Assessment of the Dosimetric Index from IMRT and Rapid arc Plan for Oropharyngeal Cancer with Simultaneous Integrated Boost (SIB) Technique in Combination with EUD-based NTCP and TCP Radiobiological Models.

PURPOSE: The current research compared radiobiological and dosimetric results for simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plans employing RapidArc and IMRT planning procedures in oropharyngeal cancer from head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The indigenously developed Python-based software was used in this study for generation and analysis. Twelve patients with forty-eight total plans with SIB were planned using Rapid arc (2 and 3 arcs) and IMRT (7 and 9 fields) and compared with radiobiological models Lyman, Kutcher, Burman (LKB) and EUD (Equivalent Uniform Dose) along with physical index such as homogeneity index(HI), conformity index(CI) of target volumes. RESULTS: These models' inputs are the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS). The values obtained vary from one model to the other for the same technique and patient. The maximum dose to the brainstem and spinal cord and the mean dose to the parotids were analysed both dosimetrically and radiobiologically, such as the LKB model effective volume, equivalent uniform dose, EUD-based normal tissue complication probability, and normal tissue integral dose. The mean and max dose to target volume with conformity, homogeneity index, tumor control probability compared with treatment times, and monitor units. CONCLUSION: Rapid arc (3 arcs) resulted in significantly better OAR sparing, dose homogeneity, and conformity. The findings indicate that the rapid arc plan has improved dose distribution in the target volume compared with IMRT, but the tumor control probability obtained for the two planning methods, Rapid arc (3 arcs) and IMRT (7 fields), are similar. The treatment time and monitor units for the Rapid arc (3 arcs) were superior to other planning methods and considered to be standard in head & neck radiotherapy.

Cost-effectiveness of intraoperative radiation therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy for the treatment of early breast cancer: a disinvestment analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant radiotherapy represents a key component in curative-intent treatment for early-stage breast cancer patients. In recent years, two accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) techniques are preferred for this population in our organization: electron-based Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) and Linac-based External Beam Radiotherapy, particularly Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Recently published long-term follow-up data evaluating these technologies have motivated a health technology reassessment of IORT compared to IMRT. METHODS: We developed a Markov model to simulate health-state transitions from a cohort of women with early-stage breast cancer, after lumpectomy and adjuvant APBI using either IORT or IMRT techniques. The cost-effectiveness from a private health provider perspective was assessed from a disinvestment point of view, using life-years (LYs) and recurrence-free life-years (RFLYs) as measure of benefits, along with their respective quality adjustments. Expected costs and benefits, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were reported. Finally, a sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness using lower IORT local recurrence and metastasis rates in IORT patients, and if equipment maintenance costs are removed. RESULTS: IORT technology was dominated by IMRT in all cases (i.e., fewer benefits with greater costs). Despite small differences were found regarding benefits, especially for LYs, costs were considerably higher for IORT. For sensitivity analyses with lower recurrence and metastasis rates for IORT, and scenario analyses without equipment maintenance costs, IORT was still dominated by IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: For this cohort of patients, IMRT was, at least, non-inferior to IORT in terms of expected benefits, with considerably lower costs. As a result, IORT disinvestment should be considered, favoring the use of IMRT in these patients.

Sensitivity and specificity of Monte Carlo based independent secondary dose computation for detecting modulation-related dose errors in intensity modulated radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The recent availability of Monte Carlo based independent secondary dose calculation (ISDC) for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) of modulated radiotherapy requires the definition of appropriate, more sensitive action levels, since contemporary recommendations were defined for less accurate ISDC dose algorithms. PURPOSE: The objective is to establish an optimum action level and measure the efficacy of a Monte Carlo ISDC software for pre-treatment QA of intensity modulated radiotherapy treatments. METHODS: The treatment planning system and the ISDC were commissioned by their vendors from independent base data sets, replicating a typical real-world scenario. In order to apply Receiver-Operator-Characteristics (ROC), a set of treatment plans for various case classes was created that consisted of 190 clinical treatment plans and 190 manipulated treatment plans with dose errors in the range of 1.5-2.5%. All 380 treatment plans were evaluated with ISDC in the patient geometry. ROC analysis was performed for a number of Gamma (dose-difference/distance-to-agreement) criteria. QA methods were ranked according to Area under the ROC curve (AUC) and optimum action levels were derived via Youden's J statistics. RESULTS: Overall, for original treatment plans, the mean Gamma pass rate (GPR) for Gamma(1%, 1 mm) was close to 90%, although with some variation across case classes. The best QA criterion was Gamma(2%, 1 mm) with GPR > 90% and an AUC of 0.928. Gamma criteria with small distance-to-agreement had consistently higher AUC. GPR of original treatment plans depended on their modulation degree. An action level in terms of Gamma(1%, 1 mm) GPR that decreases with modulation degree was the most efficient criterion with sensitivity = 0.91 and specificity = 0.95, compared with Gamma(3%, 3 mm) GPR > 99%, sensitivity = 0.73 and specificity = 0.91 as a commonly used action level. CONCLUSIONS: ISDC with Monte Carlo proves highly efficient to catch errors in the treatment planning process. For a Monte Carlo based TPS, dose-difference criteria of 2% or less, and distance-to-agreement criteria of 1 mm, achieve the largest AUC in ROC analysis.

Corrigendum: Comparison of 3DCRT and IMRT out-of-field doses in pediatric patients using Monte Carlo simulations with treatment planning system calculations and measurements.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.879167.].

Assessment of bladder filling during prostate cancer radiation therapy with ultrasound and cone-beam CT.

Prostate cancer patients undergoing external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) benefit from a full bladder to decrease bowel and bladder toxicity. Ultrasound may offer a proxy metric for evaluation, sparing CBCT dosing. Patients were prospectively enrolled pre-simulation from January 2017 to February 2018. Bladder volume was evaluated prior to RT using US daily and CBCT for three daily treatments and then weekly unless otherwise indicated. 29 patients completed median 40 days of RT, resulting in 478 CBCT and 1,099 US bladder volumes. 21 patients were treated to intact glands and 8 to the post-prostatectomy bed. Median patient age was 70 years. Bladder volume on CBCT and US positively correlated (r = 0.85), with average bladder volume for all patients of 162 mL versus 149 mL, respectively. Bladder volume during treatment was consistently lower than the volume at CT simulation (153 mL vs 194 mL, p<0.01) and progressively declined during treatment. Patients older than 70 years presented with lower average bladder volumes than those < 70 years (122 mL vs 208 mL, respectively, p<0.01). Patients with the highest agreement between CBCT and US (<10% variability) had higher average bladder volumes (192 mL vs 120 mL, p=0.01). US was found to be an accurate measure of bladder volume and may be used to monitor daily bladder volumes in patients being treated with radiation for prostate cancer.

Performance assessment of variant UNet-based deep-learning dose engines for MR-Linac-based prostate IMRT plans.

Objective. UNet-based deep-learning (DL) architectures are promising dose engines for traditional linear accelerator (Linac) models. Current UNet-based engines, however, were designed differently with various strategies, making it challenging to fairly compare the results from different studies. The objective of this study is to thoroughly evaluate the performance of UNet-based models on magnetic-resonance (MR)-Linac-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dose calculations.Approach. The UNet-based models, including the standard-UNet, cascaded-UNet, dense-dilated-UNet, residual-UNet, HD-UNet, and attention-aware-UNet, were implemented. The model input is patient CT and IMRT field dose in water, and the output is patient dose calculated by DL model. The reference dose was calculated by the Monaco Monte Carlo module. Twenty training and ten test cases of prostate patients were included. The accuracy of the DL-calculated doses was measured using gamma analysis, and the calculation efficiency was evaluated by inference time.Results. All the studied models effectively corrected low-accuracy doses in water to high-accuracy patient doses in a magnetic field. The gamma passing rates between reference and DL-calculated doses were over 86% (1%/1 mm), 98% (2%/2 mm), and 99% (3%/3 mm) for all the models. The inference times ranged from 0.03 (graphics processing unit) to 7.5 (central processing unit) seconds. Each model demonstrated different strengths in calculation accuracy and efficiency; Res-UNet achieved the highest accuracy, HD-UNet offered high accuracy with the fewest parameters but the longest inference, dense-dilated-UNet was consistently accurate regardless of model levels, standard-UNet had the shortest inference but relatively lower accuracy, and the others showed average performance. Therefore, the best-performing model would depend on the specific clinical needs and available computational resources.Significance. The feasibility of using common UNet-based models for MR-Linac-based dose calculations has been explored in this study. By using the same model input type, patient training data, and computing environment, a fair assessment of the models' performance was present.

Assessment of dosimetric impact of interfractional 6D setup error in tongue cancer treated with IMRT and VMAT using daily kV-CBCT.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the dosimetric influence of 6-dimensional (6D) interfractional setup error in tongue cancer treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using daily kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT). Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 20 tongue cancer patients treated with IMRT (10), VMAT (10), and daily kV-CBCT image guidance. Interfraction 6D setup errors along the lateral, longitudinal, vertical, pitch, roll, and yaw axes were evaluated for 600 CBCTs. Structures in the planning CT were deformed to the CBCT using deformable registration. For each fraction, a reference CBCT structure set with no rotation error was created. The treatment plan was recalculated on the CBCTs with the rotation error (RError), translation error (TError), and translation plus rotation error (T+RError). For targets and organs at risk (OARs), the dosimetric impacts of RError, TError, and T+RError were evaluated without and with moderate correction of setup errors. Results: The maximum dose variation ΔD (%) for D98% in clinical target volumes (CTV): CTV-60, CTV-54, planning target volumes (PTV): PTV-60, and PTV-54 was -1.2%, -1.9%, -12.0%, and -12.3%, respectively, in the T+RError without setup error correction. The maximum ΔD (%) for D98% in CTV-60, CTV-54, PTV-60, and PTV-54 was -1.0%, -1.7%, -9.2%, and -9.5%, respectively, in the T+RError with moderate setup error correction. The dosimetric impact of interfractional 6D setup errors was statistically significant (p < 0.05) for D98% in CTV-60, CTV-54, PTV-60, and PTV-54. Conclusions: The uncorrected interfractional 6D setup errors could significantly impact the delivered dose to targets and OARs in tongue cancer. That emphasized the importance of daily 6D setup error correction in IMRT and VMAT.

An independent Monte Carlo-based IMRT QA tool for a 0.35 T MRI-guided linear accelerator.

PURPOSE: To develop an independent log file-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA) tool for the 0.35 T magnetic resonance-linac (MR-linac) and investigate the ability of various IMRT plan complexity metrics to predict the QA results. Complexity metrics related to tissue heterogeneity were also introduced. METHODS: The tool for particle simulation (TOPAS) Monte Carlo code was utilized with a previously validated linac head model. A cohort of 29 treatment plans was selected for IMRT QA using the developed QA tool and the vendor-supplied adaptive QA (AQA) tool. For 27 independent patient cases, various IMRT plan complexity metrics were calculated to assess the deliverability of these plans. A correlation between the gamma pass rates (GPRs) from the AQA results and calculated IMRT complexity metrics was determined using the Pearson correlation coefficients. Tissue heterogeneity complexity metrics were calculated based on the gradient of the Hounsfield units. RESULTS: The median and interquartile range for the TOPAS GPRs (3%/3 mm criteria) were 97.24% and 3.75%, respectively, and were 99.54% and 0.36% for the AQA tool, respectively. The computational time for TOPAS ranged from 4 to 8 h to achieve a statistical uncertainty of <1.5%, whereas the AQA tool had an average calculation time of a few minutes. Of the 23 calculated IMRT plan complexity metrics, the AQA GPRs had correlations with 7 out of 23 of the calculated metrics. Strong correlations (|r| > 0.7) were found between the GPRs and the heterogeneity complexity metrics introduced in this work. CONCLUSIONS: An independent MC and log file-based IMRT QA tool was successfully developed and can be clinically deployed for offline QA. The complexity metrics will supplement QA reports and provide information regarding plan complexity.

Treatment planning with a 2.5 MV photon beam for radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: The shallow depth of maximum dose and higher dose fall-off gradient of a 2.5 MV beam along the central axis that is available for imaging on linear accelerators is investigated for treatment of shallow tumors and sparing the organs at risk (OARs) beyond it. In addition, the 2.5 MV beam has an energy bridging the gap between kilo-voltage (kV) and mega-voltage (MV) beams for applications of dose enhancement with high atomic number (Z) nanoparticles. METHODS: We have commissioned and utilized a MATLAB-based, open-source treatment planning software (TPS), matRad, for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dose calculations. Treatment plans for prostate, liver, and head and neck (H&N), nasal cavity, two orbit cases, and glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) were performed and compared to a conventional 6 MV beam. Additional Monte Carlo calculations were also used for benchmarking the central axis dose. RESULTS: Both beams had similar planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage for all cases. However, the 2.5 MV beam deposited 6%-19% less integral doses to the nasal cavity, orbit, and GBM cases than 6 MV photons. The mean dose to the heart in the liver plan was 10.5% lower for 2.5 MV beam. The difference between the doses to OARs of H&N for two beams was under 3%. Brain mean dose, brainstem, and optic chiasm max doses were, respectively, 7.5%-14.9%, 2.2%-8.1%, and 2.5%-19.0% lower for the 2.5 MV beam in the nasal cavity, orbit, and GBM plans. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the 2.5 MV beam can produce clinically relevant treatment plans, motivating future efforts for design of single-energy LINACs. Such a machine will be capable of producing beams at this energy beneficial for low- and middle-income countries, and investigations on dose enhancement from high-Z nanoparticles.

Assessment of Radiation-Induced Bladder and Bowel Cancer Risks after Conventionally and Hypo-Fractionated Radiotherapy for the Preoperative Management of Rectal Carcinoma.

Preoperative management of rectal carcinoma can be performed by employing either conventionally or hypo-fractionated Radiotherapy (CFRT or HFRT, respectively), delivered by Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) or Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plans, employing 6 MV or 10 MV photon beams. This study aims to dosimetrically and radiobiologically compare all available approaches, with emphasis on the risk of radiation-induced second cancer to the bladder and bowel. Computed Tomography (CT) scans and relevant radiotherapy contours from 16 patients were anonymized and analyzed retrospectively. For each case, CFRT of 25 × 2 Gy and HFRT of 5 × 5 Gy were both considered. IMRT and VMAT plans using 6 MV and 10 MV photons were prepared. Plan optimization was performed, considering all clinically used plan quality indices and dose-volume constraints for the critical organs. Resulting dose distributions were analyzed and compared. Moreover, the Lifetime Attributable Risk (LAR) for developing radiation-induced bladder and bowel malignancies were assessed using a non-linear mechanistic model, assuming patient ages at treatment of 45, 50, 55 and 60 years. All 128 plans created were clinically acceptable. Risk of second bladder cancer reached 0.26% for HFRT (5 × 5 Gy) and 0.19% for CFRT (25 × 2 Gy) at the age of 45. Systematically higher risks were calculated for HFRT (5 × 5 Gy) as compared to CFRT (25 × 2 Gy), with 6 MV photons resulting in slightly increased LAR, as well. Similar or equal bowel cancer risks were calculated for all techniques and patient ages investigated (range 0.05-0.14%). This work contributes towards radiotherapy treatment protocol selection criteria for the preoperative irradiation of rectal carcinoma. However, more studies are needed to establish the associated radiation-induced risk of each RT protocol.

Comparison of 3DCRT and IMRT out-of-field doses in pediatric patients using Monte Carlo simulations with treatment planning system calculations and measurements.

3DCRT and IMRT out-of-field doses in pediatric patients were compared using Monte Carlo simulations with treatment planning system calculations and measurements. Purpose: Out-of-field doses are given to healthy tissues, which may allow the development of second tumors. The use of IMRT in pediatric patients has been discussed, as it leads to a "bath" of low doses to large volumes of out-of-field organs and tissues. This study aims to compare out-of-field doses in pediatric patients comparing IMRT and 3DCRT techniques using measurements, Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, and treatment planning system (TPS) calculations. Materials and methods: A total dose of 54 Gy was prescribed to a PTV in the brain of a pediatric anthropomorphic phantom, for both techniques. To assess the out-of-field organ doses for both techniques, two treatment plans were performed with the 3DCRT and IMRT techniques in TPS. Measurements were carried out in a LINAC using a pediatric anthropomorphic phantom and thermoluminescent dosimeters to recreate the treatment plans, previously performed in the TPS. A computational model of a LINAC, the associated multileaf collimators, and a voxelized pediatric phantom implemented in the Monte Carlo N-Particle 6.1 computer program were also used to perform MC simulations of the out-of-field organ doses, for both techniques. Results: The results obtained by measurements and MC simulations indicate a significant increase in dose using the IMRT technique when compared to the 3DCRT technique. More specifically, measurements show higher doses with IMRT, namely, in right eye (13,041 vs. 593 mGy), left eye (6,525 vs. 475 mGy), thyroid (79 vs. 70 mGy), right lung (37 vs. 28 mGy), left lung (27 vs. 20 mGy), and heart (31 vs. 25 mGy). The obtained results indicate that out-of-field doses can be seriously underestimated by TPS. Discussion: This study presents, for the first time, out-of-field dose measurements in a realistic scenario and calculations for IMRT, centered on a voxelized pediatric phantom and an MC model of a medical LINAC, including MLC with log file-based simulations. The results pinpoint significant discrepancies in out-of-field doses for the two techniques and are a cause of concern because TPS calculations cannot accurately predict such doses. The obtained doses may presumably increase the risk of development of second tumors.

Comparison of MLC positioning deviations using log files and establishment of specific assessment parameters for different accelerators with IMRT and VMAT.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The study evaluated the differences in leaf positioning deviations by the log files of three advanced accelerators with two delivery techniques, and established specific assessment parameters of leaf positioning deviations for different types of accelerators. METHODS: A total of 420 treatment plans with 5 consecutive treatment log files were collected from the Trilogy, TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators. Millennium MLC was equipped on the Trilogy and TrueBeam accelerators. A jawless design and dual-layer MLC were adopted on the Halcyon accelerator. 70 IMRT and 70 VMAT plans were selected randomly on each accelerator. The treatment sites of all plans included head and neck, chest, breast, pelvis and other sites. The parsing tasks for 2100 log files were proceeded by SunCheck software from Sun Nuclear Corporation. The maximum leaf root mean square (RMS) errors, 95th percentile errors and percentages of different leaf positioning errors were statistically analyzed. The correlations between these evaluation parameters and accelerator performance parameters (maximum leaf speed, mean leaf speed, gantry and arc angle) were analyzed. RESULTS: The average maximum leaf RMS errors of the Trilogy in the IMRT and VMAT plans were 0.44 ± 0.09 mm and 0.79 ± 0.07 mm, respectively, which were higher than the TrueBeam's 0.03 ± 0.01 mm, 0.03 ± 0.01 mm and the Halcyon's 0.05 ± 0.01 mm, 0.07 ± 0.01 mm. Similar data results were shown in the 95th percentile error. The maximum leaf RMS errors were strongly correlated with the 95th percentile errors (Pearson index > 0.5). The leaf positioning deviations in VMAT were higher than those in IMRT for all accelerators. In TrueBeam and Halcyon, leaf position errors above 1 mm were not found in IMRT and VMAT plans. The main influencing factor of leaf positioning deviation was the leaf speed, which has no strong correlation with gantry and arc angles. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the quality assurance guidelines, the MLC positioning deviations tolerances of the three accelerators should be tightened. For both IMRT and VMAT techniques, the 95th percentile error and the maximum RMS error are suggested to be tightened to 1.5 and 1 mm respectively for the Trilogy accelerator. In TrueBeam and Halcyon accelerators, the 95th percentile error and maximum RMS error of 1 and 0.5 mm, respectively, are considered appropriate.

Patterns of the use of advanced radiation therapy techniques for the management of bone metastases and the associated factors in Victoria.

INTRODUCTION: To describe the pattern of the use of advanced radiation therapy (RT) techniques, including intensity-modulated RT (IMRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and stereotactic body RT (SBRT) for the management of bone metastases (BM), and the associated factors in Victoria. METHODS: We used a population-based cohort of patients from the state-wide Victorian Radiotherapy Minimum Data Set (VRMDS) who received RT for BM between 2012 and 2017. The primary outcome was proportion of RT courses using advanced RT techniques. The Cochran-Armitage test for trend was used to evaluate temporal trend in advanced RT use. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with advanced RT use. RESULTS: A total of 18,158 courses of RT were delivered to 10,956 patients-16,626 (91.6%) courses were 3D conformal RT, 857 (4.7%) IMRT/VMAT and 675 (3.7%) SBRT. There was a sharp increase in IMRT/VMAT use from <1% in 2012-2015, to 10.1% in 2016 and 16.3% in 2017 (P-trend < 0.001). Increase in SBRT use was more gradual, from 1.2% in 2012 to 4.8% in 2016 and 5.5% in 2017 for SBRT (P-trend<0.001). In multivariate analyses, year of RT was the strongest predictor of IMRT/VMAT use (OR = 41; 95%CI = 25-67; P < 0.001, comparing 2012-2013 and 2016-2017). Primary tumour type (prostate cancer) was the strongest predictor of SBRT use (OR = 6.07; 95% CI = 4.19-8.80; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Overall, there was increasing trend in the use of advanced RT techniques for BM in Victoria, with a distinct pattern for IMRT/VMAT compared with SBRT - SBRT uptake was more gradual while IMRT/VMAT uptake was abrupt, occurring contemporaneously with Medicare Benefit Scheme funding changes in 2016.

Dose assessment for daily cone-beam CT in lung radiotherapy patients and its combination with treatment planning.

With the increased use of X-ray imaging for patient alignment in external beam radiation therapy, particularly with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), the additional dose received by patients has become of greater consideration. In this study, we analysed the radiation dose from CBCT for clinical lung radiotherapy and assessed its relative contribution when combined with radiation treatment planning for a variety of lung radiotherapy techniques. The Monte Carlo simulation program ImpactMC was used to calculate the 3D dose delivered by a Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator to patients undergoing thorax CBCT imaging. The concomitant dose was calculated by simulating the daily CBCT irradiation of ten lung cancer patients. Each case was planned with a total dose of 50-60 Gy to the target lesion in 25-30 fractions using the 3DCRT or IMRT plan and retrospectively planned using VMAT. For each clinical case, the calculated CBCT dose was summed with the planned dose, and the dose to lungs, heart, and spinal cord were analysed according to conventional dose conformity metrics. Our results indicate greater variations in dose to the heart, lungs, and spinal cord based on planning technique, (3DCRT, IMRT, VMAT) than from the inclusion of daily cone-beam imaging doses over 25-30 fractions. The average doses from CBCT imaging per fraction to the lungs, heart and spinal cord were 0.52 ± 0.10, 0.49 ± 0.15 and 0.39 ± 0.08 cGy, respectively. Lung dose variations were related to the patient's size and body composition. Over a treatment course, this may result in an additional mean absorbed dose of 0.15-0.2 Gy. For lung V5, the imaging dose resulted in an average increase of ~ 0.6% of the total volume receiving 5 Gy. The increase in V20 was more dependent on the planning technique, with 3DCRT increasing by 0.11 ± 0.09% with imaging and IMRT and VMAT increasing by 0.17 ± 0.05% and 0.2 ± 0.06%, respectively. In this study, we assessed the concomitant dose for daily CBCT lung cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. The additional radiation dose to the normal lungs from daily CBCT was found to range from 0.15 to 0.2 Gy when the patient was treated with 25-30 fractions. Consideration of potential variation in relative biological effectiveness between kilovoltage imaging and megavoltage treatment dose was outside the scope of this study. Regardless of this, our results show that the assessment of imaging dose can be incorporated into the treatment planning process and the relative effect on overall dose distribution was small compared to the difference among planning techniques.

Retrospective assessment of radiation toxicity from a definitive-intent, moderately hypofractionated image-guided intensity-modulated protocol for anal sac adenocarcinoma in dogs.

A recent calculation study predicted acceptable toxicity in pelvic organs at risk for a new definitive-intent, moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) protocol (12 x 3.8 Gy), when used with image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IG-IMRT). We hypothesized this protocol to result in clinically acceptable radiation toxicities. Dogs diagnosed with and irradiated for anal sac adenocarcinoma (ASAC) were retrospectively assessed. Eleven dogs were included, six had prior surgery. Before any therapy, staging according to Polton et al. resulted in the following distribution: stage 1 (n = 1), stage 2 (n = 1), stage 3a (n = 6), stage 3b (n = 3). We scored radiation toxicities at the end of therapy, at weeks 1, 3 and every 3 months after RT according to Veterinary Radiation Therapy Oncology Group radiation toxicity criteria. Clinical follow-up was maintained on regular intervals combined with computed tomography (n = 3). Median follow-up time for dogs still alive was 594 days (range: 224-972 days). Within 1 week post treatment, eight dogs (73%) developed grade 2 and four dogs (36%) grade 1 acute toxicity in the perianal region. All acute toxicities resolved or improved to grade 1 within 3 weeks after treatment. Late toxicity, for example, chronic colitis/diarrhoea, ulcerations, strictures or myelopathies was not observed in any patient. Five dogs were euthanized 105, 196, 401, 508 and 908 days after RT and six dogs were still alive, one in spite of progressive disease. The median progression-free survival was 908 days (95%CI: 215; 1602). The previous theoretically described definitive-intent, moderately hypofractionated protocol using IG-IMRT for the treatment of advanced ASAC showed clinically acceptable acute and late toxicities.

Should the HPV positive oropharyngeal cancer patient be considered for a two-stage dental assessment for their radiation treatment?

Patients due to commence head and neck radiation treatment are expected to undergo a dental assessment and be deemed 'dentally fit'. Though this intervention is welcomed by the dental fraternity it is not without its challenges especially in human papilloma virus (HPV) related oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) which has seen a phenomenal rise over the past decade. This perspective piece presents these challenges and proposes a potential adaption of the dental assessment for HPV OPC patients though not necessarily exclusive to this tumour sub-site.

Activity-Based Costing of Intensity-Modulated Proton versus Photon Therapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer.

PURPOSE: In value-based health care delivery, radiation oncologists need to compare empiric costs of care delivery with advanced technologies, such as intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to compare the costs of delivering IMPT and IMRT in a case-matched pilot study of patients with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal (OPC) cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used clinicopathologic factors to match 25 patients with OPC who received IMPT in 2011-12 with 25 patients with OPC treated with IMRT in 2000-09. Process maps were created for each multidisciplinary clinical activity (including chemotherapy and ancillary services) from initial consultation through 1 month of follow-up. Resource costs and times were determined for each activity. Each patient-specific activity was linked with a process map and TDABC over the full cycle of care. All calculated costs were normalized to the lowest-cost IMRT patient. RESULTS: TDABC costs for IMRT were 1.00 to 3.33 times that of the lowest-cost IMRT patient (mean ± SD: 1.65 ± 0.56), while costs for IMPT were 1.88 to 4.32 times that of the lowest-cost IMRT patient (2.58 ± 0.39) (P < .05). Although single-fraction costs were 2.79 times higher for IMPT than for IMRT (owing to higher equipment costs), average full cycle cost of IMPT was 1.53 times higher than IMRT, suggesting that the initial cost increase is partly mitigated by reductions in costs for other, non-RT supportive health care services. CONCLUSIONS: In this matched sample, although IMPT was on average more costly than IMRT primarily owing to higher equipment costs, a subset of IMRT patients had similar costs to IMPT patients, owing to greater use of supportive care resources. Multidimensional patient outcomes and TDABC provide vital methodology for defining the value of radiation therapy modalities.

Correlation between the γ passing rates of IMRT plans and the volumes of air cavities and bony structures in head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Both patient-specific dose recalculation and γ passing rate analysis are important for the quality assurance (QA) of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans. The aim of this study was to analyse the correlation between the γ passing rates and the volumes of air cavities (Vair) and bony structures (Vbone) in target volume of head and neck cancer. METHODS: Twenty nasopharyngeal carcinoma and twenty nasal natural killer T-cell lymphoma patients were enrolled in this study. Nine-field sliding window IMRT plans were produced and the dose distributions were calculated by anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), Acuros XB algorithm (AXB) and SciMoCa based on the Monte Carlo (MC) technique. The dose distributions and γ passing rates of the targets, organs at risk, air cavities and bony structures were compared among the different algorithms. RESULTS: The γ values obtained with AAA and AXB were 95.6 ± 1.9% and 96.2 ± 1.7%, respectively, with 3%/2 mm criteria (p > 0.05). There were significant differences (p < 0.05) in the γ values between AAA and AXB in the air cavities (86.6 ± 9.4% vs. 98.0 ± 1.7%) and bony structures (82.7 ± 13.5% vs. 99.0 ± 1.7%). Using AAA, the γ values were proportional to the natural logarithm of Vair (R2 = 0.674) and inversely proportional to the natural logarithm of Vbone (R2 = 0.816). When the Vair in the targets was smaller than approximately 80 cc or the Vbone in the targets was larger than approximately 6 cc, the γ values of AAA were below 95%. Using AXB, no significant relationship was found between the γ values and Vair or Vbone. CONCLUSION: In clinical head and neck IMRT QA, greater attention should be paid to the effect of Vair and Vbone in the targets on the γ passing rates when using different dose calculation algorithms.

A cooperative game solution approach for intensity modulated radiation therapy design: Nash Social Welfare optimization.

We study the fluency map optimization problem in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy from a cooperative game theory point of view. We consider the cancerous and healthy organs in a patient's body as players of a game, where cancerous organs seek to eliminate the cancerous cells and healthy organs seek to receive no harm. The goal is to balance the trade-offs between the utility of players by forming a grand coalition between them. We do so by proposing a methodology that solves a few convex optimization problems in order to transform the fluency map optimization problem into a bargaining game. To solve the bargaining game, we employ the concept of Nash Social Welfare (NSW) optimization due to the desirable efficiency and fairness properties of its outcomes. The proposed NSW optimization is convex and can be solved by powerful commercial solvers such as CPLEX. An additional advantage of the proposed approach is that it has a new control lever for the fluency map optimization, the so-called negotiation powers, which enables practitioners to put more emphasis on an organ by changing its negotiation power. To show the efficacy of our proposed methodology, we apply it to the TG-119 case and a liver case. We compare our proposed approach with a state-of-the-art approach through creating Dose Volume Histograms.

Cost Analysis of Selected Radiotherapeutic Modalities for Prostate Cancer Treatment-Czech Republic Case Study for the Purposes of Hospital Based HTA.

This study aims to calculate the costs of prostate cancer radiotherapy in a regional hospital Department of Radiation Oncology equipped with Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy (3D-CRT) and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Volumetric Arc Therapy (VMAT) radiation technology, using activity based costing (ABC), and to compare the costs of both methods at the level of component treatment process activities and with respect to insurance reimbursements. The costing was performed based on a sample of 273 IMRT VMAT patients and 312 3D-CRT patients in a regional hospital in the period from 2018 to 2019. The research has highlighted the necessity to place emphasis on factors that may skew the costing results. The resulting output has been supplemented by a sensitivity analysis, whereas the modeled parameter is represented by the time required for one patient fraction on a linear accelerator and the time the Radiology Assistant needs to prepare the complete radiation plan as part of radiotherapy planning. Moreover, the effects of the received grant, in the form of calculated write-offs, are also considered. The case study uses the example of radiotherapy to demonstrate the potential of ABC and suggests considering the application of this method as an effective management tool for cost and economic evaluation as part of comprehensive hospital assessment under the Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA) initiative.