Paediatric CBCT protocols for image-guided radiotherapy; outcome of a survey across SIOP Europe affiliated countries and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of daily cone-beam CT (CBCT) into clinical practice in paediatric image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) lags behind compared to adults. Surveys report wide variation in practice for paediatric IGRT and technical information remains unreported. In this study we report on technical settings from applied paediatric CBCT protocols and review the literature for paediatric CBCT protocols. METHODS: From September to October 2022, a survey was conducted among 246 SIOPE-affiliated centres across 35 countries. The survey consisted of 3 parts: 1) baseline information; technical CBCT exposure settings and patient set-up procedure for 2) brain/head, and 3) abdomen. Descriptive statistics was used to summarise current practice. The literature was reviewed systematically with two reviewers obtaining consensus RESULTS: The literature search revealed 22 papers concerning paediatric CBCT protocols. Seven papers focused on dose-optimisation. Responses from 50/246 centres in 25/35 countries were collected: 44/50 treated with photons and 10/50 with protons. In total, 48 brain/head and 53 abdominal protocols were reported. 42/50 centres used kV-CBCT for brain/head and 35/50 for abdomen; daily CBCT was used for brain/head = 28/48 (58%) and abdomen = 33/53 62%. Greater consistency was seen in brain/head protocols (dose range 0.32 - 67.7 mGy) compared to abdominal (dose range 0.27 - 119.7 mGy). CONCLUSION: Although daily CBCT is now widely used in paediatric IGRT, our survey demonstrates a wide range of technical settings, suggesting an unmet need to optimise paediatric IGRT protocols. This is in accordance with the literature. However, there are only few paediatric optimisation studies suggesting that dose reduction is possible while maintaining image quality.

Evaluation of decentralised model-based selection of head and neck cancer patients for a proton treatment study. DAHANCA 35.

INTRODUCTION: Proton treatment can potentially spare patients with H&N cancer for substantial treatment-related toxicities. The current study investigated the reproducibility of a decentralised model-based selection of patients for a proton treatment study when the selection plans were compared to the clinical treatment plans performed at the proton centre. METHODS: Sixty-three patients were selected for proton treatment in the six Danish Head and Neck Cancer (DAHANCA) centres. The patients were selected based on normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) estimated from local photon and proton treatment plans, which showed a ΔNTCP greater than 5%-point for either grade 2 + dysphagia or grade 2 + xerostomia at six months. The selection plans were compared to the clinical treatment plans performed at the proton centre. RESULTS: Of the 63 patients, 49 and 25 were selected based on an estimated benefit in risk of dysphagia and xerostomia, respectively. Eleven patients had a potential gain in both toxicities. The mean ΔNTCP changed from the local selection plan comparison to the clinical comparison from 6.9 to 5.3 %-points (p = 0.01) and 7.3 to 4.9 %-points (p = 0.03) for dysphagia and xerostomia, respectively. Volume differences in both CTV and OAR could add to the loss in ΔNTCP. 61 of the 63 clinical plans had a positive ΔNTCP, and 38 had a ΔNTCP of 5%-points for at least one of the two endpoints. CONCLUSION: A local treatment plan comparison can be used to select candidates for proton treatment. The local comparative proton plan overestimates the potential benefit of the clinical proton plan. Continuous quality assurance of the delineation procedures and planning is crucial in the subsequent randomised clinical trial setting.

Consistency in contouring of organs at risk by artificial intelligence vs oncologists in head and neck cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: In the Danish Head and Neck Cancer Group (DAHANCA) 35 trial, patients are selected for proton treatment based on simulated reductions of Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) for proton compared to photon treatment at the referring departments. After inclusion in the trial, immobilization, scanning, contouring and planning are repeated at the national proton centre. The new contours could result in reduced expected NTCP gain of the proton plan, resulting in a loss of validity in the selection process. The present study evaluates if contour consistency can be improved by having access to AI (Artificial Intelligence) based contours. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 63 patients in the DAHANCA 35 pilot trial had a CT from the local DAHANCA centre and one from the proton centre. A nationally validated convolutional neural network, based on nnU-Net, was used to contour OARs on both scans for each patient. Using deformable image registration, local AI and oncologist contours were transferred to the proton centre scans for comparison. Consistency was calculated with the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and Mean Surface Distance (MSD), comparing contours from AI to AI and oncologist to oncologist, respectively. Two NTCP models were applied to calculate NTCP for xerostomia and dysphagia. RESULTS: The AI contours showed significantly better consistency than the contours by oncologists. The median and interquartile range of DSC was 0.85 [0.78 - 0.90] and 0.68 [0.51 - 0.80] for AI and oncologist contours, respectively. The median and interquartile range of MSD was 0.9 mm [0.7 - 1.1] mm and 1.9 mm [1.5 - 2.6] mm for AI and oncologist contours, respectively. There was no significant difference in ΔNTCP. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that OAR contours made by the AI algorithm were more consistent than those made by oncologists. No significant impact on the ΔNTCP calculations could be discerned.

Target coverage and local recurrences after radiotherapy for sinonasal cancer in Denmark 2008-2015. A DAHANCA study.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to investigate the pattern of failure and describe compromises in the definition and coverage of the target for patients treated with curatively intended radiotherapy (RT) for sinonasal cancer (SNC). METHODS AND MATERIAL: Patients treated with curatively intended RT in 2008-2015 in Denmark for SNC were eligible for the retrospective cohort study. Information regarding diagnosis and treatment was retrieved from the national database of the Danish Head and Neck Cancer Group (DAHANCA). Imaging from the diagnosis of recurrences was collected, and the point of origin (PO) of the recurrent tumour was estimated. All treatment plans were collected and reviewed with the focus on target coverage, manual modifications of target volumes, and dose to organs at risk (OARs) above defined constraints. RESULTS: A total of 184 patients were included in the analysis, and 76 (41%) relapsed. The majority of recurrences involved T-site (76%). Recurrence imaging of 39 patients was evaluated, and PO was established. Twenty-nine POs (74%) were located within the CTV, and the minimum dose to the PO was median 64.1 Gy (3.1-70.7). The criteria for target coverage (V95%) was not met in 89/184 (48%) of the CTV and 131/184 (71%) of the PTV. A total of 24% of CTVs had been manually modified to spare OARs of high-dose irradiation. No difference in target volume modifications was observed between patients who suffered recurrence and patients with lasting remission. CONCLUSION: The majority of relapses after radical treatment of SNC were located in the T-site (the primary tumour site). Multiple compromises with regards to target coverage and tolerance levels for OARs in the sinonasal region, as defined from RT guidelines, were taken. No common practice in this respect could be derived from the study.

Radiation dose-painting with protons vs. photons for head-and-neck cancer.

Background: Dose-painting has recently been investigated in early-phase trials in head-and-neck cancer (HNC) with the aim of improving local tumor control. At the same time proton therapy has been reported as potentially capable of decreasing toxicity. Here, we investigate whether protons could be applied in a dose-painting setting by comparing proton dose distributions with delivered photon plans from a phase-I trial of FDG-PET based dose-painting at our institution.Material and methods: Eleven oropharynx (5), hypopharynx (2) and larynx cancer (4) patients from the recently conducted phase I trial were used for comparison of proton and photon dose-painting techniques. Robust optimization (3.5%/3 mm) was used for proton plans. Plan robustness and difference in dose metrics to targets and organs at risk were evaluated.Results: The proton plans met target dose constraints, while having lower non-target dose than photon plans (body-minus-CTV, mean dose 3.9 Gy vs 7.2 Gy, p = .004). Despite the use of robust proton planning for plan max dose, photon plan max doses were more robust (p = .006). Max dose to medulla, brainstem and mandible were lower in the proton plans, while there was no significant difference in mean dose to submandibular- and parotid glands.Conclusion: Proton dose-painting for HNC seems feasible and can reduce the non-target dose overall, however not significantly to certain organs close to the target, such as the salivary glands. Max dose in proton plans had a lower robustness compared to photons, requiring caution to avoid unintended hot spots in consideration of the risk of mucosal toxicity.

Advanced dose calculation algorithms in lung cancer radiotherapy: Implications for SBRT and locally advanced disease in deep inspiration breath hold.

PURPOSE: Evaluating performance of modern dose calculation algorithms in SBRT and locally advanced lung cancer radiotherapy in free breathing (FB) and deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH). METHODS: For 17 patients with early stage and 17 with locally advanced lung cancer, a plan in FB and in DIBH were generated with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA). Plans for early stage were 3D-conformal SBRT, 45 Gy in 3 fractions, prescribed to 95% isodose covering 95% of PTV and aiming for 140% dose centrally in the tumour. Locally advanced plans were volumetric modulated arc therapy, 66 Gy in 33 fractions, prescribed to mean PTV dose. Calculation grid size was 1 mm for SBRT and 2.5 mm for locally advanced plans. All plans were recalculated with AcurosXB with same MU as in AAA, for comparison on target coverage and dose to risk organs. RESULTS: Lung volume increased in DIBH, resulting in decreased lung density (6% for early and 13% for locally-advanced group). In SBRT, AAA overestimated mean and near-minimum PTV dose (p-values < 0.01) compared to AcurosXB, with largest impact in DIBH (differences of up to 11 Gy). These clinically relevant differences may be a combination of small targets and large dose gradients within the PTV. In locally advanced group, AAA overestimated mean GTV, CTV and PTV doses by median less than 0.8 Gy and near-minimum doses by median 0.4-2.7 Gy. No clinically meaningful difference was observed for lung and heart dose metrics between the algorithms, for both FB and DIBH. CONCLUSIONS: AAA overestimated target coverage compared to AcurosXB, especially in DIBH for SBRT.

Translational and rotational intra- and inter-fractional errors in patient and target position during a short course of frameless stereotactic body radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in frameless stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) of lung tumours enables setup correction based on tumour position. The aim of this study was to compare setup accuracy with daily soft tissue matching to bony anatomy matching and evaluate intra- and inter-fractional translational and rotational errors in patient and target positions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive SBRT patients were included in the study. Vacuum cushions were used for immobilisation. SBRT plans were based on midventilation phase of four-dimensional (4D)-CT or three-dimensional (3D)-CT from PET/CT. Margins of 5 mm in the transversal plane and 10 mm in the cranio-caudal (CC) direction were applied. SBRT was delivered in three fractions within a week. At each fraction, CBCT was performed before and after the treatment. Setup accuracy comparison between soft tissue matching and bony anatomy matching was evaluated on pretreatment CBCTs. From differences in pre- and post-treatment CBCTs, we evaluated the extent of translational and rotational intra-fractional changes in patient position, tumour position and tumour baseline shift. All image registration was rigid with six degrees of freedom. RESULTS: The median 3D difference between patient position based on bony anatomy matching and soft tissue matching was 3.0 mm (0-8.3 mm). The median 3D intra-fractional change in patient position was 1.4 mm (0-12.2 mm) and 2.2 mm (0-13.2 mm) in tumour position. The median 3D intra-fractional baseline shift was 2.2 mm (0-4.7 mm). With correction of translational errors, the remaining systematic and random errors were approximately 1°. CONCLUSION: . Soft tissue tumour matching improved precision of treatment delivery in frameless SBRT of lung tumours compared to image guidance using bone matching. The intra-fractional displacement of the target position was affected by both translational and rotational changes in tumour baseline position relative to the bony anatomy and by changes in patient position.

Monitor unit calculations for wedged asymmetric photon beams.

Algorithms for calculating monitor units (MUs) in wedged asymmetric high-energy photon beams as implemented in treatment planning systems have their limitations. Therefore an independent method for MU calculation is necessary. The aim of this study was to develop an empirical method to determine MUs for points at the centre of wedged fields, asymmetric in two directions. The method is based on the determination of an off-axis factor (OAF) that corrects for the difference in dose between wedged asymmetric and wedged symmetric beams with the same field size. Measurements were performed in a water phantom irradiated with 6 and 18 MV photon beams produced by Elekta accelerators, which are fitted with an internal motorized wedge that has a complex shape. The OAF perpendicular to the wedge direction changed significantly with depth for the 18 MV beam. Dose values measured for a set of 18 test cases were compared with those calculated with our method. The maximum difference found was 6.5% and in 15 cases this figure was smaller than 2.0%. The analytical method of Khan and the empirical method of Georg were also tested and showed errors up to 12.8%. It can be concluded that our simple formalism is able to calculate MUs in wedged asymmetric fields with an acceptable accuracy in most clinical situations.