Measuring out-of-field dose to the hippocampus in common radiotherapy indications.

BACKGROUND: The high susceptibility of the hippocampus region to radiation injury is likely the causal factor of neurocognitive dysfunctions after exposure to ionizing radiation. Repetitive exposures with even low doses have been shown to impact adult neurogenesis and induce neuroinflammation. We address the question whether the out-of-field doses during radiotherapy of common tumour entities may pose a risk for the neuronal stem cell compartment in the hippocampus. METHODS: The dose to the hippocampus was determined for a single fraction according to different treatment plans for the selected tumor entities: Point dose measurements were performed in an anthropomorphic Alderson phantom and the out-of-field dose to the hippocampus was measured using thermoluminescence dosimeters. RESULTS: For carcinomas in the head and neck region the dose exposure to the hippocampal region for a single fraction ranged from to 37.4 to 154.8 mGy. The hippocampal dose was clearly different for naso-, oro- and hypopharynx, with maximal values for nasopharynx carcinoma. In contrast, hippocampal dose levels for breast and prostate cancer ranged between 2.7 and 4.1 mGy, and therefore significantly exceeded the background irradiation level. CONCLUSION: The mean dose to hippocampus for treatment of carcinomas in the head and neck region is high enough to reduce neurocognitive functions. In addition, care must be taken regarding the out of field doses. The mean dose is mainly related to scattering effects, as is confirmed by the data from breast or prostate treatments, with a very different geometrical set-up but similar dosimetric results.

Imaging doses for different CBCT protocols on the Halcyon 3.0 linear accelerator - TLD measurements in an anthropomorphic phantom.

INTRODUCTION: Image guided radiotherapy allows for particularly conformal tumour irradiation through precise patient positioning. Becoming the standard for radiotherapy, this increases imaging doses to the patient. The Halcyon 3.0 linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) requires daily imaging due to its geometry. For this reason, the accelerator is equipped with on-line kV and MV imaging. However, daily CBCT images required for irradiation apply additional radiation, which increases the dose to normal tissue and therefore can affect the patient's secondary cancer risk. In this study, actual organ doses were measured for the kV system, and a comparison of normal tissue doses for all available kV CBCT protocols was presented to demonstrate differences in imaging doses across entities and protocols. In addition, effective dose and secondary cancer risk from imaging are evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Measurements were performed with thermoluminescent dosimeters in an anthropomorphic phantom positioned according to each entity (brain, head and neck, breast, lung, pelvis). CBCT images were obtained, using all available pre-set protocols without further adjustment of the parameters. Measured doses for each position and each protocol were then compared and secondary cancer risk of relevant and specifically radiosensitive organs was calculated. RESULTS: It was found that imaging doses for protocols such as Pelvis and Head could be reduced by up to half using the corresponding Fast and Low Dose modes, respectively. On the other hand, larger field sizes or the Large mode yielded higher doses than their initial protocols. Image Gently was found to spare normal tissue best, however it is not suitable for certain entities due to low image quality or insufficient projection data. DISCUSSION: By using appropriate kV-CBCT protocols, it is possible to reduce imaging doses to a significant extent and therefore spare healthy tissue. Combined with studies of image quality, the results of this study could lead to adjustments in workflow regarding the choice of protocols used in daily routine. This could prevent unnecessary radiation exposure and reduce secondary cancer risk.

Comparison of Breast Cancer Radiotherapy Techniques Regarding Secondary Cancer Risk and Normal Tissue Complication Probability - Modelling and Measurements Using a 3D-Printed Phantom.

Background: Radiotherapy after breast-conserving therapy is a standard postoperative treatment of breast cancer, which can be carried out with a variety of irradiation techniques. The treatment planning must take into consideration detrimental effects on the neighbouring organs at risk-the lung, the heart, and the contralateral breast, which can include both short- and long-term effects represented by the normal tissue complication probability and secondary cancer risk. Patients and Methods: In this planning study, we investigate intensity-modulated (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal (3D-CRT) radiotherapy techniques including sequential or simultaneously integrated boosts as well as interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy boost techniques of 38 patients with breast-conserving surgery retrospectively. We furthermore develop a 3D-printed breast phantom add-on to allow for catheter placement and to measure the out-of-field dose using thermoluminescent dosimeters placed inside an anthropomorphic phantom. Finally, we estimate normal tissue complication probabilities using the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman model and secondary cancer risks using the linear non-threshold model (out-of-field) and the model by Schneider et al. (in-field). Results: The results depend on the combination of primary whole-breast irradiation and boost technique. The normal tissue complication probabilities for various endpoints are of the following order: 1%-2% (symptomatic pneumonitis, ipsilateral lung), 2%-3% (symptomatic pneumonitis, whole lung), and 1%-2% (radiation pneumonitis grade ≥ 2, whole lung). The additional relative risk of ischemic heart disease ranges from +25% to +35%. In-field secondary cancer risk of the ipsilateral lung in left-sided treatment is around 50 per 10,000 person-years for 20 years after exposure at age 55. Out-of-field estimation of secondary cancer risk results in approximately 5 per 10,000 person-years each for the contralateral lung and breast. Conclusions: In general, 3D-CRT shows the best risk reduction in contrast to IMRT. Regarding the boost concepts, brachytherapy is the most effective method in order to minimise normal tissue complication probability and secondary cancer risk compared to teletherapy boost concepts. Hence, the 3D-CRT technique in combination with an interstitial multicatheter brachytherapy boost is most suitable in terms of risk avoidance for treating breast cancer with techniques including boost concepts.