A finite element method for modeling diffusion of alpha-emitting particles in tissue.

BACKGROUND: Diffusing alpha-emitters Radiation Therapy ("DaRT") is a promising new modality for the treatment of solid tumors. Interstitial sources containing 224 Ra are inserted into the tumor, producing alpha particles via the decay of 224 Ra and its daughters. The alpha particles are able to produce a "kill region" of several mm due to the diffusion of the alpha-emitting atoms. The Diffusion-Leakage (D-L) model has been proposed to describe the movement of the alpha-emitters used in DaRT in tumor tissue. PURPOSE: To date, estimating the dose delivered under the D-L model has been accomplished with numerical solutions based on finite difference methods, namely DART1D and DART2D, as well as with asymptotic expressions for the long time limit. The aim of this work is to develop a flexible method of finite elements for solving the D-L model and to validate prior solutions of the D-L model. METHODS: We develop a two-dimensional finite element solution to the D-L model implemented using the FEniCS software library. Our approach solves the variational formulation of the D-L equations on an unstructured mesh of triangular Lagrangian elements. We calculate the local dose in the mid- and axial planes of the source and validate our results against the one- and two-dimensional solutions obtained using the previously proposed numerical scheme, DART1D and DART2D. We use our model to estimate the change in dose in the source midplane as a function of the physical parameters used in the D-L model. RESULTS: The local dose at the end of a 30 day treatment period estimated by our numerical method differs from DART1D and DART2D by less than 1% in the source midplane and less than 3% along the source axis over clinically relevant distances, with the largest discrepancies in high gradient areas where the Finite Element Method (FEM) mesh has a higher element density. We find that within current experimentally estimated ranges for D-L model parameters, the dose in the source midplane at a distance of 2 mm can vary by over a factor of 3. CONCLUSIONS: The 2D finite element model reproduces the calculated dose obtained with DART1D and DART2D under the assumptions D-L model. The variation in predicted dose within current experimental ranges for model parameters suggests the necessity of further studies to better determine their statistical distributions. Finally, the FEM model can be used to calculate dose from DaRT in a variety of realistic 2D geometries beyond the D-L model.

Quantifying clinical severity of physics errors in high-dose rate prostate brachytherapy using simulations.

PURPOSE: To quantitatively evaluate through automated simulations the clinical significance of potential high-dose rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy (HDRPB) physics errors selected from our internal failure-modes and effect analysis (FMEA). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A list of failure modes was compiled and scored independently by 8 brachytherapy physicists on a one-to-ten scale for severity (S), occurrence (O), and detectability (D), with risk priority number (RPN) = SxOxD. Variability of RPNs across observers (standard deviation/average) was calculated. Six idealized HDRPB plans were generated, and error simulations were performed: single (N = 1722) and systematic (N = 126) catheter shifts (craniocaudal; -1cm:1 cm); single catheter digitization errors (tip and connector needle-tips displaced independently in random directions; 0.1 cm:0.5 cm; N = 44,318); and swaps (two catheters swapped during digitization or connection; N = 528). The deviations due to each error in prostate D90%, urethra D20%, and rectum D1cm3 were analyzed using two thresholds: 5-20% (possible clinical impact) and >20% (potentially reportable events). RESULTS: Twenty-nine relevant failure modes were described. Overall, RPNs ranged from 6 to 108 (average ± 1 standard deviation, 46 ± 23), with responder variability ranging from 19% to 184% (average 75% ± 30%). Potentially reportable events were observed in the simulations for systematic shifts >0.4 cm for prostate and digitization errors >0.3 cm for the urethra and >0.4 cm for rectum. Possible clinical impact was observed for catheter swaps (all organs), systematic shifts >0.2 cm for prostate and >0.4 cm for rectum, and digitization errors >0.2 cm for prostate and >0.1 cm for urethra and rectum. CONCLUSIONS: A high variability in RPN scores was observed. Systematic simulations can provide insight in the severity scoring of multiple failure modes, supplementing typical FMEA approaches.

The American Brachytherapy Society consensus statement on intraoperative radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: Although radiation therapy has traditionally been delivered with external beam or brachytherapy, intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) represents an alternative that may shorten the course of therapy, reduce toxicities, and improve patient satisfaction while potentially lowering the cost of care. At this time, there are limited evidence-based guidelines to assist clinicians with patient selection for IORT. As such, the American Brachytherapy Society presents a consensus statement on the use of IORT. METHODS: Physicians and physicists with expertise in intraoperative radiation created a site-directed guideline for appropriate patient selection and utilization of IORT. RESULTS: Several IORT techniques exist including radionuclide-based high-dose-rate, low-dose-rate, electron, and low-energy electronic. In breast cancer, IORT as monotherapy should only be used on prospective studies. IORT can be considered in the treatment of sarcomas with close/positive margins or recurrent sarcomas. IORT can be considered in conjunction with external beam radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcomas. IORT can be considered for colorectal malignancies with concern for positive margins and in the setting of recurrent gynecologic cancers. For thoracic, head and neck, and central nervous system malignancies, utilization of IORT should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. CONCLUSIONS: The present guidelines provide clinicians with a summary of current data regarding IORT by treatment site and guidelines for the appropriate patient selection and safe utilization of the technique. High-dose-rate, low-dose-rate brachytherapy methods are appropriate when IORT is to be delivered as are electron and low-energy based on the clinical scenario.

Real-time intraoperative evaluation of implant quality and dose correction during prostate brachytherapy consistently improves target coverage using a novel image fusion and optimization program.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to describe the process and outcome of performing postimplantation dosimetric assessment and intraoperative dose correction during prostate brachytherapy using a novel image fusion-based treatment-planning program. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-six consecutive patients underwent intraoperative real-time corrections of their dose distributions at the end of their permanent seed interstitial procedures. After intraoperatively planned seeds were implanted and while the patient remained in the lithotomy position, a cone beam computed tomography scan was obtained to assess adequacy of the prescription dose coverage. The implanted seed positions were automatically segmented from the cone-beam images, fused onto a new set of acquired ultrasound images, reimported into the planning system, and recontoured. Dose distributions were recalculated based upon actual implanted seed coordinates and recontoured ultrasound images and were reviewed. If any dose deficiencies within the prostate target were identified, additional needles and seeds were added. Once an implant was deemed acceptable, the procedure was completed, and anesthesia was reversed. RESULTS: When the intraoperative ultrasound-based quality assurance assessment was performed after seed placement, the median volume receiving 100% of the dose (V100) was 93% (range, 74% to 98%). Before seed correction, 23% (6/26) of cases were noted to have V100 <90%. Based on this intraoperative assessment and replanning, additional seeds were placed into dose-deficient regions within the target to improve target dose distributions. Postcorrection, the median V100 was 97% (range, 93% to 99%). Following intraoperative dose corrections, all implants achieved V100 >90%. CONCLUSIONS: In these patients, postimplantation evaluation during the actual prostate seed implant procedure was successfully applied to determine the need for additional seeds to correct dose deficiencies before anesthesia reversal. When applied, this approach should significantly reduce intraoperative errors and chances for suboptimal dose delivery during prostate brachytherapy.

Real-time intraoperative computed tomography assessment of quality of permanent interstitial seed implantation for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of real-time kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during prostate brachytherapy for intraoperative dosimetric assessment and correcting deficient dose regions. METHODS: A total of 20 patients were evaluated intraoperatively with a mobile CBCT unit immediately after implantation while still anesthetized. The source detector system was enclosed in a circular CT-like geometry with a bore that accommodates patients in the lithotomy position. After seed deposition, the CBCT scans were obtained. The dosimetry was evaluated and compared with the standard postimplantation CT-based assessment. In 8 patients, the deposited seeds were localized in the intraoperative CBCT frame of reference and registered to the intraoperative transrectal ultrasound images. With this information, a second intraoperative plan was generated to ascertain whether additional seeds were needed to achieve the planned prescription dose. The final dosimetry was compared with the postimplantation scan assessment. RESULTS: The mean differences between the dosimetric parameters from the intraoperative CBCT and postimplant CT scans were < .5% for percentage of volume receiving 100% of the prescription dose, minimal dose received by 90% of the prostate, and percentage of volume receiving 150% of the prescription dose. The minimal dose received by 5% (maximal dose) of the urethra differed by 8% on average and for the rectum an average difference of approximately 18% was observed. After fusion of the implanted seed coordinates from the intraoperative CBCT scans to the intraoperative transrectal ultrasound images, the dosimetric outcomes were not significantly different from the postimplantation CT dosimetric results. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative CT-based dosimetric evaluation of prostate permanent seed implantation before anesthesia reversal is feasible and might avert misadministration of dose delivery. The dosimetric measurements using the intraoperative CBCT scans were dependable and correlated well with the postimplant diagnostic CT findings.

Single-fraction intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer: early cosmetic results.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cosmetic outcome of patients treated with wide local excision and intraoperative radiotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 50 women were treated on a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of intraoperative radiotherapy at wide local excision. The eligibility criteria included age >60, tumor size 47 cm(3) of treated tissue. Women who had received 18 Gy at the lateral aspects of their cavities had better cosmetic outcomes than did women who had received 20 Gy at the lateral aspects. When comparing the 6- and 12-month results, the scores remained stable for 63%, improved for 17%, and worsened for 20%. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative radiotherapy appears feasible for selected patients. A favorable cosmetic outcome appears to be related to a smaller treatment volume. The cosmetic outcome is acceptable, although additional follow-up is necessary.

The role of external beam in brachytherapy.

In this paper we put forward the claim that the combination of low dose-rate brachytherapy (BRT) and fractionated external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) may, when planned to take advantage of the relative advantages of each of these two modalities, result in enhanced tumor dose with no penalties to organs at risk. The concept of iso-effective dose (IED) serves the role of common currency for fusing BRT and EBRT and, for evaluation purposes, converting back the resulting IED distribution into a biologically equivalent plan delivered by any single modality. If we accept this view, there are further questions that must be answered regarding practical matters. We show how to deal with these questions by describing an actual patient plan.

Methodology for biologically-based treatment planning for combined low-dose-rate (permanent implant) and high-dose-rate (fractionated) treatment of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The combination of permanent low-dose-rate interstitial implantation (LDR-BRT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) has been used in the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. While a high radiation dose is delivered to the prostate in this setting, the actual biologic dose equivalence compared to monotherapy is not commonly invoked. We describe methodology for obtaining the fused dosimetry of this combined treatment and assigning a dose equivalence which in turn can be used to develop desired normal tissue and target constraints for biologic-based treatment planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients treated with this regimen initially receive an I-125 implant prescribed to 110 Gy followed, 2 months later, by 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions using intensity-modulated external beam radiotherapy. Ab initio methodology is described, using clinically derived biologic parameters (alpha, beta, potential doubling time for prostate cancer cells [T(pot)], cell loss factor), for calculating tumor control probability isoeffective doses for the combined LDR and conventional fraction EBRT treatment regimen. As no such formalism exists for assessing rectal or urethral toxicity, we make use of semi-empirical expressions proposed for describing urethral and rectal complication probabilities for specific treatment situations (LDR and fractionation, respectively) and utilize the notion of isoeffective dose to extend these results to combined LDR-EBRT regimens. RESULTS: The application to treatment planning of the methodology described in this study is illustrated with real-patient data. We evaluate the effect of changing LDR and EBRT prescription doses (in a manner that remains isoeffective with 81 Gy EBRT alone or with 144 Gy LDR monotherapy) on rectal and urethral complication probabilities, and suggest that it should be possible to improve the therapeutic ratio by exploiting joint LDR-EBRT planning. CONCLUSIONS: We describe new methodology for biologically based treatment planning for patients who receive combined low-dose-rate brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Using relevant mathematical tools, we demonstrate the feasibility of fusing dose distributions from each treatment for this combined regimen, which can then be expressed as isoeffective dose distributions. Based on this information, dose constraints for the rectum and urethra are described which could be used for planning such combination regimens.