Four irradiation and three positioning techniques for whole-breast radiotherapy: Is sophisticated always better?

PURPOSE: We report on a dosimetrical study of three patient positions (supine, prone dive, and prone crawl) and four irradiation techniques for whole-breast irradiation (WBI): wedged-tangential fields (W-TF), tangential-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (TF-IMRT), multi-beam IMRT (MB-IMRT), and intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT). This is the first study to evaluate prone crawl positioning in WBI and the first study to quantify dosimetrical and anatomical differences with prone dive positioning. METHODS: We analyzed five datasets with left- and right-sided patients (n = 51). One dataset also included deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) data. A total of 252 new treatment plans were composed. Dose-volume parameters and indices of conformity were calculated for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs-at-risk (OARs). Furthermore, anatomical differences among patient positions were quantified to explain dosimetrical differences. RESULTS: Target coverage was inferior for W-TF and supine position. W-TF proved overall inferior, and IMAT proved foremost effective in supine position. TF-IMRT proved competitive to the more demanding MB-IMRT and IMAT in prone dive, but not in prone crawl position. The lung-sparing effect was overall confirmed for both prone dive and prone crawl positioning and was largest for prone crawl. For the heart, no differences were found between prone dive and supine positioning, whereas prone crawl showed cardiac advantages, although minor compared to the established heart-sparing effect of DIBH. Dose differences for contralateral breast were minor among the patient positions. In prone crawl position, the ipsilateral breast sags deeper and the PTV is further away from the OARs than in prone dive position. CONCLUSIONS: The prone dive and prone crawl position are valid alternatives to the supine position in WBI, with largest advantages for lung structures. For the heart, differences are small, which establishes the role of DIBH in different patient positions. These results may be of particular interest to radiotherapy centers with limited technical resources.

A comparative analysis of Acuros XB and the analytical anisotropic algorithm for volumetric modulation arc therapy.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to verify the dosimetric impact of Acuros XB (AXB) (AXB, Varian Medical Systems Palo Alto CA, USA), a two model-based algorithm, in comparison with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA ) calculations for prostate, head and neck and lung cancer treatment by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT ), without primary modification to AA. At present, the well-known and validated AA algorithm is clinically used in our department for VMAT treatments of different pathologies. AXB could replace it without extra measurements. The treatment result and accuracy of the dose delivered depend on the dose calculation algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Ninety-five complex VMAT plans for different pathologies were generated using the Eclipse version 15.0.4 treatment planning system (TPS). The dose distributions were calculated using AA and AXB (dose-to-water, AXBw and dose-to-medium, AXBm), with the same plan parameters for all VMAT plans. The dosimetric parameters were calculated for each planning target volume (PTV) and involved organs at risk (OA R). The patient specific quality assurance of all VMAT plans has been verified by Octavius®-4D phantom for different algorithms. RESULTS: The relative differences among AA, AXBw and AXBm, with respect to prostate, head and neck were less than 1% for PTV D95%. However, PTV D95% calculated by AA tended to be overestimated, with a relative dose difference of 3.23% in the case of lung treatment. The absolute mean values of the relative differences were 1.1 ± 1.2% and 2.0 ± 1.2%, when comparing between AXBw and AA, AXBm and AA, respectively. The gamma pass rate was observed to exceed 97.4% and 99.4% for the measured and calculated doses in most cases of the volumetric 3D analysis for AA and AXBm, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the dose calculated to medium using AXBm algorithm is better than AAA and it could be used clinically. Switching the dose calculation algorithm from AA to AXB does not require extra measurements.

A feasibility study on adaptive 18F-FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy for recurrent and second primary head and neck cancer in the previously irradiated territory.

PURPOSE: To evaluate feasibility, disease control, survival, and toxicity after adaptive 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emisson tomography (PET) guided radiotherapy in patients with recurrent and second primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: A prospective trial investigated the feasibility of adaptive intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) ± concomitant cetuximab in 10 patients. The primary endpoint was achieving a 2-year survival free of grade >3 toxicity in ≥30% of patients. Three treatment plans based on 3 PET/CT scans were consecutively delivered in 6 weeks. The range of dose painting was 66.0-85.0 Gy in the dose-painted tumoral volumes in 30 fractions. RESULTS: Two-year locoregional and distant control rates were 38 and 76%, respectively. Overall and disease-free survival at 2 years was 20%. No grade 4 or 5 acute toxicity was observed in any of the patients, except for arterial mucosal hemorrhage in 1 patient. Three months after radiotherapy, grade 4 dysphagia and mucosal wound healing problems were observed in 1/7 and 1/6 of patients, respectively. Grade 5 toxicity (fatal bleeding) was seen in 2 patients, at 3.8 and 4.1 months of follow-up. Data on 2­year toxicity could only be assessed in 1 of the 2 surviving patients, in whom grade 4 mucosal wound healing problems were observed; no other grade >3 toxicity was observed. In this respect, a 30% 2­year survival free of grade >3 toxicity will not be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive PET-guided reirradiation is feasible. However, due to slow accrual and treatment results that seemed inconsistent with achieving the primary endpoint, the trial was stopped early.

EXclusion of non-Involved uterus from the Target Volume (EXIT-trial): an individualized treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer using modern radiotherapy and imaging techniques.

BACKGROUND: Definitive chemoradiotherapy is standard of care in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). Both toxicity and local relapse remain major concerns in this treatment. We hypothesize that a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based redefining of the radiotherapeutic target volume will lead to a reduction of acute and late toxicity. In our center, chemoradiotherapy followed by hysterectomy was implemented successfully in the past. This enables us to assess the safety of reducing the target volume but also to explore the biological effects of chemoradiation on the resected hysterectomy specimen. METHODS: The EXIT-trial is a phase II, single arm study aimed at LACC patients. This study evaluates whether a MRI-based exclusion of the non-tumor-bearing parts of the uterus out of the target volume results in absence of tumor in the non-high doses irradiated part of the uterus in the hysterectomy specimen. Secondary endpoints include a dosimetric comparison of dose on normal tissue when comparing study treatment plans compared to treatment of the whole uterus at high doses; acute and chronic toxicity, overall survival, local relapse- and progression-free survival. In the translational part of the study, we will evaluate the hypothesis that the baseline apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of diffusion weighted MRI and its evolution 2 weeks after start of CRT, for the whole tumor as well as for intra-tumoral regions, is prognostic for residual tumor on the hysterectomy specimen. DISCUSSION: Although MRI is already used to guide target delineation in brachytherapy, the EXIT-trial is the first to use this information to guide target delineation in external beam radiotherapy. Early therapy resistance prediction using DW-MRI opens a window for early treatment adaptation or further dose-escalation on tumors/intratumoral regions at risk for treatment failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Belgian Registration: B670201526181 (prospectively registered, 26/11/2015); ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03542942 (retrospectively registered, 17/5/2018).

Late mucosal ulcers in dose-escalated adaptive dose-painting treatments for head-and-neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: To identify predictive factors for the development of late grade 4 mucosal ulcers in adaptive dose-escalated treatments for head-and-neck cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patient data of four dose-escalated three-phase adaptive dose-painting by numbers (DPBN) clinical trials were analyzed in this study. Correlations between the development of late grade 4 ulcers and factors related with the treatment, disease characteristics and the patient were investigated. Dosimetrical thresholds were searched among the highest doses received by 1.75 cm3 (D1.75cc) of the primary gross tumor volume (GTVT) and the corresponding normalized isoeffective dose (NID21.75cc, with a reference dose of 2Gy/fraction and α/ß of 3 Gy). RESULTS: From 39 studied patients, nine developed late grade 4 mucosal ulcers. The continuation to either smoke or drink alcohol after therapy was the factor that showed a strong (eight out of nine patients) association with the occurrence of grade 4 ulcers. Six of the patients who continued to smoke or/and drink had D1.75cc and NID21.75cc above 84 Gy and 95.5 Gy, respectively. Seven of the patients with grade 4 had the dose levels above these thresholds, but even if the D1.75cc threshold was significant in the prediction of late grade 4 ulcers, it could not be considered as the only contributing factor. CONCLUSIONS: The search for patterns provided strong reasons to apply a dosimetrical threshold for the peak-dose volume of 1.75 cm3 as a preventive measure for late grade 4 mucosal ulcers. Also, patients that continue to smoke or drink alcohol after therapy have increased risk to develop late mucosal ulcers.

External partial breast irradiation in prone position: how to improve accuracy?

INTRODUCTION: In view of the limited incremental benefit between whole breast irradiation (WBI), accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) and omission of radiotherapy in favorable early-stage breast cancer (ESBC), APBI can only be justified if it combines adequate target coverage with the lowest achievable toxicity. Interobserver exercises demonstrated the difficulty of precise target delineation, especially in prone position; information on accuracy is even scarcer. We tested the impact of inserting an additional indicator clip, marking the depth of the tumor in the breast, and the added value of a preoperative CT in treatment position on precision and accuracy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 12 patients, tumor bed delineation was performed by four radiation oncologists, with CTVstandard (clinical target volume) based on standard delineation guidelines, CTVclip resulting from a 1-2-cm symmetrical expansion with the indicator clip as center and CTVclip_CT expanding from the midpoint between the indicator clip and preoperative gross tumor volume (GTV) as center. Precision was measured as the mean pairwise Jaccard index (JIpairs) between observers, accuracy as the mean overlap between GTV and respective CTVs. RESULTS: JIpairs was 0.38 for CTVstandard, 0.75 for CTVclip and 0.59 for CTVclip_CT. Overlap rate of GTV with CTVs was respectively 0.48, 0.67 and improved further to 0.88 for CTVclip_CT. High-dose coverage of GTV (D95 and D90) improved with an indicator clip, but the most optimal result was reached when preoperative CT was added. CONCLUSIONS: If EB-APBI in prone position is aimed for, an indicator clip intended to mark the depth of the tumor increases the probability of accurate target coverage, but cannot entirely replace the added value of a preoperative CT in treatment position. Avoiding the cost and effort of such CT implies a risk of missing the target, especially when small volumes are aimed for. Increasing target volumes to reduces this risk, questions the concept of APBI.

Potential benefits of crawl position for prone radiation therapy in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate crawl position with the arm at the treated side alongside the body and at the opposite side above the head for prone treatment in patients requiring breast and regional lymph node irradiation. METHODS: Patient support devices for crawl position were built for CT simulation and treatment. An asymmetric fork design resulted from an iterative process of prototype construction and testing. The fork's large horn supports the hemi-thorax, shoulder, and elevated arm at the nontreated side and the head. The short, narrow horn supports the arm at the treated side. Between both horns, the treated breast and its regional lymph nodes are exposed. Endpoints were pain, comfort, set-up precision, beam access to the breast and lymph nodes, and plan dose metrics. Pain and comfort were tested by volunteers (n = 9); set-up precision, beam access, and plan dose metrics were tested by means of a patient study (n = 10). The AIO™ (Orfit, Wijnegem, Belgium) prone breastboard (AIO™) was used as a reference regarding comfort and set-up precision. RESULTS: Pain at the sternum, the ipsilateral shoulder, upper arm, and neck was lower in crawl position than with bilateral arm elevation on AIO™. Comfort and set-up precision were better on the crawl prototype than on AIO™. In crawl position, beam directions in the coronal and near-sagittal planes have access to the breast or regional lymph nodes without traversing device components. Plan comparison between supine and crawl positions showed better dose homogeneity for the breast and lymph node targets and dose reductions to all organs at risk for crawl position. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation therapy for breast and regional lymph nodes in crawl position is feasible. Good comfort and set-up precision were demonstrated. Planning results support the hypothesis that breast and regional lymph nodes can be treated in crawl position with less dose to organs at risk and equal or better dose distribution in the target volumes than in supine position. The crawl technique is a candidate methodology for further investigation for patients requiring breast and regional lymph node irradiation.

Reliability and accuracy assessment of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-endorsed guidelines for brachial plexus contouring.

PURPOSE: The goal of this work was to validate the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)-endorsed guidelines for brachial plexus (BP) contouring by determining the intra- and interobserver agreement. Accuracy of the delineation process was determined using anatomically validated imaging datasets as a gold standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five observers delineated the right BP on three cadaver computed tomography (CT) datasets. To assess intraobserver variation, every observer repeated each delineation three times with a time interval of 2 weeks. The BP contours were divided into four regions for detailed analysis. Inter- and intraobserver variation was verified using the Computerized Environment for Radiation Research (CERR) software. Accuracy was measured using anatomically validated fused CT-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) datasets by measuring the BP inclusion of the delineations. RESULTS: The overall kappa (κ) values were rather low (mean interobserver overall κ: 0.29, mean intraobserver overall κ: 0.45), indicating poor inter- and intraobserver reliability. In general, the κ coefficient decreased gradually from the medial to lateral BP regions. The total agreement volume (TAV) was much smaller than the union volume (UV) for all delineations, resulting in a low Jaccard index (JI; interobserver agreement 0-0.124; intraobserver agreement 0.004-0.636). The overall accuracy was poor, with an average total BP inclusion of 38%. Inclusions were insufficient for the most lateral regions (region 3: 21.5%; region 4: 12.6%). CONCLUSION: The inter- and intraobserver reliability of the RTOG-endorsed BP contouring guidelines was poor. BP inclusion worsened from the medial to lateral regions. Accuracy assessment of the contours showed an average BP inclusion of 38%. For the first time, this was assessed using the original anatomically validated BP volume. The RTOG-endorsed BP guidelines have insufficient accuracy and reliability, especially for the lateral head-and-neck regions.

Disease Control and Late Toxicity in Adaptive Dose Painting by Numbers Versus Nonadaptive Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Phase 2 Trial.

PURPOSE: Local recurrence remains the main cause of death in stage III-IV nonmetastatic head and neck cancer (HNC), with relapse-prone regions within high 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET)-signal gross tumor volume. We investigated if dose escalation within this subvolume combined with a 3-phase treatment adaptation could increase local (LC) and regional (RC) control at equal or minimized radiation-induced toxicity, by comparing adaptive 18F-FDG-PET voxel intensity-based dose painting by numbers (A-DPBN) with nonadaptive standard intensity modulated radiation therapy (S-IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This 2-center randomized controlled phase 2 trial assigned (1:1) patients to receive A-DPBN or S-IMRT (+/-chemotherapy). Eligibility: nonmetastatic HNC of oral cavity, oro-/hypopharynx, or larynx, needing radio(chemo)therapy; T1-4N0-3 (exception: T1-2N0 glottic); KPS ≥ 70; ≥18 years; and informed consent. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: 1-year LC and RC. The dose prescription for A-DPBN was intercurrently adapted in 2 steps to an absolute dose-volume limit (≤1.75 cm3 can receive >84 Gy and normalized isoeffective dose >96 Gy) as a safety measure during the study course after 4/7 A-DPBN patients developed ≥G3 mucosal ulcers. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were randomized (A-DPBN, 47; S-IMRT, 48). Median follow-up was 31 months (IQR, 14-48 months); 29 patients died (17 of cancer progression). A-DPBN resulted in superior LC compared with S-IMRT, with 1- and 2-year LC of 91% and 88% versus 78% and 75%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.13-8.71; P = .021). RC and overall survival were comparable between arms, as was overall grade (G) ≥3 late toxicity (36% vs 20%; P = .1). More ≥G3 late mucosal ulcers were observed in active smokers (29% vs 3%; P = .005) and alcohol users (33% vs 13%; P = .02), independent of treatment arm. Similarly, in the A-DPBN arm, significantly more patients who smoked at diagnosis developed ≥G3 (46% vs 12%; P = .005) and ≥G4 (29% vs 8%; P = .048) mucosal ulcers. One arterial blowout occurred after a G5 mucosal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: A-DPBN resulted in superior 1- and 2-year LC for HNC compared with S-IMRT. This supports further exploration in multicenter phase 3 trials. It will, however, be challenging to recruit a substantial patient sample for such trials, as concerns have arisen regarding the association of late mucosal ulcers when escalating the dose in continuing smokers.

Exclusion of non-Involved uterus from the target volume (EXIT-trial): An individualized treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer using modern radiotherapy and imaging techniques followed by completion surgery.

Background and purpose: Chemoradiotherapy followed by brachytherapy is the standard of care for locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC). In this study, we postulate that omitting an iconographical unaffected uterus (+12 mm distance from the tumour) from the treatment volume is safe and that no tumour will be found in the non-targeted uterus (NTU) leading to reduction of high-dose volumes of surrounding organs at risk (OARs). Material and Methods: In this single-arm phase 2 study, two sets of target volumes were delineated: one standard-volume (whole uterus) and an EXIT-volume (exclusion of non-tumour-bearing parts of the uterus with a minimum 12 mm margin from the tumour). All patients underwent chemoradiotherapy targeting the EXIT-volume, followed by completion hysterectomy. In 15 patients, a plan comparison between two treatment plans (PTV vs PTV_EXIT) was performed. The primary endpoint was the pathological absence of tumour involvement in the non-targeted uterus (NTU). Secondary endpoints included dosimetric impact of target volume reduction on OARs, acute and chronic toxicity, overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In all 21 (FIGO stage I: 2; II: 14;III: 3; IV: 2) patients the NTU was pathologically negative. Ssignificant reductions in Dmean in bladder, sigmoid and rectum; V15Gy in sigmoid and rectum, V30Gy in bladder, sigmoid and rectum; V40Gy and V45Gy in bladder, bowel bag, sigmoid and rectum; V50Gy in rectum were achieved. Median follow-up was 54 months (range 7-79 months). Acute toxicity was mainly grade 2 and 5 % grade 3 urinary. The 3y- OS, PFS and LRFS were respectively 76,2%, 64,9% and 81 %. Conclusion: MRI-based exclusion of the non-tumour-bearing parts of the uterus at a minimum distance of 12 mm from the tumour out of the target volume in LACC can be done without risk of residual disease in the NTU, leading to a significant reduction of the volume of surrounding OARS treated to high doses.

Systems thinking and designerly tools for medical device design in engineering curricula.

Background: In this paper we focus on medical device development (MDD) in Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) academia. We want to find which methods our MDD-students currently use, where our guidance has shortcomings and where it brings added value. Methods: We have analysed 19 master and 3 doctoral MDD-theses in our IDE curriculum. The evaluation focusses around four main themes: 1) regulatory 2) testing 3) patient-centricity and 4) systemic design. Results: Regulatory aspects and medical testing procedures seem to be disregarded frequently. We assume this is because of a lack of MDD experience and the small thesis timeframe. Furthermore, many students applied medical-oriented systemic tools, which enhances multiperspectivism. However, we found an important lack in the translation to the List of Specifications and to business models of these medical devices. Finally, students introduced various participatory techniques, but seem to struggle with implementing this in the setting of evidence-based medicine.

Prone Breast and Lymph Node Irradiation in 5 or 15 Fractions: A Randomized 2 × 2 Design Comparing Dosimetry, Acute Toxicity, and Set-Up Errors.

PURPOSE: Prone whole breast irradiation results in lower dose to organs at risk compared with supine position, especially lung dose. However, the adoption of prone position for whole breast irradiation + lymph node irradiation remains limited and data on lymph node irradiation in 5 fractions are lacking. Although the study was ended prematurely for the primary endpoint (breast retraction at 2 years), we decided to report acute toxicity for prone and supine positions and 5 and 15 fractions. Additionally, dosimetry and set-up accuracy between prone and supine positions were evaluated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A randomized open-label factorial 2 × 2 design was used for an acute toxicity comparison between prone and supine positions and 5 and 15 fractions. The primary endpoint of the trial was breast retraction 2 years after treatment. In total, 57 patients were evaluated. Dosimetry and set-up errors were compared between prone and supine positions. All patients were positioned on either our in -house developed prone crawl breast couch or a Posirest-2 (Civco). RESULTS: No difference in acute toxicity between prone and supine positions was found, but 5 fractions did result in a lower risk of desquamation (15% vs 41%; P = .04). Prone positioning resulted in lower mean ipsilateral lung dose (2.89 vs 4.89 Gy; P < .001), mean thyroid dose (3.42 vs 6.61 Gy; P = .004), and mean contralateral breast dose (0.41 vs 0.54 Gy; P = .007). No significant difference in mean heart dose (0.90 vs 1.07 Gy; P = .22) was found. Set-up accuracy was similar between both positions. CONCLUSIONS: Unfortunately, the primary endpoint of the trial was not met due to premature closure of the trial. Acceleration in 5 fractions resulted in a lower risk of desquamation. Prone positioning did not influence acute toxicity or set-up accuracy, but did result in lower ipsilateral mean lung dose, thyroid dose, and contralateral breast dose.

Reproducibility of repeated breathhold and impact of breathhold failure in whole breast and regional nodal irradiation in prone crawl position.

In whole breast and regional nodal irradiation (WB + RNI), breathhold increases organ at risk (OAR) sparing. WB + RNI is usually performed in supine position, because positioning materials obstruct beam paths in prone position. Recent advancements allow prone WB + RNI (pWB + RNI) with increased sparing of OARs compared to supine WB + RNI. We evaluate positional and dosimetrical impact of repeated breathhold (RBH) and failure to breathhold (FTBH) in pWB + RNI. Twenty left-sided breast cancer patients were scanned twice in breathhold (baseline and RBH) and once free breathing (i.e. FTBH). Positional impact was evaluated using overlap index (OI) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Dosimetrical impact was assessed by beam transposition from the baseline plan. Mean OI and DSC ranges were 0.01-0.98 and 0.01-0.92 for FTBH, and 0.73-1 and 0.69-1 for RBH. Dosimetric impact of RBH was negligible. FTBH significantly decreased minimal dose to CTV WBI, level II and the internal mammary nodes, with adequate mean doses. FTBH significantly increased heart, LAD, left lung and esophagus dose. OI and DSC for RBH and FTBH show reproducible large ROI positions. Small ROIs show poor overlap. FTBH maintained adequate target coverage but increased heart, LAD, ipsilateral lung and esophagus dose. RBH is a robust technique in pWB + RNI. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05179161, registered 05/01/2022).

Effects of deep inspiration breath hold on prone photon or proton irradiation of breast and regional lymph nodes.

We report on a comparative dosimetrical study between deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) and shallow breathing (SB) in prone crawl position for photon and proton radiotherapy of whole breast (WB) and locoregional lymph node regions, including the internal mammary chain (LN_MI). We investigate the dosimetrical effects of DIBH in prone crawl position on organs-at-risk for both photon and proton plans. For each modality, we further estimate the effects of lung and heart doses on the mortality risks of different risk profiles of patients. Thirty-one patients with invasive carcinoma of the left breast and pathologically confirmed positive lymph node status were included in this study. DIBH significantly decreased dose to heart for photon and proton radiotherapy. DIBH also decreased lung doses for photons, while increased lung doses were observed using protons because the retracting heart is displaced by low-density lung tissue. For other organs-at-risk, DIBH resulted in significant dose reductions using photons while minor differences in dose deposition between DIBH and SB were observed using protons. In patients with high risks for cardiac and lung cancer mortality, average thirty-year mortality rates from radiotherapy-related cardiac injury and lung cancer were estimated at 3.12% (photon DIBH), 4.03% (photon SB), 1.80% (proton DIBH) and 1.66% (proton SB). The radiation-related mortality risk could not outweigh the ~ 8% disease-specific survival benefit of WB + LN_MI radiotherapy in any of the assessed treatments.

Intensity-modulated arc therapy with simultaneous integrated boost in the treatment of primary irresectable cervical cancer. Treatment planning, quality control, and clinical implementation.

PURPOSE: To report on the planning procedure, quality control, and clinical implementation of intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT) delivering a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in patients with primary irresectable cervix carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six patients underwent PET-CT (positron emission tomography-computed tomography) and MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) before treatment planning. Prescription (25 fractions) was (1) a median dose (D(50)) of 62, 58 and 56 Gy to the primary tumor (GTV_cervix), primary clinical target volume (CTV_cervix) and its planning target volume (PTV_cervix), respectively; (2) a D(50) of 60 Gy to the PET-positive lymph nodes (GTV_nodes); (3) a minimal dose (D(98)) of 45 Gy to the planning target volume of the elective lymph nodes (PTV_nodes). IMAT plans were generated using an anatomy-based exclusion tool with the aid of weight and leaf position optimization. The dosimetric delivery of IMAT was validated preclinically using radiochromic film dosimetry. RESULTS: Five to nine arcs were needed to create valid IMAT plans. Dose constraints on D(50) were not met in two patients (both GTV_cervix: 1 Gy and 3 Gy less). D(98) for PTV_nodes was not met in three patients (1 Gy each). Film dosimetry showed excellent gamma evaluation. There were no treatment interruptions. CONCLUSION: IMAT allows delivering an SIB to the macroscopic tumor without compromising the dose to the elective lymph nodes or the organs at risk. The clinical implementation is feasible.

Joint coordinate system for biomechanical analysis of the sacroiliac joint.

Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) biomechanics have been described in both in vitro and in vivo studies. A standard for joint coordinate systems has been created by the International Society of Biomechanics for most of the joints in the human body. However, a standardized joint coordinate system for sacroiliac joint motion analysis is currently still lacking. This impedes the comparison across studies and hinders communication among scientists and clinicians. As SIJ motion is reported to be quite limited, a proper standardization and reproducibility of this procedure is essential for the interpretation of future biomechanical SIJ studies. This paper proposes a joint coordinate system for the analysis of sacroiliac joint motion, based on the procedure developed by Grood and Suntay, using semi-automated anatomical landmarks on 3D joint surfaces. This coordinate system offers high inter-rater reliability and aspires to a more intuitive representation of biomechanical data, as it is aligned with SIJ articular surfaces. This study aims to encourage further reflection and debate on biomechanical data representation, in order to facilitate interpretation of SIJ biomechanics and improve communication between researchers and clinicians. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res.

Comparison of supine or prone crawl photon or proton breast and regional lymph node radiation therapy including the internal mammary chain.

We report on a dosimetrical study comparing supine (S) and prone-crawl (P) position for radiotherapy of whole breast (WB) and loco-regional lymph node regions, including the internal mammary chain (LN_IM). Six left sided breast cancer patients were CT-simulated in S and P positions and four patients only in P position. Treatment plans were made using non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc photon therapy (VMAT) or pencil beam scanning intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Dose prescription was 15*2.67 Gy(GyRBE). The average mean heart doses for S or P VMAT were 5.6 or 4.3 Gy, respectively (p = 0.16) and 1.02 or 1.08 GyRBE, respectively for IMPT (p = 0.8; p < 0.001 for IMPT versus VMAT). The average mean lung doses for S or P VMAT were 5.91 or 2.90 Gy, respectively (p = 0.002) and 1.56 or 1.09 GyRBE, respectively for IMPT (p = 0.016). In high-risk patients, average (range) thirty-year mortality rates from radiotherapy-related cardiac injury and lung cancer were estimated at 6.8(5.4-9.4)% or 3.8(2.8-5.1)% for S or P VMAT (p < 0.001), respectively, and 1.6(1.1-2.0)% or 1.2(0.8-1.6)% for S or P IMPT (p = 0.25), respectively. Radiation-related mortality risk could outweigh the ~8% disease-specific survival benefit of WB + LN_IM radiotherapy for S VMAT but not P VMAT. IMPT carries the lowest radiation-related mortality risks.

Positron emission tomography-guided, focal-dose escalation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using positron emission tomography (PET)-guided dose escalation, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose in head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A Phase I clinical trial was designed to escalate the dose limited to the [(18)-F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography ((18)F-FDG-PET)-delineated subvolume within the gross tumor volume. Positron emission tomography scanning was performed in the treatment position. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy with an upfront simultaneously integrated boost was employed. Two dose levels were planned: 25 Gy (level I) and 30 Gy (level II), delivered in 10 fractions. Standard IMRT was applied for the remaining 22 fractions of 2.16 Gy. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2005, 41 patients were enrolled, with 23 at dose level I, and 18 at dose level II; 39 patients completed the planned therapy. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 14 months. Two cases of dose-limiting toxicity occurred at dose level I (Grade 4 dermitis and Grade 4 dysphagia). One treatment-related death at dose level II halted the study. Complete response was observed in 18 of 21 (86%) and 13 of 16 (81%) evaluated patients at dose levels I and II (p < 0.7), respectively, with actuarial 1-year local control at 85% and 87% (p = n.s.), and 1-year overall survival at 82% and 54% (p = 0.06), at dose levels I and II, respectively. In 4 of 9 patients, the site of relapse was in the boosted (18)F-FDG-PET-delineated region. CONCLUSIONS: For head and neck cancer, PET-guided dose escalation appears to be well-tolerated. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached at the investigated dose levels.

Comparison of 6 MV and 18 MV photons for IMRT treatment of lung cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare 6 MV and 18 MV photon intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for non-small cell lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Doses for a cohort of 10 patients, typical for our department, were computed with a commercially available convolution/superposition (CS) algorithm. Final dose computation was also performed with a dedicated IMRT Monte Carlo dose engine (MCDE). RESULTS: CS plans showed higher D(95%) (Gy) for the GTV (68.13 vs 67.36, p=0.004) and CTV (67.23 vs 66.87, p=0.028) with 18 than with 6 MV photons. MCDE computations demonstrated higher doses with 6 MV than 18 MV in D(95%) for the PTV (64.62 vs 63.64, p=0.009), PTV(optim) (65.48 vs 64.83, p=0.014) and CTV (66.22 vs 65.64, p=0.027). Dose inhomogeneity was lower with 18 than with 6 MV photons for GTV (0.08 vs 0.09, p=0.007) and CTV (0.10 vs 0.11, p=0.045) in CS but not MCDE plans. 6 MV photons significantly (D(33%); p=0.045) spared the esophagus in MCDE plans. Observed dose differences between lower and higher energy IMRT plans were dependent on the individual patient. CONCLUSIONS: Selection of photon energy depends on priority ranking of endpoints and individual patients. In the absence of highly accurate dose computation algorithms such as CS and MCDE, 6 MV photons may be the prudent choice.