Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy in Hippocampus- and Scalp-Sparing Whole Brain Radiotherapy.

Objective: Cognitive decline and alopecia after radiotherapy are challenging problems. We aimed to compare whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) plans reducing radiation dose to the hippocampus and scalp between helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Methods: We conducted a planning study of WBRT for 10 patients. The clinical target volume was defined as the whole brain excluding the hippocampus avoidance (HA) region. The prescribed dose was 30 Gy in 10 fractions to cover 95% of the target. Constraint goals were defined for the target and organs at risk (OAR). Results: Both techniques met the dose constraints for the target and OAR. However, the coverage of the target (dose covering 95% [D95%] and 98% [D98%] of the volume) were better in IMPT than HT (HT vs IMPT: D95%, 29.9 Gy vs 30.0 Gy, P < .001; D98%, 26.7 Gy vs 28.1 Gy, P = .002). The homogeneity and conformity of the target were also better in IMPT than HT (HT vs IMPT: homogeneity index, 1.50 vs 1.28, P < .001; conformity index, 1.30 vs 1.14, P < .001). IMPT reduced the D100% of the hippocampus by 59% (HT vs IMPT: 9.3 Gy vs 3.8 Gy, P < .001) and reduced the Dmean of the hippocampus by 37% (HT vs IMPT: 11.1 Gy vs 7.0 Gy, P < .001) compared with HT. The scalp IMPT reduced the percentage of the volume receiving at least 20 Gy (V20Gy) and V10Gy compared with HT (HT vs IMPT: V20Gy, 56.7% vs 6.6%, P < .001; V10Gy, 90.5% vs 37.1%, P < .001). Conclusion: Both techniques provided acceptable target dose coverage. Especially, IMPT achieved excellent hippocampus- and scalp-sparing. HA-WBRT using IMPT is a promising treatment to prevent cognitive decline and alopecia.

Radiotherapy of Parasellar Tumours.

Parasellar tumours represent a wide group of intracranial lesions, both benign and malignant. They may arise from several structures located within the parasellar area or they may infiltrate or metastasize this region. The treatment of the tumours located in these areas is challenging because of their complex anatomical location and their heterogenous histology. It often requires a multimodal approach, including surgery, radiation therapy (RT), and medical therapy. Due to the proximity of critical structures and the risks of side effects related to the procedure, a successful surgical resection is often not achievable. Thus, RT plays a crucial role in the treatment of several parasellar tumours. Conventional fractionated RT and modern radiation techniques, like stereotactic radiosurgery and proton beam RT, have become a standard management option, in particular for cases with residual or recurrent tumours after surgery and for those cases where surgery is contraindicated. This review examines the role of RT in parasellar tumours analysing several techniques, outcomes and side effects.

Optimizing Whole Brain Radiation Therapy Dose and Fractionation: Results From a Prospective Phase 3 Trial (NCCTG N107C [Alliance]/CEC.3).

PURPOSE: Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) remains a commonly used cancer treatment, although controversy exists regarding the optimal dose/fractionation to optimize intracranial tumor control and minimize resultant cognitive deficits. METHODS AND MATERIALS: NCCTG N107C [Alliance]/CEC.3 randomized 194 patients with brain metastases to either stereotactic radiosurgery alone or WBRT after surgical resection. Among the 92 patients receiving WBRT, sites predetermined the dose/fractionation that would be used for all patients treated at that site (either 30 Gy in 10 fractions or 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions). Analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates, log rank tests, and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Among 92 patients treated with surgical resection and adjuvant WBRT, 49 were treated with 30 Gy in 10 fractions (53%), and 43 were treated with 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions (47%). Baseline characteristics, including cognitive testing, were well balanced between groups with the exception of primary tumor type (lung cancer histology was more frequent with protracted WBRT: 72% vs 45%, P = .01), and 93% of patients completed the full course of WBRT. A more protracted WBRT dose regimen (37.5 Gy in 15 fractions) did not significantly affect time to cognitive failure (hazard ratio [HR], 0.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.39; P = .66), surgical bed control (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.22-1.25], P = .14), intracranial tumor control (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.28-1.12], P = .09), or overall survival (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.45-1.16], P = .18). Although there was no reported radionecrosis, there is a statistically significant increase in the risk of at least 1 grade ≥3 adverse event with 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions versus 30 Gy in 10 fractions (54% vs 31%, respectively, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis does not demonstrate that protracted WBRT courses reduce the risk of cognitive deficit, improve tumor control in the hypoxic surgical cavity, or otherwise improve the therapeutic ratio. Adverse events were significantly higher with the lengthened course of WBRT. For patients with brain metastases where WBRT is recommended, shorter course hypofractionated regimens remain the current standard of care.

Patterns of brain metastasis immediately before prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI): implications for PCI optimization in limited-stage small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is indicated for limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) with good response to chemoradiotherapy (CRT). However, brain metastasis (BM) developed in LS-SCLC before PCI is not rare. In this study, we comprehensively investigated the features of pre-PCI BMs, aiming to explore the potential of PCI optimization for LS-SCLC. METHODS: One-hundred-ten LS-SCLC patients achieving clinical complete remission after definitive CRT with contrast-enhanced cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline and immediately before PCI were included. The time trend and risk factors for pre-PCI BM were evaluated. Several radiological features, including numbers, sizes, and locations of pre-PCI BMs, were investigated to explore the technical feasibility of stereotactic radiotherapy and hippocampal-avoidance (HA) PCI. RESULTS: Twenty-four (21.8%) of the LS-SCLC patients harbored pre-PCI BM, all except one were asymptomatic. CRT duration (CRT-D) was the only independent risk factor for pre-PCI BM. The pre-PCI BM rate gradually increased in line with a growing time interval between treatment initiation and pre-PCI MRI. Pre-PCI BM and prolonged CRT-D were both correlated with worse overall survival. Of 129 pre-PCI intracranial lesions, 2 (1.5%) were in the HA region. Eight of the 24 (33.3%) pre-PCI BM patients were ineligible for stereotactic radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that PCI is still of importance in LS-SCLC, and MRI evaluation before PCI is indispensable. Investigations are warranted to explore the possibility of moving PCI up to before CRT completion in LS-SCLC patients with prolonged CRT-D. HA-PCI could be considered to reduce neurotoxicity.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Role of Whole Brain Radiation Therapy in Adults With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Brain Tumors.

TARGET POPULATION: Adult patients (older than 18 yr of age) with newly diagnosed brain metastases. QUESTION: If whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) is used, is there an optimal dose/fractionation schedule? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 1: A standard WBRT dose/fractionation schedule (ie, 30 Gy in 10 fractions or a biological equivalent dose [BED] of 39 Gy10) is recommended as altered dose/fractionation schedules do not result in significant differences in median survival or local control. Level 3: Due to concerns regarding neurocognitive effects, higher dose per fraction schedules (such as 20 Gy in 5 fractions) are recommended only for patients with poor performance status or short predicted survival. Level 3: WBRT can be recommended to improve progression-free survival for patients with more than 4 brain metastases. QUESTION: What impact does tumor histopathology or molecular status have on the decision to use WBRT, the dose fractionation scheme to be utilized, and its outcomes? RECOMMENDATIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support the choice of any particular dose/fractionation regimen based on histopathology. Molecular status may have an impact on the decision to delay WBRT in subgroups of patients, but there is not sufficient data to make a more definitive recommendation. QUESTION: Separate from survival outcomes, what are the neurocognitive consequences of WBRT, and what steps can be taken to minimize them? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 2: Due to neurocognitive toxicity, local therapy (surgery or SRS) without WBRT is recommended for patients with ≤4 brain metastases amenable to local therapy in terms of size and location. Level 2: Given the association of neurocognitive toxicity with increasing total dose and dose per fraction of WBRT, WBRT doses exceeding 30 Gy given in 10 fractions, or similar biologically equivalent doses, are not recommended, except in patients with poor performance status or short predicted survival. Level 2: If prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is given to prevent brain metastases for small cell lung cancer, the recommended WBRT dose/fractionation regimen is 25 Gy in 10 fractions, and because this can be associated with neurocognitive decline, patients should be told of this risk at the same time they are counseled about the possible survival benefits. Level 3: Patients having WBRT (given for either existing brain metastases or as PCI) should be offered 6 mo of memantine to potentially delay, lessen, or prevent the associated neurocognitive toxicity. QUESTION: Does the addition of WBRT after surgical resection or radiosurgery improve progression-free or overall survival outcomes when compared to surgical resection or radiosurgery alone? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 2: WBRT is not recommended in WHO performance status 0 to 2 patients with up to 4 brain metastases because, compared to surgical resection or radiosurgery alone, the addition of WBRT improves intracranial progression-free survival but not overall survival. Level 2: In WHO performance status 0 to 2 patients with up to 4 brain metastases where the goal is minimizing neurocognitive toxicity, as opposed to maximizing progression-free survival and overall survival, local therapy (surgery or radiosurgery) without WBRT is recommended. Level 3: Compared to surgical resection or radiosurgery alone, the addition of WBRT is not recommended for patients with more than 4 brain metastases unless the metastases' volume exceeds 7 cc, or there are more than 15 metastases, or the size or location of the metastases are not amenable to surgical resection or radiosurgery.The full guideline can be found at: https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-treatment-adults-metastatic-brain-tumors/chapter_3.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Role of Chemotherapy in the Management of Adults With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Brain Tumors.

QUESTION 1: Should patients with brain metastases receive chemotherapy in addition to whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for the treatment of their brain metastases? TARGET POPULATION: This recommendation applies to adult patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases amenable to both chemotherapy and radiation treatment. RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 1: Routine use of chemotherapy following WBRT for brain metastases is not recommended. Level 3: Routine use of WBRT plus temozolomide is recommended as a treatment for patients with triple negative breast cancer. QUESTION 2: Should patients with brain metastases receive chemotherapy in addition to stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for the treatment of their brain metastases? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 1: Routine use of chemotherapy following SRS is not recommended. Level 2: SRS is recommended in combination with chemotherapy to improve overall survival and progression free survival in lung adenocarcinoma patients. QUESTION 3: Should patients with brain metastases receive chemotherapy alone? RECOMMENDATION: Level 1: Routine use of cytotoxic chemotherapy alone for brain metastases is not recommended as it has not been shown to increase overall survival.Please see the full-text version of this guideline (https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-treatment-adults-metastatic-brain-tumors/chapter_5) for the target population of each recommendation.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Role of Surgery in the Management of Adults With Metastatic Brain Tumors.

Please see the full-text version of this guideline https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-treatment-adults-metastatic-brain-tumors/chapter_2) for the target population of each recommendation listed below. SURGERY FOR METASTATIC BRAIN TUMORS AT NEW DIAGNOSIS QUESTION: Should patients with newly diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo surgery, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), or whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT)? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 1: Surgery + WBRT is recommended as first-line treatment in patients with single brain metastases with favorable performance status and limited extracranial disease to extend overall survival, median survival, and local control. Level 3: Surgery plus SRS is recommended to provide survival benefit in patients with metastatic brain tumors Level 3: Multimodal treatments including either surgery + WBRT + SRS boost or surgery + WBRT are recommended as alternatives to WBRT + SRS in terms of providing overall survival and local control benefits. SURGERY AND RADIATION FOR METASTATIC BRAIN TUMORS QUESTION: Should patients with newly diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo surgical resection followed by WBRT, SRS, or another combination of these modalities? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 1: Surgery + WBRT is recommended as superior treatment to WBRT alone in patients with single brain metastases. Level 3: Surgery + SRS is recommended as an alternative to treatment with SRS alone to benefit overall survival. Level 3: It is recommended that SRS alone be considered equivalent to surgery + WBRT. SURGERY FOR RECURRENT METASTATIC BRAIN TUMORS QUESTION: Should patients with recurrent metastatic brain tumors undergo surgical resection? RECOMMENDATIONS: Level 3: Craniotomy is recommended as a treatment for intracranial recurrence after initial surgery or SRS. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE AND RECURRENCE QUESTION A: Does the surgical technique (en bloc resection or piecemeal resection) affect recurrence? RECOMMENDATION: Level 3: En bloc tumor resection, as opposed to piecemeal resection, is recommended to decrease the risk of postoperative leptomeningeal disease when resecting single brain metastases. QUESTION B: Does the extent of surgical resection (gross total resection or subtotal resection) affect recurrence? RECOMMENDATION: Level 3: Gross total resection is recommended over subtotal resection in recursive partitioning analysis class I patients to improve overall survival and prolong time to recurrence. The full guideline can be found at https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-treatment-adults-metastatic-brain-tumors/chapter_2.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) address all aspects of disease management. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for SCLC regarding immunotherapy, systemic therapy, and radiation therapy. For the 2018 update, new sections were added on "Signs and Symptoms of SCLC" and "Principles of Pathologic Review."

Quality assurance analysis of hippocampal avoidance in a melanoma whole brain radiotherapy randomized trial shows good compliance.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) often cause morbidity and mortality for stage IV melanoma patients. An ongoing randomised phase III trial (NCT01503827 - WBRT-Mel) evaluates the role of adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) following local treatment of MBM. Hippocampal avoidance during WBRT (HA-WBRT) has shown memory and neurocognitive function (NCF) preservation in the RTOG-0933 phase II study. This study assessed the quality assurance of HA-WBRT within the WBRT-Mel trial according to RTOG-0933 study criteria. METHODS: Hippocampal avoidance was allowed in approved centres with intensity-modulated radiotherapy capability. Patients treated by HA-WBRT were not randomized within the WBRT arm. The RTOG 0933 contouring Atlas was used to contour hippocampi. In the trial co-ordinating centre, patients were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy using complementary arcs; similar techniques were used at other sites. Dosimetric data were extracted retrospectively and analysed in accordance with RTOG 0933 study constraints criteria. RESULTS: Among the 215 patients accrued to the WBRT-Mel study between April 2009 and September 2017, 107 were randomized to the WBRT arm, 22 were treated by HA-WBRT in 4 centers. Eighteen patients were treated in the same centre. The median age was 65 years. The commonest (91%) HA-WBRT schema was 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Prior to HA-WBRT, 10 patients had been treated by surgery alone, six by radiosurgery alone, four by surgery and radiosurgery and two exclusively by simultaneous integrated boost concurrent to HA-WBRT. Twenty patients were treated with intention to spare both hippocampi and two patients had MBM close to one hippocampus and were treated with intention to spare the contralateral hippocampus. According to RTOG-0933 study criteria, 18 patients (82%) were treated within constraints and four patients (18%) had unacceptable deviation in just one hippocampus. CONCLUSIONS: This dosimetric quality assurance study shows good compliance (82%) according to RTOG-0933 study dosimetric constraints. Indeed, all patients respected RTOG hippocampal avoidance constraints on at least one hippocampus. In the futureanalysis of the WBRT-Mel trial, the NCF of patients on the observation arm, WBRT arm and with HA-WBRT arm will be compared.

Optimal radiotherapy target volumes in intracranial nongerminomatous germ cell tumors: Long-term institutional experience with chemotherapy, surgery, and dose- and field-adapted radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate patterns of failure after multimodality treatment of nongerminomatous germ cell tumors (NGGCTs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of 34 patients diagnosed with primary intracranial NGGCT between 1988 and 2014. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients received induction chemotherapy followed by radiation with or without surgery. Median follow-up was 11.1 years (0.8-23.3). Outcomes were significantly improved in these 34 patients (5-year overall survival [OS]: 88% versus 50%, P = 0.0092), so analysis is restricted to that subset. Disease-free survival (DFS) was 67, 60, and 54% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. Elevated cerebrospinal fluid-α-fetoprotein (CSF-AFP) at diagnosis was associated with poorer DFS (37 vs. 89% at 10 years; P = 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in OS, or DFS, or patterns of failure for limited radiotherapy volumes versus larger volumes; however, patients receiving initial local radiotherapy had 32% distant central nervous system (CNS) recurrence at 10 years compared to 0% for those receiving initial larger field irradiation (P = 0.09). Fifteen patients recurred. All four patients who relapsed in the spine had received local radiotherapy and had elevated serum and CSF-AFP at baseline. All three patients with ventricular relapse received local radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: NGGCT patients continue to relapse beyond 5 years. Late ventricular relapse occurred even in patients without clear evidence of germinoma component. Elevated CSF-AFP at diagnosis is associated with poor DFS and risk for distant CNS relapse. Patients with residual radiographic disease after chemotherapy or residual malignant histologies after second-look surgery have inferior outcomes. Our data support consideration of treatment intensification for these patients.

Radiation Therapy for Glioblastoma: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Guideline.

Purpose The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) produced an evidence-based guideline on radiation therapy for glioblastoma. Because of its relevance to the ASCO membership, ASCO reviewed the guideline and applied a set of procedures and policies used to critically examine guidelines developed by other organizations. Methods The ASTRO guideline on radiation therapy for glioblastoma was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO endorsement panel updated the literature search and reviewed the content and recommendations. Results The ASCO endorsement panel determined that the recommendations from the ASTRO guideline, published in 2016, are clear, thorough, and based on current scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the ASTRO guideline on radiation therapy for glioblastoma and added qualifying statements. Recommendations Partial-brain fractionated radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide is the standard of care after biopsy or resection of newly diagnosed glioblastoma in patients up to 70 years of age. Hypofractionated radiotherapy for elderly patients with fair to good performance status is appropriate. The addition of concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide to hypofractionated radiotherapy seems to be safe and efficacious without impairing quality of life for elderly patients with good performance status. Reasonable options for patients with poor performance status include hypofractionated radiotherapy alone, temozolomide alone, or best supportive care. Focal reirradiation represents an option for select patients with recurrent glioblastoma, although this is not supported by prospective randomized evidence. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/glioblastoma-radiotherapy-endorsement and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

[Radiotherapy for paediatric cancers]. / Radiothérapie des cancers de l'enfant.

The purpose of this article is to describe the specificities of paediatric radiation oncology: cancer types, radiotherapy indications, techniques, organisation and reglementary framework.

[Radiotherapy for brain metastases]. / Radiothérapie des métastases cérébrales.

Radiotherapy for brain metastases has become more multifaceted. Indeed, with the improvement of the patient's life expectancy, side effects must be undeniably avoided and the retreatments or multiple treatments are common. The cognitive side effects should be warned and the most modern techniques of radiation therapy are used regularly to reach this goal. The new classifications of patients with brain metastases help guiding treatment more appropriately. Stereotactic radiotherapy has supplanted whole brain radiation therapy both for patients with metastases in place and for those who underwent surgery. Hippocampus protection is possible with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Its relevance in terms of cognitive functioning should be more clearly demonstrated but the requirement, for using it, is increasingly strong. While addressing patients in palliative phase, the treatment of brain metastases is one of the localisations where technical thinking is the most challenging.

[Radiotherapy of benign intracranial tumors]. / Radiothérapie des tumeurs intracrâniennes bénignes.

Most of the benign intracranial tumors are meningiomas, vestibular schwannomas, pituitary adenomas, craniopharyngiomas, and glomus tumors. Some of them grow very slowly, and can be observed without specific treatment, especially if they are asymptomatic. Symptomatic or growing tumors are treated by surgery, which is the reference treatment. When surgery is not possible, due to the location of the lesion, or general conditions, radiotherapy can be applied, as it is if there is a postoperative growing residual tumor, or a local relapse. Indications have to be discussed in polydisciplinary meetings, with precise evaluation of the benefit and risks of the treatments. The techniques to be used are the most modern ones, as multimodal imaging and image-guided radiation therapy. Stereotactic treatments, using fractionated or single doses depending on the size or the location of the tumors, are commonly realized, to avoid as much a possible the occurrence of late side effects.

[Guidelines for the radiotherapy of gliomas]. / Référentiels d'irradiation des gliomes.

Gliomas are the most frequent primary brain tumours. Treating these tumours is difficult because of the proximity of organs at risk, infiltrating nature, and radioresistance. Clinical prognostic factors such as age, Karnofsky performance status, tumour location, and treatments such as surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy have long been recognized in the management of patients with gliomas. Molecular biomarkers are increasingly evolving as additional factors that facilitate diagnosis and therapeutic decision-making. These practice guidelines aim at helping in choosing the best treatment, in particular radiation therapy.

Real-time pretreatment review limits unacceptable deviations on a cooperative group radiation therapy technique trial: quality assurance results of RTOG 0933.

PURPOSE: RTOG 0933 was a phase II trial of hippocampal avoidance during whole brain radiation therapy for patients with brain metastases. The results demonstrated improvement in short-term memory decline, as compared with historical control individuals, and preservation of quality of life. Integral to the conduct of this trial were quality assurance processes inclusive of pre-enrollment credentialing and pretreatment centralized review of enrolled patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Before enrolling patients, all treating physicians and sites were required to successfully complete a "dry-run" credentialing test. The treating physicians were credentialed based on accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging-computed tomography image fusion and hippocampal and normal tissue contouring, and the sites were credentialed based on protocol-specified dosimetric criteria. Using the same criteria, pretreatment centralized review of enrolled patients was conducted. Physicians enrolling 3 consecutive patients without unacceptable deviations were permitted to enroll further patients without pretreatment review, although their cases were reviewed after treatment. RESULTS: In all, 113 physicians and 84 sites were credentialed. Eight physicians (6.8%) failed hippocampal contouring on the first attempt; 3 were approved on the second attempt. Eight sites (9.5%) failed intensity modulated radiation therapy planning on the first attempt; all were approved on the second attempt. One hundred thirteen patients were enrolled in RTOG 0933; 100 were analyzable. Eighty-seven cases were reviewed before treatment; 5 (5.7%) violated the eligibility criteria, and 21 (24%) had unacceptable deviations. With feedback, 18 cases were approved on the second attempt and 2 cases on the third attempt. One patient was treated off protocol. Twenty-two cases were reviewed after treatment; 1 (4.5%) violated the eligibility criteria, and 5 (23%) had unacceptable deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Although >95% of the cases passed the pre-enrollment credentialing, the pretreatment centralized review disqualified 5.7% of reviewed cases, prevented unacceptable deviations in 24% of reviewed cases, and limited the final unacceptable deviation rate to 5%. Thus, pretreatment review is deemed necessary in future hippocampal avoidance trials and is potentially useful in other similarly challenging radiation therapy technique trials.

From whole brain to hospice: patterns of care in radiation oncology.

OBJECTIVES: The development of brain metastases is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. Limited life expectancy is well established once a patient requires whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). There is emerging evidence demonstrating the value of involving palliative care services alongside traditional treatments. However, data regarding the utilization of these services in patients requiring WBRT remain unexplored. METHODS: Patients with histologic or radiographic evidence of brain metastases treated with WBRT alone between July 2010 and June 2012 were reviewed retrospectively. Patient demographics, the number of hospital admissions in the last 6 months of life, survival, and referrals to palliative care services were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were diagnosed with brain metastases and treated with WBRT alone. The median overall survival following WBRT was 80 days. Twenty-eight of the patients presented to the emergency department ≥2 times in the last 6 months of life. Sixty-eight percent of patients were referred to palliative care. Of those referrals, 57% were during an inpatient hospitalization. The median survival from palliative care referral to death was 27 days. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with brain metastasis requiring WBRT have a predictable dying trajectory. These patients are likely to have a high symptom burden and would benefit from palliative care. Timely palliative care referrals in this population remain inadequate and classically follow a hospital admission. Referrals continued to be late in the dying process and the recommendation for WBRT can be used as an independent marker for initiating end-of-life discussions and involving palliative care.

Range modulation in proton therapy planning: a simple method for mitigating effects of increased relative biological effectiveness at the end-of-range of clinical proton beams.

BACKGROUND: The increase in relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of proton beams at the distal edge of the spread out Bragg peak (SOBP) is a well-known phenomenon that is difficult to quantify accurately in vivo. For purposes of treatment planning, disallowing the distal SOBP to fall within vulnerable tissues hampers sparing to the extent possible with proton beam therapy (PBT). We propose the distal RBE uncertainty may be straightforwardly mitigated with a technique we call "range modulation". With range modulation, the distal falloff is smeared, reducing both the dose and average RBE over the terminal few millimeters of the SOBP. METHODS: One patient plan was selected to serve as an example for direct comparison of image-guided radiotherapy plans using non-range modulation PBT (NRMPBT), and range-modulation PBT (RMPBT). An additional plan using RMPBT was created to represent a re-treatment scenario (RMPBTrt) using a vertex beam. Planning statistics regarding dose, volume of the planning targets, and color images of the plans are shown. RESULTS: The three plans generated for this patient reveal that in all cases dosimetric and device manufacturing advantages are able to be achieved using RMPBT. Organ at risk (OAR) doses to critical structures such as the cochleae, optic apparatus, hypothalamus, and temporal lobes can be selectively spared using this method. Concerns about the location of the RBE that did significantly impact beam selection and treatment planning no longer have the same impact on the process, allowing these structures to be spared dose and subsequent associated issues. CONCLUSIONS: This present study has illustrated that RMPBT can improve OAR sparing while giving equivalent coverage to target volumes relative to traditional PBT methods while avoiding the increased RBE at the end of the beam. It has proven easy to design and implement and robust in our planning process. The method underscores the need to optimize treatment plans in PBT for both traditional energy dose in gray (Gy) and biologic dose (RBE).

Helical tomotherapy for whole-brain irradiation with integrated boost to multiple brain metastases: evaluation of dose distribution characteristics and comparison with alternative techniques.

PURPOSE: To quantitatively evaluate dose distribution characteristics achieved with helical tomotherapy (HT) for whole-brain irradiation (WBRT) with integrated boost (IB) to multiple brain metastases in comparison with alternative techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Dose distributions for 23 patients with 81 metastases treated with WBRT (30 Gy/10 fractions) and IB (50 Gy) were analyzed. The median number of metastases per patient (N(mets)) was 3 (range, 2-8). Mean values of the composite planning target volume of all metastases per patient (PTV(mets)) and of the individual metastasis planning target volume (PTV(ind met)) were 8.7 ± 8.9 cm(3) (range, 1.3-35.5 cm(3)) and 2.5 ± 4.5 cm(3) (range, 0.19-24.7 cm(3)), respectively. Dose distributions in PTV(mets) and PTV(ind met) were evaluated with respect to dose conformity (conformation number [CN], RTOG conformity index [PITV]), target coverage (TC), and homogeneity (homogeneity index [HI], ratio of maximum dose to prescription dose [MDPD]). The dependence of dose conformity on target size and N(mets) was investigated. The dose distribution characteristics were benchmarked against alternative irradiation techniques identified in a systematic literature review. RESULTS: Mean ± standard deviation of dose distribution characteristics derived for PTV(mets) amounted to CN = 0.790 ± 0.101, PITV = 1.161 ± 0.154, TC = 0.95 ± 0.01, HI = 0.142 ± 0.022, and MDPD = 1.147 ± 0.029, respectively, demonstrating high dose conformity with acceptable homogeneity. Corresponding numbers for PTV(ind met) were CN = 0.708 ± 0.128, PITV = 1.174 ± 0.237, TC = 0.90 ± 0.10, HI = 0.140 ± 0.027, and MDPD = 1.129 ± 0.030, respectively. The target size had a statistically significant influence on dose conformity to PTV(mets) (CN = 0.737 for PTV(mets) ≤4.32 cm(3) vs CN = 0.848 for PTV(mets) >4.32 cm(3), P=.006), in contrast to N(mets). The achieved dose conformity to PTV(mets), assessed by both CN and PITV, was in all investigated volume strata well within the best quartile of the values reported for alternative irradiation techniques. CONCLUSIONS: HT is a well-suited technique to deliver WBRT with IB to multiple brain metastases, yielding high-quality dose distributions. A multi-institutional prospective randomized phase 2 clinical trial to exploit efficacy and safety of the treatment concept is currently under way.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria: single brain metastasis.

Single brain metastasis represents a common neurologic complication of cancer. Given the number of treatment options that are available for patients with brain metastasis and the strong opinions that are associated with each option, appropriate treatment for these patients has become controversial. Prognostic factors such as recursive partitioning analysis and graded prognostic assessment can help guide treatment decisions. Surgery, whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), stereotactic radiosurgery or combination of these treatments can be considered based on a number of factors. Despite Class I evidence suggestive of best therapy, the treatment recommendation is quite varied among physicians as demonstrated by the American College of Radiology's Appropriateness Panel on single brain metastasis. Given the potential concerns of the neurocognitive effects of WBRT, the use of SRS alone or SRS to a resection cavity has gained support. Since aggressive local therapy is beneficial for survival, local control and quality of life, the use of these various treatment modalities needs to be carefully investigated given the growing number of long-term survivors. Enrollment of patients onto clinical trials is important to advance our understanding of brain metastasis.