Dose-response modeling and treatment plan assessment with a python software toolkit.

This software assistant aims at calculating the dose-response relations of tumors and normal tissues, or clinically assessing already determined values by other researchers. It can also indicate the optimal dose prescription by optimizing the expected treatment outcome. The software is developed solely in python programming language, and it employs PSFL license for its Graphical User Interface (GUI), NUMPY, MATPLOTLIB, and SCIPY libraries. It comprises of two components. The first is the Dose-response relations derivation component, which takes as input the dose volume histograms (DVHs) of patients and their recorded responses regarding a given clinical endpoint to determine the parameters of different tumor control probability (TCP) or normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models. The second is the Treatment Plan Assessment component, which uses the DVHs of a plan and the dose-response parameters values of the involved tumors and organs at risk (OARs) to calculate their expected responses. Additionally, the overall probabilities of benefit (PB), injury (PI) and complication-free tumor control (P+) are calculated. The software calculates rapidly the corresponding generalized equivalent uniform doses (gEUD) and biologically effective uniform doses (D‾‾) for the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB), parallel volume (PV) and relative seriality (RS) models respectively, determining the model parameters. In the Dose-Response Relations Derivation component, the software plots the dose-response curves of the irradiated organ with the relevant confidence internals along with the data of the patients with and without toxicity. It also calculates the odds ratio (OR) and the area under the curve (AUC) of different dose metrics or model parameter values against the individual patient outcomes to determine their discrimination capacity. It also performs a goodness-of-fit evaluation of any model parameter set. The user has the option of viewing plots like Scatter, 3D surfaces, and Bootstrap plots. In the Treatment Plan Assessment part, the software calculates the TCP and NTCP values of the involved tumors and OARs, respectively. Furthermore, it plots the dose-response curves of the TCPs, NTCPs, PB, PI, and P+ for a range of prescription doses for different treatment plans. The presented software is ideal for efficiently conducting studies of radiobiological modeling. Furthermore, it is ideal for performing treatment plan assessment, comparison, and optimization studies.

NTCP Modeling and Dose-Volume Correlations of Significant Hematocrit Drop 3 Months After Prostate Radiation Therapy.

Purpose: Our purpose was to determine and model the dose-response relations of different parts of the pelvis regarding the endpoint of hematocrit level drop after pelvic radiation therapy (RT). Methods and Materials: Two hundred and twenty-one patients treated with RT for prostate adenocarcinoma between 2014 and 2016 were included. All patients had complete blood counts collected at baseline and 3 months post-RT. The net difference of hematocrit level post-RT versus baseline was calculated, and the level of the 15th percentiles defined the thresholds of response in each case. The doses to 8 different pelvic structures were derived and fitted to the hematocrit levels using the relative seriality normal tissue complication probability model and the biologically equivalent uniform dose (D=). Results: Pelvic structures that correlated with significant decreases in hematocrit were the os coxae bilaterally superior to the acetabulum (OCUB), the total os coxae bilaterally, and the bone volume of the whole pelvis. The structure showing the highest correlation was OCUB with a maximum area under the curve (AUC) of 0.74. For V20 Gy < 30% the odds ratio was 9.8 with 95% CI of 2.9 to 32.9. For mean dose (Dmean) to OCUB, an AUC of 0.73 was observed where the dose threshold was 23 Gy and the odds ratio was 2.7 and 95% CI 1.3 to 5.6. The values for the D50, γ, and s parameters of the relative seriality model were 26.9 Gy (25.9-27.9), 1.3 (1.2-2.2), and 0.12 (0.10-0.83), respectively. The AUC of D= was 0.73 and patients with D= to OCUB ≥ 27 Gy had 8.2 times higher rate of significant hematocrit drop versus <27 Gy. Conclusions: These findings confirm the association of radiation-induced damage to pelvic bone marrow with a drop in hematocrit. A threshold of V20 Gy < 30%, Dmean < 23 Gy, or D= < 27 Gy to OCUB may significantly reduce the risk for this endpoint.

Hypofractionated Stereotactic Radiation Therapy Dosimetric Tolerances for the Inferior Aspect of the Brachial Plexus: A Systematic Review.

We sought to systematically review and summarize dosimetric factors associated with radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) or hypofractionated image guided radiation therapy (HIGRT). From published studies identified from searches of PubMed and Embase databases, data quantifying risks of RIBP after 1- to 10-fraction SBRT/HIGRT were extracted and summarized. Published studies have reported <10% risks of RIBP with maximum doses (Dmax) to the inferior aspect of the brachial plexus of 32 Gy in 5 fractions and 25 Gy in 3 fractions. For 10-fraction HIGRT, risks of RIBP appear to be low with Dmax < 40 to 50 Gy. For a given dose value, greater risks are anticipated with point volume-based metrics (ie, D0.03-0.035cc: minimum dose to hottest 0.03-0.035 cc) versus Dmax. With SBRT/HIGRT, there were insufficient published data to predict risks of RIBP relative to brachial plexus dose-volume exposure. Minimizing maximum doses and possibly volume exposure of the brachial plexus can reduce risks of RIBP after SBRT/HIGRT. Further study is needed to better understand the effect of volume exposure on the brachial plexus and whether there are location-specific susceptibilities along or within the brachial plexus structure.

Comparison Between EPI DWI and PROPELLER DWI in Brain MR Imaging.

OBJECTIVE: EPI DWI is a routinely used sequence in brain imaging but it has limitations when it comes to SNR and artifact reduction. PROPELLER DWI has the benefit of improving image quality compared to EPI DWI. The aim of this study is to compare the EPI DWI sequence in brain MR imaging with the PROPELLER DWI sequence. The objective is to identify which sequence is more beneficial in brain imaging by evaluating image quality and the depiction of pathologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 101 patients (55 females and 46 males, mean age 56 years) underwent brain MRI examination on a 1.5 T scanner. EPI DWI and PROPELLER DWI sequences were acquired in every exam and were reviewed by 2 radiologists. The images were evaluated by performing a quantitative analysis based on Relative Contrast and a qualitative analysis (overall image quality, conspicuousness of lesions, artifact reduction, etc.). RESULTS: In both the qualitative and quantitative analysis PROPELLER DWI achieved better results than EPI DWI. PROPELLER DWI showed statistical significance in the overall image quality (P < 0.001), the elimination of susceptibility (P < 0.001) and flow pulsation artifacts (P < 0.001), as well as in the contrast between CSF with white (P < 0.001) and grey matter (P < 0.001). Also, PROPELLER DWI presented better delineation of pathologies like ischemic strokes, metastasis, tumors and vasogenic edemas than conventional EPI DWI. CONCLUSION: PROPELLER DWI was the preferred sequence during the image evaluation. Compared to EPI DWI, PROPELLER DWI managed to reduce susceptibility and flow pulsation whilst achieving higher image quality and lesion delineation and earlier depiction of ischemic strokes than the conventional EPI DWI. PROPELLER DWI may be incorporated in brain MR imaging replacing EPI DWI.

NTCP modelling of xerostomia after radiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer using the PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE scoring systems at different time-points post-RT.

PURPOSE: This study aims at determining the parameter values of three normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models for the contralateral parotid gland, contralateral submandibular gland (SMG) and contralateral salivary glands regarding the endpoint of xerostomia 6-24 months after radiotherapy for oropharynx cancer. METHODS: The treatment and outcome data of 231 patients with favorable risk, HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma are analyzed. 60 Gy intensity modulated radiotherapy was delivered to all the patients. The presence and severity of xerostomia was recorded (pre- and post- radiotherapy) by the PRO-CTCAE and the CTCAE scoring systems. In both scoring systems, patients with a change in symptom severity (from baseline) of ≥ 2 were considered responders. RESULTS: Xerostomia was observed in 61.3 %, 39.2 %, 28.6 % and 27.0 % of the patients based on the PRO-CTCAE scoring system at 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-months post-RT, respectively. The AUCs of the contralateral salivary glands ranged between 0.58-0.64 in the LKB model with the gEUD ranging between 20.3 Gy and 24.7 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the PRO-CTCAE scores, mean dose < 22 Gy, V50 < 10 % for the contralateral salivary glands and mean dose < 18 Gy, V45 < 10 % for the contralateral parotid were found to significantly reduce by a factor of 2-3 the risk for radiation induced xerostomia that is observed at 6-24 months post-RT, respectively. Also, gEUD < 22 Gy to the contralateral salivary glands and < 18 Gy to the contralateral parotid was found to significantly reduce the risk for radiation induced xerostomia that is observed at 6-24 months post-RT by 2.0-2.3 times.

Radiation-induced inferior brachial plexopathy after stereotactic body radiotherapy: Pooled analyses of risks.

INTRODUCTION: Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP), resulting in symptomatic motor or sensory deficits of the upper extremity, is a risk after exposure of the brachial plexus to therapeutic doses of radiation. We sought to model dosimetric factors associated with risks of RIBP after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). METHODS: From a prior systematic review, 4 studies were identified that included individual patient data amenable to normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) modelling after SBRT for apical lung tumors. Two probit NTCP models were derived: one from 4 studies (including 221 patients with 229 targets and 18 events); and another from 3 studies (including 185 patients with 192 targets and 11 events) that similarly contoured the brachial plexus. RESULTS: NTCP models suggest ≈10% risks associated with brachial plexus maximum dose (Dmax) of ∼32-34 Gy in 3 fractions and ∼40-43 Gy in 5 fractions. RIBP risks increase with increasing brachial plexus Dmax. Compared to previously published data from conventionally-fractionated or moderately-hypofractionated radiotherapy for breast, lung and head and neck cancers (which tend to utilize radiation fields that circumferentially irradiate the brachial plexus), SBRT (characterized by steep dose gradients outside of the target volume) exhibits a much less steep dose-response with brachial plexus Dmax > 90-100 Gy in 2-Gy equivalents. CONCLUSIONS: A dose-response for risk of RIBP after SBRT is observed relative to brachial plexus Dmax. Comparisons to data from less conformal radiotherapy suggests potential dose-volume dependences of RIBP risks, though published data were not amenable to NTCP modelling of dose-volume measures associated with RIBP after SBRT.

Evaluation of the clinical impact of the differences between planned and delivered dose in prostate cancer radiotherapy based on CT-on-rails IGRT and patient-reported outcome scores.

PURPOSE: To estimate the clinical impact of differences between delivered and planned dose using dose metrics and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) modeling. METHODS: Forty-six consecutive patients with prostate adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2015 treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and who had undergone computed tomography on rails imaging were included. Delivered doses to bladder and rectum were estimated using a contour-based deformable image registration method. The bladder and rectum NTCP were calculated using dose-response parameters applied to planned and delivered dose distributions. Seven urinary and gastrointestinal symptoms were prospectively collected using the validated prostate cancer symptom indices patient reported outcome (PRO) at pre-treatment, weekly treatment, and post-treatment follow-up visits. Correlations between planned and delivered doses against PRO were evaluated in this study. RESULTS: Planned mean doses to bladder and rectum were 44.9 ± 13.6 Gy and 42.8 ± 7.3 Gy, while delivered doses were 46.1 ± 13.4 Gy and 41.3 ± 8.7 Gy, respectively. D10cc for rectum was 64.1 ± 7.6 Gy for planned and 60.1 ± 9.3 Gy for delivered doses. NTCP values of treatment plan were 22.3% ± 8.4% and 12.6% ± 5.9%, while those for delivered doses were 23.2% ± 8.4% and 9.9% ± 8.3% for bladder and rectum, respectively. Seven of 25 patients with follow-up data showed urinary complications (28%) and three had rectal complications (12%). Correlations of NTCP values of planned and delivered doses with PRO follow-up data were random for bladder and moderate for rectum (0.68 and 0.67, respectively). CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of bladder to clinical variations of dose accumulation indicates that an automated solution based on a DIR that considers inter-fractional organ deformation could recommend intervention. This is intended to achieve additional rectum sparing in cases that indicate higher than expected dose accumulation early during patient treatment in order to prevent acute severity of bowel symptoms.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy optimization to reduce the risk of carotid blowout syndrome using normal tissue complication probability objectives.

PURPOSE: To determine the possibility of further improving clinical stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans using normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) objectives in order to minimize the risk for carotid blowout syndrome (CBOS). METHODS: 10 patients with inoperable locally recurrent head and neck cancer, who underwent SBRT using CyberKnife were analyzed. For each patient, three treatment plans were examined: (1) cone-based without delineation of the ipsilateral internal carotid (clinical plan used to treat the patients); (2) cone-based with the carotid retrospectively delineated and spared; and (3) Iris-based with carotid sparing. The dose-volume histograms of the target and primary organs at risk were calculated. The three sets of plans were compared based on dosimetric and TCP/NTCP (tumor control and normal tissue complication probabilities) metrics. For the NTCP values of carotid, the relative seriality model was used with the following parameters: D50 = 40 Gy, γ = 0.75, and s = 1.0. RESULTS: Across the 10 patient plans, the average TCP did not significantly change when the plans were re-optimized to spare the carotid. The estimated risk of CBOS was significantly decreased in the re-optimized plans, by 14.9% ± 7.4% for the cone-based plans and 17.7% ± 7.1% for the iris-based plans (p = 0.002 for both). The iris-based plans had significant (p = 0.02) reduced CBOS risk and delivery time (20.1% ± 7.4% time reduction, p = 0.002) compared to the cone-based plans. CONCLUSION: A significant improvement in the quality of the clinical plans could be achieved through the delineation of the internal carotids and the use of more modern treatment delivery modalities. In this way, for the same target coverage, a significant reduction in the risk of CBOS could be achieved. The range of risk reduction varied depending on the proximity of carotid artery to the target.

Coronary Artery Calcifications and Cardiac Risk After Radiation Therapy for Stage III Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Heart dose and heart disease increase the risk for cardiac toxicity associated with radiation therapy. We hypothesized that computed tomography (CT) coronary calcifications are associated with cardiac toxicity and may help ascertain baseline heart disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed the cumulative incidence of cardiac events in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer receiving median 74 Gy on prospective dose-escalation trials. Events were defined as symptomatic effusion, pericarditis, unstable angina, infarction, significant arrhythmia, and/or heart failure. Coronary calcifications were delineated on simulation CTs using radiation software program (130 HU threshold). Calcifications were defined as "none," "low," and "high," with median volume dividing low and high. RESULTS: Of 109 patients, 26 had cardiac events at median 26 months (range, 1-84 months) after radiation therapy. Median follow-up in surviving patients was 8.8 years (range, 2.3-17.3). On simulation CTs, 64 patients (59%) had coronary calcifications with median volume 0.2 cm3 (range, 0.01-8.3). Only 16 patients (15%) had baseline coronary artery disease. Cardiac events occurred in 7% (3 of 45), 29% (9 of 31), and 42% (14 of 33) of patients with no, low, and high calcifications, respectively. Calcification burden was associated with cardiac toxicity on univariate (low vs none: hazard ratio [HR] 5.0, P = .015; high vs none: HR 8.1, P < .001) and multivariate analyses (low vs none: HR 7.0, P = .005, high vs none: HR 10.6, P < .001, heart mean dose: HR 1.1/Gy, P < .001). Four-year competing risk-adjusted event rates for no, low, and high calcifications were 4%, 23%, and 34%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of coronary calcifications is a cardiac risk factor that can identify high-risk patients for medical referral and help guide clinicians before potentially cardiotoxic cancer treatments.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Apical Lung Tumors: Dosimetric Analysis of the Brachial Plexus and Preliminary Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Dosimetric constraints of the brachial plexus have not yet been well-established for patients undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). This study evaluated long-term experience with the treatment of early-stage apical lung tumors with SBRT and reports on dosimetric correlates of outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 2009 and 2018, a total of 78 consecutive patients with 81 apical lung tumors underwent SBRT for T1-3N0 non-small cell lung cancer. Apical tumors were those with tumor epicenter superior to the aortic arch. The brachial plexus (BP) was anatomically contoured according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group atlas. Patient medical records were reviewed retrospectively to determine incidence of brachial plexus injury (BPI) and a normal tissue complication probability model was applied to the dosimetric data. RESULTS: Five patients (6.4%) reported neuropathic symptoms consistent with BPI and occurred a median 11.9 months after treatment (range, 5.2-28.1 months). Most common dose and fractionation in those developing BPI were 50 Gy in 5 fractions (4 patients). Symptoms consisted of pain in 2 patients (40.0%), numbness in the hand or axilla in 4 patients (80.0%), and ipsilateral hand weakness in 1 patient (20.0%). In the overall cohort the median BP Dmax (EQD23 Gy) was 5.13 Gy (range, 0.18-217.2 Gy) and in patients with BPI the median BP Dmax (EQD23 Gy) was 32.14 Gy (range, 13.4-99.9 Gy). The normal tissue complication probability model gave good fit with an area under the curve of 0.75 (odds ratio, 7.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-68.3) for BP Dmax (EQD23 Gy) threshold of 20 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation exists in the dose delivered to the brachial plexus for patients treated by SBRT for apical lung tumors. The incidence of neuropathic symptoms in the post-SBRT setting was appreciable and prospective clinical correlation with dosimetric information should be used to develop evidence-based dose constraints.

NTCP modeling and dose-volume correlations for acute xerostomia and dry eye after whole brain radiation.

BACKGROUND: Whole brain radiation (WBRT) may lead to acute xerostomia and dry eye from incidental parotid and lacrimal exposure, respectively. We performed a prospective observational study to assess the incidence/severity of this toxicity. We herein perform a secondary analysis relating parotid and lacrimal dosimetric parameters to normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) rates and associated models. METHODS: Patients received WBRT to 25-40 Gy in 10-20 fractions using 3D-conformal radiation therapy without prospective delineation of the parotids or lacrimals. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline and 1 month post-WBRT. Xerostomia was assessed using the University of Michigan xerostomia score (scored 0-100, toxicity defined as ≥ 20 pt increase) and xerostomia bother score (scored from 0 to 3, toxicity defined as ≥ 2 pt increase). Dry eye was assessed using the Subjective Evaluation of Symptom of Dryness (SESoD, scored from 0 to 4, toxicity defined as ≥ 2 pt increase). The clinical data were fitted by the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) and Relative Seriality (RS) NTCP models. RESULTS: Of 55 evaluable patients, 19 (35%) had ≥ 20 point increase in xerostomia score, 11 (20%) had ≥ 2 point increase in xerostomia bother score, and 13 (24%) had ≥ 2 point increase in SESoD score. For xerostomia, parotid V10Gy-V20Gy correlated best with toxicity, with AUC 0.68 for xerostomia score and 0.69-0.71 for bother score. The values for the D50, m and n parameters of the LKB model were 22.3 Gy, 0.84 and 1.0 for xerostomia score and 28.4 Gy, 0.55 and 1.0 for bother score, respectively. The corresponding values for the D50, γ and s parameters of the RS model were 23.5 Gy, 0.28 and 0.0001 for xerostomia score and 32.0 Gy, 0.45 and 0.0001 for bother score, respectively. For dry eye, lacrimal V10Gy-V15Gy were found to correlate best with toxicity, with AUC values from 0.67 to 0.68. The parameter values of the LKB model were 53.5 Gy, 0.74 and 1.0, whereas of the RS model were 54.0 Gy, 0.37 and 0.0001, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Xerostomia was most associated with parotid V10Gy-V20Gy, and dry eye with lacrimal V10Gy-V15Gy. NTCP models were successfully created for both toxicities and may help clinicians refine dosimetric goals and assess levels of risk in patients receiving palliative WBRT.

Initial Data Pooling for Radiation Dose-Volume Tolerance for Carotid Artery Blowout and Other Bleeding Events in Hypofractionated Head and Neck Retreatments.

PURPOSE: Dose-volume data for injury to carotid artery and other major vessels in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)/SABR head and neck reirradiation were reviewed, modeled, and summarized. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A PubMed search of the English-language literature (stereotactic and carotid and radiation) in April 2018 found 238 major vessel maximum point doses in 6 articles that were pooled for logistic modeling. Two subsequent studies with dose-volume major vessel data were modeled separately for comparison. Attempts were made to separate carotid blowout syndrome from other bleeding events (BE) in the analysis, but we acknowledge that all except 1 data set has some element of BE interspersed. RESULTS: Prior radiation therapy (RT) dose was not uniformly reported per patient in the studies included, but a course on the order of conventionally fractionated 70 Gy was considered for the purposes of the analysis (with an approximately ≥6-month estimated interval between prior and subsequent treatment in most cases). Factors likely associated with reduced risk of BE include nonconsecutive daily treatment, lower extent of circumferential tumor involvement around the vessel, and no surgical manipulation before or after SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Initial data pooling for reirradiation involving the carotid artery resulted in 3 preliminary models compared in this Hypofractionated Treatment Effects in the Clinic (HyTEC) report. More recent experiences with alternating fractionation schedules and additional risk-reduction strategies are also presented. Complications data for the most critical structures such as spinal cord and carotid artery are so limited that they cannot be viewed as strong conclusions of probability of risk, but rather, as a general guideline for consideration. There is a great need for better reporting standards as noted in the High Dose per Fraction, Hypofractionated Treatment Effects in the Clinic introductory paper.

Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: An Overview of Toxicity and Dose Response.

PURPOSE: Ultrahypofractionationed radiation therapy for prostate cancer is increasingly studied and adopted. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Biological Effects of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy therefore aimed to review studies examining toxicity and quality of life after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer and model its effect. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a systematic PubMed search of prostate SBRT studies published between 2001 and 2018. Those that analyzed factors associated with late urinary, bowel, or sexual toxicity and/or quality of life were included and reviewed. Normal tissue complication probability modelling was performed on studies that contained detailed dose/volume and outcome data. RESULTS: We found 13 studies that examined urinary effects, 6 that examined bowel effects, and 4 that examined sexual effects. Most studies included patients with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer treated to 35-40 Gy. Most patients were treated with 5 fractions, with several centers using 4 fractions. Endpoints were heterogeneous and included both physician-scored toxicity and patient-reported quality of life. Most toxicities were mild-moderate (eg, grade 1-2) with a very low overall incidence of severe toxicity (eg, grade 3 or higher, usually <3%). Side effects were associated with both dosimetric and non-dosimetric factors. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate SBRT appears to be overall well tolerated, with determinants of toxicity that include dosimetric factors and patient factors. Suggested dose constraints include bladder V(Rx Dose)Gy <5-10 cc, urethra Dmax <38-42 Gy, and rectum Dmax <35-38 Gy, though current data do not offer firm guidance on tolerance doses. Several areas for future research are suggested.

Head and Neck Tumor Control Probability: Radiation Dose-Volume Effects in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Previously-Irradiated Head and Neck Cancer: Report of the AAPM Working Group.

PURPOSE: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a viable reirradiation strategy for locally recurrent previously-irradiated head and neck cancer. Doses in the literature have varied, which challenges clinical application of SBRT as well as clinical trial design. MATERIAL & METHODS: A working group was formed through the American Association of Physicists in Medicine to study tumor control probabilities for SBRT in head and neck cancer. We herein present a systematic review of the available literature addressing the dose/volume data for tumor control probability with SBRT in patients with locally recurrent previously-irradiated head and neck cancer. Dose-response models are generated that present tumor control probability as a function of dose. RESULTS: Data from more than 300 cases in 8 publications suggest that there is a dose-response relationship, with superior local control and possibly improved overall survival for doses of 35 to 45 Gy (in 5 fractions) compared with <30 Gy. CONCLUSION: Stereotactic body radiation therapy doses equivalent to 5-fraction doses of 40 to 50 Gy are suggested for retreatment.

Tumor Control Probability Modeling and Systematic Review of the Literature of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Dose escalation improves localized prostate cancer disease control, and moderately hypofractionated external beam radiation is noninferior to conventional fractionation. The evolving treatment approach of ultrahypofractionation with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) allows possible further biological dose escalation (biologically equivalent dose [BED]) and shortened treatment time. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Biological Effects of Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy/SBRT included a subgroup to study the prostate tumor control probability (TCP) with SBRT. We performed a systematic review of the available literature and created a dose-response TCP model for the endpoint of freedom from biochemical relapse. Results were stratified by prostate cancer risk group. RESULTS: Twenty-five published cohorts were identified for inclusion, with a total of 4821 patients (2235 with low-risk, 1894 with intermediate-risk, and 446 with high-risk disease, when reported) treated with a variety of dose/fractionation schemes, permitting dose-response modeling. Five studies had a median follow-up of more than 5 years. Dosing regimens ranged from 32 to 50 Gy in 4 to 5 fractions, with total BED (α/ß = 1.5 Gy) between 183.1 and 383.3 Gy. At 5 years, we found that in patients with low-intermediate risk disease, an equivalent doses of 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) of 71 Gy (31.7 Gy in 5 fractions) achieved a TCP of 90% and an EQD2 of 90 Gy (36.1 Gy in 5 fractions) achieved a TCP of 95%. In patients with high-risk disease, an EQD2 of 97 Gy (37.6 Gy in 5 fractions) can achieve a TCP of 90% and an EQD2 of 102 Gy (38.7 Gy in 5 fractions) can achieve a TCP of 95%. CONCLUSIONS: We found significant variation in the published literature on target delineation, margins used, dose/fractionation, and treatment schedule. Despite this variation, TCP was excellent. Most prescription doses range from 35 to 40 Gy, delivered in 4 to 5 fractions. The literature did not provide detailed dose-volume data, and our dosimetric analysis was constrained to prescription doses. There are many areas in need of continued research as SBRT continues to evolve as a treatment modality for prostate cancer, including the durability of local control with longer follow-up across risk groups, the efficacy and safety of SBRT as a boost to intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and the impact of incorporating novel imaging techniques into treatment planning.

Prostate cancer tumour control probability modelling for external beam radiotherapy based on multi-parametric MRI-GTV definition.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the applicability and estimate the radiobiological parameters of linear-quadratic Poisson tumour control probability (TCP) model for primary prostate cancer patients for two relevant target structures (prostate gland and GTV). The TCP describes the dose-response of prostate after definitive radiotherapy (RT). Also, to analyse and identify possible significant correlations between clinical and treatment factors such as planned dose to prostate gland, dose to GTV, volume of prostate and mpMRI-GTV based on multivariate logistic regression model. METHODS: The study included 129 intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients (cN0 and cM0), who were treated with image-guided intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) ± androgen deprivation therapy with a median follow-up period of 81.4 months (range 42.0-149.0) months. Tumour control was defined as biochemical relapse free survival according to the Phoenix definition (BRFS). MpMRI-GTV was delineated retrospectively based on a pre-treatment multi-parametric MR imaging (mpMRI), which was co-registered to the planning CT. The clinical treatment planning procedure was based on prostate gland, delineated on CT imaging modality. Furthermore, we also fitted the clinical data to TCP model for the two considered targets for the 5-year follow-up after radiation treatment, where our cohort was composed of a total number of 108 patients, of which 19 were biochemical relapse (BR) patients. RESULTS: For the median follow-up period of 81.4 months (range 42.0-149.0) months, our results indicated an appropriate α/ß = 1.3 Gy for prostate gland and α/ß = 2.9 Gy for mpMRI-GTV. Only for prostate gland, EQD2 and gEUD2Gy were significantly lower in the biochemical relapse (BR) group compared to the biochemical control (BC) group. Fitting results to the linear-quadratic Poisson TCP model for prostate gland and α/ß = 1.3 Gy were D50 = 66.8 Gy with 95% CI [64.6 Gy, 69.0 Gy], and γ = 3.8 with 95% CI [2.6, 5.2]. For mpMRI-GTV and α/ß = 2.9 Gy, D50 was 68.1 Gy with 95% CI [66.1 Gy, 70.0 Gy], and γ = 4.5 with 95% CI [3.0, 6.1]. Finally, for the 5-year follow-up after the radiation treatment, our results for the prostate gland were: D50 = 64.6 Gy [61.6 Gy, 67.4 Gy], γ = 3.1 [2.0, 4.4], α/ß = 2.2 Gy (95% CI was undefined). For the mpMRI-GTV, the optimizer was unable to deliver any reasonable results for the expected clinical D50 and α/ß. The results for the mpMRI-GTV were D50 = 50.1 Gy [44.6 Gy, 56.0 Gy], γ = 0.8 [0.5, 1.2], α/ß = 0.0 Gy (95% CI was undefined). For a follow-up time of 5 years and a fixed α/ß = 1.6 Gy, the TCP fitting results for prostate gland were D50 = 63.9 Gy [60.8 Gy, 67.0 Gy], γ = 2.9 [1.9, 4.1], and for mpMRI-GTV D50 = 56.3 Gy [51.6 Gy, 61.1 Gy], γ = 1.3 [0.8, 1.9]. CONCLUSION: The linear-quadratic Poisson TCP model was better fit when the prostate gland was considered as responsible target than with mpMRI-GTV. This is compatible with the results of the comparison of the dose distributions among BR and BC groups and with the results achieved with the multivariate logistic model regarding gEUD2Gy. Probably limitations of mpMRI in defining the GTV explain these results. Another explanation could be the relatively homogeneous dose prescription and the relatively low number of recurrences. The failure to identify any benefit for considering mpMRI-GTV as the target responsible for the clinical response is confirmed when considering a fixed α/ß = 1.6 Gy, a fixed follow-up time for biochemical response at 5 years or Gleason score differentiation.

Evaluation of a commercial DIR platform for contour propagation in prostate cancer patients treated with IMRT/VMAT.

PURPOSE: To assess the performance and limitations of contour propagation with three commercial deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms using fractional scans of CT-on-rails (CTOR) and Cone Beam CT (CBCT) in image guided prostate therapy patients treated with IMRT/VMAT. METHODS: Twenty prostate cancer patients treated with IMRT/VMAT were selected for analysis. A total of 453 fractions across those patients were analyzed. Image data were imported into MIM (MIM Software, Inc., Cleveland, OH) and three DIR algorithms (DIR Profile, normalized intensity-based (NIB) and shadowed NIB DIR algorithms) were applied to deformably register each fraction with the planning CT. Manually drawn contours of bladder and rectum were utilized for comparison against the DIR propagated contours in each fraction. Four metrics were utilized in the evaluation of contour similarity, the Hausdorff Distance (HD), Mean Distance to Agreement (MDA), Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), and Jaccard indices. A subfactor analysis was performed per modality (CTOR vs. CBCT) and time (fraction). Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals were assessed via a Linear Mixed Effect model for the contour similarity metrics. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between the DIR Profile and NIB algorithms. However, statistically significant differences were observed between the shadowed NIB and NIB algorithms for some of the DIR evaluation metrics. The Hausdorff Distance calculation showed the NIB propagated contours vs. shadowed NIB propagated contours against the manual contours were 14.82 mm vs. 8.34 mm for bladder and 15.87 mm vs. 11 mm for rectum, respectively. Similarly, the Mean Distance to Agreement calculation comparing the NIB propagated contours vs. shadowed NIB propagated contours against the manual contours were 2.43 mm vs. 0.98 mm for bladder and 2.57 mm vs. 1.00 mm for rectum, respectively. The Dice Similarity Coefficients comparing the NIB propagated contours and shadowed NIB propagated contours against the manual contours were 0.844 against 0.936 for bladder and 0.772 against 0.907 for rectum, respectively. The Jaccard indices comparing the NIB propagated contours and shadowed NIB propagated contours against the manual contours were 0.749 against 0.884 for bladder and 0.637 against 0.831 for rectum, respectively. The shadowed NIB DIR, which showed the closest agreement with the manual contours performed significantly better than the DIR Profile in all the comparisons. The OAR with the greatest agreement varied substantially across patients and image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) modality. Intra-patient variability of contour metric evaluation was insignificant across all the DIR algorithms. Statistical significance at α = 0.05 was observed for manual vs. deformably propagated contours for bladder for all the metrics except Hausdorff Distance (P = 0.01 for MDA, P = 0.02 for DSC, P = 0.01 for Jaccard), whereas the corresponding values for rectum were: P = 0.03 for HD, P = 0.01 for MDA, P < 0.01 for DSC, P < 0.01 for Jaccard. The performance of the different metrics varied slightly across the fractions of each patient, which indicates that weekly contour propagation models provide a reasonable approximation of the daily contour propagation models. CONCLUSION: The high variance of Hausdorff Distance across all automated methods for bladder indicates widely variable agreement across fractions for all patients. Lower variance across all modalities, methods, and metrics were observed for rectum. The shadowed NIB propagated contours were substantially more similar to the manual contours than the DIR Profile or NIB contours for both the CTOR and CBCT imaging modalities. The relationship of each algorithm to similarity with manual contours is consistent across all observed metrics and organs. Screening of image guidance for substantial differences in bladder and rectal filling compared with the planning CT reference could aid in identifying fractions for which automated DIR would prove insufficient.

Incorporating biological modeling into patient-specific plan verification.

PURPOSE: Dose-volume histogram (DVH) measurements have been integrated into commercially available quality assurance systems to provide a metric for evaluating accuracy of delivery in addition to gamma analysis. We hypothesize that tumor control probability and normal tissue complication probability calculations can provide additional insight beyond conventional dose delivery verification methods. METHODS: A commercial quality assurance system was used to generate DVHs of treatment plan using the planning CT images and patient-specific QA measurements on a phantom. Biological modeling was performed on the DVHs produced by both the treatment planning system and the quality assurance system. RESULTS: The complication-free tumor control probability, P+ , has been calculated for previously treated intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) patients with diseases in the following sites: brain (-3.9% ± 5.8%), head-neck (+4.8% ± 8.5%), lung (+7.8% ± 1.3%), pelvis (+7.1% ± 12.1%), and prostate (+0.5% ± 3.6%). CONCLUSION: Dose measurements on a phantom can be used for pretreatment estimation of tumor control and normal tissue complication probabilities. Results in this study show how biological modeling can be used to provide additional insight about accuracy of delivery during pretreatment verification.

Dose Calculation Comparisons between Three Modern Treatment Planning Systems.

PURPOSE: Monaco treatment planning system (TPS) version 5.1 uses a Monte-Carlo (MC)-based dose calculation engine. The aim of this study is to verify and compare the Monaco-based dose calculations with both Pinnacle3 collapsed cone convolution superposition (CCCS) and Eclipse anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) calculations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this study, 18 previously treated lung and head-and-neck (HN) cancer patients were chosen to compare the dose calculations between Pinnacle, Monaco, and Eclipse. Plans were chosen from those that had been treated using the Elekta VersaHD or a Novalis Tx linac. All of the treated volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans used 6 MV or 10 MV photon beams. The original plans calculated with CCCS or AAA along with the recalculated ones using MC from the three TPS were exported into Velocity software for intercomparison. RESULTS: To compare the dose calculations, Planning target volume (PTV) heterogeneity indexes and conformity indexes were calculated from the dose volume histograms (DVH) of all plans. While mean lung dose (MLD), lung V5 and V20 values were recorded for lung plans, the computed dose to parotids, brainstem, and mandible were documented for HN plans. In plan evaluation, percent differences of the above dosimetric values in Monaco computation were compared against each of the other TPS computations. CONCLUSION: It could be concluded through this research that there can be differences in the calculation of dose across different TPSs. Although relatively small, these differences could become apparent when compared using DVH. These differences most likely arise from the different dose calculation algorithms used in each TPS. Monaco employs the MC allowing it to have much more detailed calculations that result in it being seen as the most accurate and the gold standard.