted for calendar period and age. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 8.0 years (accumulated 11,664 person-years at-risk) with 159 cases developing ≥1 non-pelvic SPC. For IMRT vs 3DCRT we observed a significantly (p=0.03) increased risk (sHR=1.56, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.03-2.36, corresponding estimated excess absolute risk (EAR) of +7 cases per 10,000 person-years). At explorative analysis, IMRT was in particular associated with increased risks within the subgroup of active smokers (sHR 2.94, p=0.01). Within the age subgroups 50-69 and 70-79 years, the sHR for non-pelvic SPC was 3.27 (p=0.001) and 0.96 (p=0.9), respectively. For pelvic SPC no increase was observed (sHR=0.8, p=0.4). Compared to the general population, IMRT was associated with significantly increased risks for non-pelvic SPC in the 50-69 year age group (SIR=1.90, p<0.05) but not in the 70-79 years group (SIR=1.08). CONCLUSION: IMRT is associated with increased SPC risks for subjects who are relatively young at time of treatment. Additional research on aspects of IMRT that may cause this effect is essential to minimize risks for future patients receiving modern radiotherapy.

Surgical clips for position verification and correction of non-rigid breast tissue in simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) treatments.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to investigate whether surgical clips in the lumpectomy cavity are representative for position verification of both the tumour bed and the whole breast in simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For a group of 30 patients treated with a SIB technique, kV and MV planar images were acquired throughout the course of the fractionated treatment. The 3D set-up error for the tumour bed was derived by matching the surgical clips (3-8 per patient) in two almost orthogonal planar kV images. By projecting the 3D set-up error derived from the planar kV images to the (u, v)-plane of the tangential beams, the correlation with the 2D set-up error for the whole breast, derived from the MV EPID images, was determined. The stability of relative clip positions during the fractionated treatment was investigated. In addition, for a subgroup of 15 patients, the impact of breathing was determined from fluoroscopic movies acquired at the linac. RESULTS: The clip configurations were stable over the course of radiotherapy, showing an inter-fraction variation (1 SD) of 0.5mm on average. Between the start and the end of the treatment, the mean distance between the clips and their center of mass was reduced by 0.9 mm. A decrease larger than 2mm was observed in eight patients (17 clips). The top-top excursion of the clips due to breathing was generally less than 2.5mm in all directions. The population averages of the difference (+/-1 SD) between kV and MV matches in the (u, v)-plane were 0.2+/-1.8mm and 0.9+/-1.5mm, respectively. In 30% of the patients, time trends larger than 3mm were present over the course of the treatment in either or in both kV and MV match results. Application of the NAL protocol based on the clips reduced the population mean systematic error to less than 2mm in all directions, both for the tumour bed and the whole breast. Due to the observed time trends, these systematic errors can be further reduced to about 1mm by using an eNAL protocol instead. CONCLUSIONS: The relative positions of implanted surgical clips in the lumpectomy cavity after breast-conserving surgery remain stable during the course of radiotherapy treatment. Application of a NAL or eNAL set-up correction protocol based on surgical clips allows for adequate treatment of both the tumour bed and the whole breast with tight CTV-PTV margins.

Portal dose image prediction for in vivo treatment verification completely based on EPID measurements.

A high dosimetric accuracy is required for radiotherapy treatments where IMRT in combination with narrow treatment margins is applied to achieve optimally conformal dose distributions. In order to routinely verify the in vivo fluence delivery (i.e., during the actual patient treatment), our method for predicting portal dose images with a patient in the beam was validated. A unique feature of this method is that it is fully based on calibration measurements with an EPID. The portal dose image (PDI) behind a patient is dependent on the transmission of primary radiation through the patient and a contribution of scattered radiation from the patient. To derive both components, the patient geometry as observed in the planning CT scan is converted into an equivalent homogeneous phantom. A limited set of EPID measurements is required to derive the input parameters of this model. The accuracy of the in vivo PDI prediction was verified using measurements behind phantoms and four prostate cancer patients treated with IMRT. Behind homogeneous slab phantoms, the local differences between measured and predicted PDIs were within 2% inside the field, while behind a lung and a pelvic phantom, the agreement was within 3% or within 3 mm in regions with steep gradients. Outside the fields, the PDIs agreed within 2% of the global dose maximum. Evaluation of the in vivo PDI measurements behind patients showed that, on average, 87% of the pixels inside the field fulfilled the 3% local dose and 3 mm distance-to-agreement criteria. For half of the failing pixels the differences occurred due to changes in patient geometry with respect to the planning CT or due to beam attenuation by the treatment couch that was not accounted for. A fully EPID-based method for predicting portal dose images using the planning CT scan has been implemented and validated for phantoms and clinical patients.

Automated VMAT planning for postoperative adjuvant treatment of advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative/adjuvant radiotherapy of advanced gastric cancer involves a large planning target volume (PTV) with multi-concave shapes which presents a challenge for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning. This study investigates the advantages of automated VMAT planning for this site compared to manual VMAT planning by expert planners. METHODS: For 20 gastric cancer patients in the postoperative/adjuvant setting, dual-arc VMAT plans were generated using fully automated multi-criterial treatment planning (autoVMAT), and compared to manually generated VMAT plans (manVMAT). Both automated and manual plans were created to deliver a median dose of 45 Gy to the PTV using identical planning and segmentation parameters. Plans were evaluated by two expert radiation oncologists for clinical acceptability. AutoVMAT and manVMAT plans were also compared based on dose-volume histogram (DVH) and predicted normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) analysis. RESULTS: Both manVMAT and autoVMAT plans were considered clinically acceptable. Target coverage was similar (manVMAT: 96.6 ± 1.6%, autoVMAT: 97.4 ± 1.0%, p = 0.085). With autoVMAT, median kidney dose was reduced on average by > 25%; (for left kidney from 11.3 ± 2.1 Gy to 8.9 ± 3.5 Gy (p = 0.002); for right kidney from 9.2 ± 2.2 Gy to 6.1 ± 1.3 Gy (p <  0.001)). Median dose to the liver was lower as well (18.8 ± 2.3 Gy vs. 17.1 ± 3.6 Gy, p = 0.048). In addition, Dmax of the spinal cord was significantly reduced (38.3 ± 3.7 Gy vs. 31.6 ± 2.6 Gy, p <  0.001). Substantial improvements in dose conformity and integral dose were achieved with autoVMAT plans (4.2% and 9.1%, respectively; p <  0.001). Due to the better OAR sparing in the autoVMAT plans compared to manVMAT plans, the predicted NTCPs for the left and right kidney and the liver-PTV were significantly reduced by 11.3%, 12.8%, 7%, respectively (p ≤ 0.001). Delivery time and total number of monitor units were increased in autoVMAT plans (from 168 ± 19 s to 207 ± 26 s, p = 0.006) and (from 781 ± 168 MU to 1001 ± 134 MU, p = 0.003), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For postoperative/adjuvant radiotherapy of advanced gastric cancer, involving a complex target shape, automated VMAT planning is feasible and can substantially reduce the dose to the kidneys and the liver, without compromising the target dose delivery.

Late toxicity in the randomized multicenter HYPRO trial for prostate cancer analyzed with automated treatment planning.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Assess to what extent the use of automated treatment planning would have reduced organ-at-risk dose delivery observed in the randomized HYPRO trial for prostate cancer, and estimate related toxicity reductions. Investigate to what extent improved plan quality for hypofractionation scheme as achieved with automated planning can potentially reduce observed enhanced toxicity for the investigated hypofractionation scheme to levels observed for conventional fractionation scheme. MATERIAL/METHODS: For 725 trial patients, VMAT plans were generated with an algorithm for automated multi-criterial plan generation (autoVMAT). All clinically delivered plans (CLINICAL), generated with commonly applied interactive trial-and-error planning were also available for the investigations. Analyses were based on dose-volume histograms (DVH) and predicted normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) for late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. RESULTS: Compared to CLINICAL, autoVMAT plans had similar or higher PTV coverage, while large and statistically significant OAR sparing was achieved. Mean doses in the rectum, anus and bladder were reduced by 7.8 ±â€¯4.7 Gy, 7.9 ±â€¯6.0 Gy and 4.2 ±â€¯2.9 Gy, respectively (p < 0.001). NTCPs for late grade ≥2 GI toxicity, rectal bleeding and stool incontinence were reduced from 23.3 ±â€¯9.1% to 19.7 ±â€¯8.9%, from 9.7 ±â€¯2.8% to 8.2 ±â€¯2.8%, and from 16.8 ±â€¯8.5% to 13.1 ±â€¯7.2%, respectively (p < 0.001). Reductions in rectal bleeding NTCP were observed for all published Equivalent Uniform Dose volume parameters, n. AutoVMAT allowed hypofractionation with predicted toxicity similar to conventional fractionation with CLINICAL plans. CONCLUSION: Compared to CLINICAL, autoVMAT had superior plan quality, with meaningful NTCP reductions for both conventional fractionation and hypofractionation schemes. AutoVMAT plans might reduce toxicity for hypofractionation to levels that were clinically observed (and accepted) for conventional fractionation. This may be relevant when considering clinical use of the investigated hypofractionation schedule with relatively high fraction dose (3.4 Gy).