Comparative proton versus photon treatment planning for the Medicare Medical Treatment Overseas Program: The Royal Adelaide Hospital experience.

INTRODUCTION: Australia's first proton beam therapy (PBT) service, The Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and Research, is scheduled to open in the near future providing PBT for patients closer to home. Patients currently access Commonwealth funding for PBT via the Medicare Medical Treatment Overseas Program (MTOP). Proton versus photon treatment planning is a pre-requisite for the MTOP application. The Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) Department of Radiation Oncology has been providing this since 2016. We aim to provide a descriptive overview of our proton versus photon treatment planning process, presenting a summary of the comparative planning results and the treatment pathways selected for the patients referred. METHODS: All patients referred to the RAH for comparative planning between January 2016 and December 2018 were included in the analysis. Comparative plans were generated for each case using Pinnacle or Eclipse treatment planning systems. The planning techniques used and plan quality metrics were reported. RESULTS: Forty three patients were referred for comparative planning. The age range was 1-63 years, with the majority (72%) being paediatric patients (age ≤18 years). Of the 19 cases that have been submitted to MTOP, 16 have been accepted and 3 denied. Two of the accepted cases chose not to travel abroad for PBT. The other 14 cases have received PBT overseas. CONCLUSIONS: The RAH has provided an important service to demonstrate the dosimetric difference between PBT and photon therapy for Australian patients, an important step in supporting the funding of patients for treatment overseas.

Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) and Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) Guidelines for Pancreatic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT).

PURPOSE: Nonrandomized data exploring pancreas stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has demonstrated excellent local control rates and low toxicity. Before commencing a randomized trial investigating pancreas SBRT, standardization of prescription dose, dose constraints, simulation technique, and clinical target volume delineation are required. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Specialists in radiation oncology, medical oncology, hepatobiliary surgery, and gastroenterology attended 2 consecutive Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group workshops in 2017 and 2018. Sample cases were discussed during workshop contact with specifically invited international speakers highly experienced in pancreas SBRT. Furthermore, sample cases were contoured and planned between workshop contact to finalize dose constraints and clinical target volume delineation. RESULTS: Over 2 separate workshops, consensus was reached on dose and simulation technique. The working group recommended a dose prescription of 40 Gy in 5 fractions. Treatment delivery during end-expiratory breath hold with triple-phase contrast enhanced computed tomography was recommended. In addition, dose constraints, stepwise contouring guidelines, and an anatomic atlas for pancreatic SBRT were developed. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreas SBRT is emerging as a promising treatment modality requiring prospective evaluation in randomized studies. This work attempts to standardize dose, simulation technique, and volume delineation to support the delivery of high quality SBRT in a multicenter study.

Cost-effectiveness of proton therapy in treating base of skull chordoma.

While proton beam therapy (PBT) can offer increased sparing of healthy tissue, it is associated with large capital costs and as such, has limited availability. Furthermore, it has not been well established whether PBT has significant clinical advantages over conventional volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for all tumour types. PBT can potentially offer improved clinical outcomes for base of skull chordoma (BOSCh) patients compared with photon (X-ray) therapy, however the cost-effectiveness of these treatments is unclear. In this study, the cost-effectiveness of PBT in the treatment of BOSCh patients is assessed, based on an analysis of comparative radiotherapy treatment plans using a radiobiological Markov model. Seven BOSCh patients had treatment plans for the delivery of intensity modulated proton therapy and VMAT retrospectively analysed. The patient outcome (in terms of tumour local control and normal tissue complications) after receiving each treatment was estimated with a radiobiological Markov model. In addition, the model estimated the cost of both the primary treatment and treating any resultant adverse events. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was obtained for each patient. PBT was found to be cost-effective for 5 patients and cost-saving for 2. The mean ICER was AUD$1,990 per quality adjusted life year gained. Variation of model parameters resulted in the proton treatments remaining cost-effective for these patients. Based on this cohort, PBT is a cost-effective treatment for patients with BOSCh. This supports the inclusion of PBT for BOSCh in the Medicare Services Advisory Committee 1455 application.

Performance of a new preloaded fiducial needle to guide radiation therapy of upper gastrointestinal cancers.

BACKGROUND: Insertion of fiducials to outline the targeted lesion allows image-guided radiotherapy, and is best achieved by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This study is a performance comparison of the new EUS-guided preloaded fiducial needle against Visicoil fiducials. METHODS: Technical success, visibility score, procedural time, costs, and complications for patients who underwent EUS-guided fiducial placement in upper gastrointestinal malignancies were prospectively collected. RESULTS: 60 patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers had fiducials (14 Visicoil; 46 preloaded fiducials) inserted for image-guided radiotherapy. Technical success was 100 %, with a shorter mean (standard deviation) insertion time of 0.94 minutes (0.28 minutes) vs. 5.5 minutes (1.9 minutes; P < 0.001) and higher visibility score on fluoroscopy of 2 vs. 1.18 (P < 0.001) in the preloaded group. Neither group had major complications related to fiducial insertion. The cost of consumables per patient was lower in the preloaded group at US$480 (US$124) vs. US$643 (US$123; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Fiducial insertion for image-guided radiotherapy using the new preloaded needle is associated with 100 % technical success, shorter insertion time, and higher visibility, and is more cost-effective than the Visicoil system.