Radiotherapy for the treatment of pituitary adenomas: A dosimetric comparison of three planning techniques.

AIM: Our goal was to compare conformal 3D (C3D) radiotherapy (RT), modulated intensity RT (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) planning techniques in treating pituitary adenomas. BACKGROUND: RT is important for managing pituitary adenomas. Treatment planning advances allow for higher radiation dosing with less risk of affecting organs at risk (OAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 5-year retrospective review of patients with pituitary adenoma treated with external beam radiation therapy (C3D with flattening filter, flattening filter-free [FFF], IMRT, and VMAT). We compared dose-volume histogram data. For OARs, we recorded D2%, maximum, and mean doses. For planning target volume (PTV), we registered V95%, V107%, D95%, D98%, D50%, D2%, minimum dose, conformity index (CI), and homogeneity index (HI). RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with pituitary adenoma were included. Target-volume coverage was acceptable for all techniques. The HI values were 0.06, IMRT; 0.07, VMAT; 0.08, C3D; and 0.09, C3D FFF (p < 0.0001). VMAT and IMRT provided the best target volume conformity (CI, 0.64 and 0.74, respectively; p < 0.0001). VMAT yielded the lowest doses to the optic pathway, lens, and cochlea. The position of the neck in extreme flexion showed that it helps in planning mainly with VMAT by allowing only one arc to be used and achieving the desired conformity, decreasing the treatment time, while allowing greater protection to the organs of risk using C3D, C3DFFF. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirmed that EBRT in pituitary adenomas using IMRT, VMAT, C3D, C3FFF provide adequate coverage to the target. VMAT with a single arc or incomplete arc had a better compliance with desired dosimetric goals, such as target coverage and normal structures dose constraints, as well as shorter treatment time. Neck extreme flexion may have benefits in treatment planning for better preservation of organs at risk. C3D with extreme neck flexion is an appropriate treatment option when other treatment techniques are not available.

Evaluation of short-term gastrointestinal motion and its impact on dosimetric parameters in stereotactic body radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer.

Background: The aim of this study is to quantify the short-term motion of the gastrointestinal tract (GI-tract) and its impact on dosimetric parameters in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for pancreatic cancer. Methods: The analyzed patients were eleven pancreatic cancer patients treated with SBRT or proton beam therapy. To ensure a fair analysis, the simulation SBRT plan was generated on the planning CT in all patients with the dose prescription of 40 Gy in 5 fractions. The GI-tract motion (stomach, duodenum, small and large intestine) was evaluated using three CT images scanned at spontaneous expiration. After fiducial-based rigid image registration, the contours in each CT image were generated and transferred to the planning CT, then the organ motion was evaluated. Planning at risk volumes (PRV) of each GI-tract were generated by adding 5 mm margins, and the volume receiving at least 33 Gy (V33) < 0.5 cm3 was evaluated as the dose constraint. Results: The median interval between the first and last CT scans was 736 s (interquartile range, IQR:624-986). To compensate for the GI-tract motion based on the planning CT, the necessary median margin was 8.0 mm (IQR: 8.0-10.0) for the duodenum and 14.0 mm (12.0-16.0) for the small intestine. Compared to the planned V33 with the worst case, the median V33 in the PRV of the duodenum significantly increased from 0.20 cm3 (IQR: 0.02-0.26) to 0.33 cm3 (0.10-0.59) at Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p = 0.031). Conclusion: The short-term motions of the GI-tract lead to high dose differences.

Selection of motion management in liver stereotactic body radiotherapy and its impact on treatment time.

Background and purpose: Reduction of respiratory tumour motion is important in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to reduce side effects and improve tumour control probability. We have assessed the distribution of use of voluntary exhale breath hold (EBH), abdominal compression (AC), free breathing gating (gating) and free breathing (FB), and the impact of these on treatment time. Materials and Methods: We assessed all patients treated in a single institution with liver SBRT between September 2017 and September 2021. Data from pre-simulation motion management assessment using fluoroscopic assessment of liver dome position in repeat breath holds, and motion with and without AC, was reviewed to determine liver dome position consistency in EBH and the impact of AC on motion. Treatment time was assessed for all fractions as time from first image acquisition to last treatment beam off. Results: Of 136 patients treated with 145 courses of liver SBRT, 68 % were treated in EBH, 20 % with AC, 7 % in gating and 5 % in FB. AC resulted in motion reduction < 1 mm in 9/26 patients assessed. Median treatment time was higher using EBH (39 min) or gating (42 min) compared with AC (30 min) or FB (24 min) treatments. Conclusions: Motion management in liver SBRT needs to be assessed per-patient to ensure appropriate techniques are applied. Motion management significantly impacts treatment time therefore patient comfort must also be taken into account when selecting the technique for each patient.

Evaluation of an automated template-based treatment planning system for radiotherapy of anal, rectal and prostate cancer.

Background and purpose: The Ethos system has enabled online adaptive radiotherapy (oART) by implementing an automated treatment planning system (aTPS) for both intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) plan creation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the quality of aTPS plans in the pelvic region. Material and Methods: Sixty patients with anal (n = 20), rectal (n = 20) or prostate (n = 20) cancer were retrospectively re-planned with the aTPS. Three IMRT (7-, 9- and 12-field) and two VMAT (2 and 3 arc) automatically generated plans (APs) were created per patient. The duration of the automated plan generation was registered. The best IMRT-AP and VMAT-AP for each patient were selected based on target coverage and dose to organs at risk (OARs). The AP quality was analyzed and compared to corresponding clinically accepted and manually generated VMAT plans (MPs) using several clinically relevant dose metrics. Calculation-based pre-treatment plan quality assurance (QA) was performed for all plans. Results: The median total duration to generate the five APs with the aTPS was 55 min, 39 min and 35 min for anal, prostate and rectal plans, respectively. The target coverage and the OAR sparing were equivalent for IMRT-APs and VMAT-MPs, while VMAT-Aps.demonstrated lower target dose homogeneity and higher dose to some OARs. Both conformity and homogeneity index were equivalent (rectal) or better (anal and prostate) for IMRT-APs compared to VMAT-MPs. All plans passed the patient-specific QA tolerance limit. Conclusions: The aTPS generates plans comparable to MPs within a short time-frame which is highly relevant for oART treatments.