RESUMO
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess if multicriteria optimization could limit interoperator variability in radiation therapy planning and assess if this method could contribute to target volume coverage and sparing of organ at risk for intensity-modulated curative radiation therapy of head and neck cancers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on 20 patients treated for an oropharyngeal or oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. We carried out a comparative dosimetric study of manual plans produced with Precision® software, compared with the plans proposed using the multicriteria optimization method (RayStation®). We assessed interoperator reproducibility on the first six patients, and dosimetric contribution in sparing organs at risk using the multicriteria optimization method. RESULTS: Median age was 69 years, most lesions were oropharyngeal carcinoma (65%), and 35% lesions were stage T3. First, we obtained a high degree of similarity between the four operator measurements for each patient at the level of each organ. Intraclass correlation coefficients were greater than 0.85. Second, we observed a significant dosimetric benefit for contralateral parotid gland, homolateral and contralateral masseter muscles, homolateral and contralateral pterygoid muscles and for the larynx (P<0.05). For the contralateral parotid gland, the mean dose difference between the multicriteria optimization and manual plans was -2.0Gy (P=0.01). Regarding the larynx, the mean dose difference between the two plans was -4.6Gy (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Multicriteria optimization is a reproducible technique and faster than manual optimization. It allows dosimetric advantages on organs at risk, especially for those not usually taken into consideration in manual dosimetry. This may lead to improved quality of life.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Osteosarcoma stratification relies on clinical parameters and histological response. We developed a new personalized stratification using less invasive circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) quantification. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma from patients homogeneously treated in the prospective protocol OS2006, at diagnosis, before surgery and end of treatment, were sequenced using low-passage whole-genome sequencing (lpWGS) for copy number alteration detection. We developed a prediction tool including ctDNA quantification and known clinical parameters to estimate patients' individual risk of event. RESULTS: ctDNA quantification at diagnosis (diagCPA) was evaluated for 183 patients of the protocol OS2006. diagCPA as a continuous variable was a major prognostic factor, independent of other clinical parameters, including metastatic status [diagCPA hazard ratio (HR) = 3.5, P = 0.002 and 3.51, P = 0.012, for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)]. At the time of surgery and until the end of treatment, diagCPA was also a major prognostic factor independent of histological response (diagCPA HR = 9.2, P < 0.001 and 11.6, P < 0.001, for PFS and OS). Therefore, the addition of diagCPA to metastatic status at diagnosis or poor histological response after surgery improved the prognostic stratification of patients with osteosarcoma. We developed the prediction tool PRONOS to generate individual risk estimations, showing great performance ctDNA quantification at the time of surgery and the end of treatment still required improvement to overcome the low sensitivity of lpWGS and to enable the follow-up of disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of ctDNA quantification to known risk factors improves the estimation of prognosis calculated by our prediction tool PRONOS. To confirm its value, an external validation in the Sarcoma 13 trial is underway.