RESUMO
Purpose: Discrepancies between planned and delivered dose to GI structures during radiation therapy (RT) of liver cancer may hamper the prediction of treatment outcomes. The purpose of this study is to develop a streamlined workflow for dose accumulation in a treatment planning system (TPS) during liver image-guided RT and to assess its accuracy when using different deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms. Materials and Methods: Fifty-six patients with primary and metastatic liver cancer treated with external beam radiotherapy guided by daily CT-on-rails (CTOR) were retrospectively analyzed. The liver, stomach and duodenum contours were auto-segmented on all planning CTs and daily CTORs using deep-learning methods. Dose accumulation was performed for each patient using scripting functionalities of the TPS and considering three available DIR algorithms based on: (i) image intensities only; (ii) intensities + contours; (iii) a biomechanical model (contours only). Planned and accumulated doses were converted to equivalent dose in 2Gy (EQD2) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) were calculated for the stomach and duodenum. Dosimetric indexes for the normal liver, GTV, stomach and duodenum and the NTCP values were exported from the TPS for analysis of the discrepancies between planned and the different accumulated doses. Results: Deep learning segmentation of the stomach and duodenum enabled considerable acceleration of the dose accumulation process for the 56 patients. Differences between accumulated and planned doses were analyzed considering the 3 DIR methods. For the normal liver, stomach and duodenum, the distribution of the 56 differences in maximum doses (D2%) presented a significantly higher variance when a contour-driven DIR method was used instead of the intensity only-based method. Comparing the two contour-driven DIR methods, differences in accumulated minimum doses (D98%) in the GTV were >2Gy for 15 (27%) of the patients. Considering accumulated dose instead of planned dose in standard NTCP models of the duodenum demonstrated a high sensitivity of the duodenum toxicity risk to these dose discrepancies, whereas smaller variations were observed for the stomach. Conclusion: This study demonstrated a successful implementation of an automatic workflow for dose accumulation during liver cancer RT in a commercial TPS. The use of contour-driven DIR methods led to larger discrepancies between planned and accumulated doses in comparison to using an intensity only based DIR method, suggesting a better capability of these approaches in estimating complex deformations of the GI organs.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Increasing evidence suggests that patients with a limited number of metastases benefit from SABR to all lesions. However, the optimal dose and fractionation remain unknown. This is particularly true for bone and lymph node metastases. Therefore, a prospective, single-center, dose-escalation trial was initiated. METHODS: Dose-Escalation trial of STereotactic ablative body RadiOtherapY for non-spine bone and lymph node metastases (DESTROY) was an open-label phase 1 trial evaluating SABR to nonspine bone and lymph node lesions in patients with up to 3 metastases. Patients with European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, an estimated life expectancy of at least 6 months, and histologically confirmed nonhematological malignancy were eligible. Three SABR fractionation regimens, ie, 5 fractions of 7.0 Gy versus 3 fractions of 10.0 Gy versus a single fraction of 20.0 Gy, were applied in 3 consecutive patient cohorts. The rate of ≥grade 3 toxicity, scored according to the Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v. 4.03, up to 6 months after SABR, was the primary endpoint. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03486431). RESULTS: Between July 2017 and December 2018, 90 patients were enrolled. In total 101 metastases were treated. No ≥grade 3 toxicity was observed in any of the enrolled patients (95% CI 0.0%-12.3% for the first cohort with 28 analyzable patients; 95% CI 0.0%-11.6% for the second and third cohort with 30 analyzable patients each). Treatment-related grade 2 toxicities occurred in 4 out of 30 versus 2 out of 30 versus 2 out of 30 patients for the 5, 3 and 1 fraction schedule, respectively. Actuarial local control rate at 12 months was 94.5%. CONCLUSION: All 3 treatment schedules were feasible and effective with remarkably low toxicity rates and high local control rates. From a patient and resource point of view, the single-fraction schedule is undoubtedly most convenient.
