RESUMEN
Brain metastases can effectively be treated with surgical resection and adjuvant stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) has been used to non-invasively map the motor cortex prior to surgery of motor eloquent brain lesions. To date, few studies have reported the integration of such motor maps into radiotherapy planning. The hippocampus has been identified as an additional critical structure of radiation-induced deficits. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of selective dose reduction to both the nTMS-based motor cortex and the hippocampi in SRT of motor-eloquent brain metastases. Patients with motor-eloquent brain metastases undergoing surgical resection and adjuvant SRT between 07/2014 and 12/2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The radiotherapy treatment plans were retrieved from the treatment planning system ("original" plan). For each case, two intensity-modulated treatment plans were created: the "motor" plan aimed to reduce the dose to the motor cortex, the "motor & hipp" plan additionally reduce the dose to the hippocampus. The optimized plans were compared with the "original" plan regarding plan quality, planning target volume (PTV) coverage, and sparing of organs at risk (OAR). 69 plans were analyzed, all of which were clinically acceptable with no significant differences for PTV coverage. All OAR were protected according to standard protocols. Sparing of the nTMS motor map was feasible: mean dose 9.66 ± 5.97 Gy (original) to 6.32 ± 3.60 Gy (motor) and 6.49 ± 3.78 Gy (motor & hipp), p<0.001. In the "motor & hipp" plan, dose to the ipsilateral hippocampi could be significantly reduced (max 1.78 ± 1.44 Gy vs 2.49 ± 1.87 Gy in "original", p = 0.003; mean 1.01 ± 0.92 Gy vs. 1.32 ± 1.07 Gy in "original", p = 0.007). The study confirms the results from previous studies that inclusion of nTMS motor information into radiotherapy treatment planning is possible with a relatively straightforward workflow and can achieve reduced doses to the nTMS-defined motor area without compromising PTV coverage. Furthermore, we demonstrate the feasibility of selective dose reduction to the hippocampus at the same time. The clinical significance of these optimized plans yet remains to be determined. However, with no apparent disadvantages these optimized plans call for further and broader exploration.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) of the motor cortex has been successfully implemented into radiotherapy planning by a number of studies. Furthermore, the hippocampus has been identified as a radiation-sensitive structure meriting particular sparing in radiotherapy. This study assesses the joint protection of these two eloquent brain regions for the treatment of glioblastoma (GBM), with particular emphasis on the use of automatic planning. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with motor-eloquent brain glioblastoma who underwent surgical resection after nTMS mapping of the motor cortex and adjuvant radiotherapy were retrospectively evaluated. The radiotherapy treatment plans were retrieved, and the nTMS-defined motor cortex and hippocampus contours were added. Four additional treatment plans were created for each patient: two manual plans aimed to reduce the dose to the motor cortex and hippocampus by manual inverse planning. The second pair of re-optimized plans was created by the Auto-Planning algorithm. The optimized plans were compared with the "Original" plan regarding plan quality, planning target volume (PTV) coverage, and sparing of organs at risk (OAR). RESULTS: A total of 50 plans were analyzed. All plans were clinically acceptable with no differences in the PTV coverage and plan quality metrics. The OARs were preserved in all plans; however, overall the sparing was significantly improved by Auto-Planning. Motor cortex protection was feasible and significant, amounting to a reduction in the mean dose by >6 Gy. The dose to the motor cortex outside the PTV was reduced by >12 Gy (mean dose) and >5 Gy (maximum dose). The hippocampi were significantly improved (reduction in mean dose: ipsilateral >6 Gy, contralateral >4.6 Gy; reduction in maximum dose: ipsilateral >5 Gy, contralateral >5 Gy). While the dose reduction using Auto-Planning was generally better than by manual optimization, the radiated total monitor units were significantly increased. CONCLUSION: Considerable dose sparing of the nTMS-motor cortex and hippocampus could be achieved with no disadvantages in plan quality. Auto-Planning could further contribute to better protection of OAR. Whether the improved dosimetric protection of functional areas can translate into improved quality of life and motor or cognitive performance of the patients can only be decided by future studies.
