Initial Experience With Single-Isocenter Radiosurgery to Target Multiple Brain Metastases Using an Automated Treatment Planning Software: Clinical Outcomes and Optimal Target Volume Margins Strategy.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess the clinical outcomes and target positioning accuracy of frameless linear accelerator single-isocenter multiple-target (SIMT) dynamic conformal arc (DCA) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for multiple brain metastases (BM). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between October 2016 and September 2018, 31 consecutive patients ≥18 years old with 204 BM <3 cm in maximum size receiving SIMT DCA SRS were retrospectively evaluated. All plans were created using a dedicated automated treatment planning software (Brainlab, Munich, Germany), and treatments were performed with a Truebeam STx or a Novalis Tx (Brainlab and Varian Medical Systems, CA). The accuracy of setup and interfraction patient repositioning was assessed by Brainlab ExacTrac radiograph 6-dimensional image system and the risk of compromised target dose coverage evaluated. Brain control and overall survival were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method calculated from the time of SRS. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were treated for 4 to 6 and 17 patients for 7 to 10 BM. The mean gross tumor volume (GTV) was 0.65 cm3 and the mean planning target volume (PTV) was 0.89 cm3. Mean V95 (the volume of the PTV covered by 95% of the prescription dose) and D95 (the prescription dose covering 95% of the PTV) were 99.5% and 21.1 Gy, respectively. With a median clinical follow-up of 11 months (range, 4-26 months), the 1-year survival was 68% and local control was 89%. As a consequence of plan isocenter residual errors, a loss of target coverage, defined as V95 < 95%, occurred in 28 PTVs (10 patients); using a 1 mm GTV-to-PTV margin, adequate dose coverage was maintained for all lesions. CONCLUSIONS: SIMT DCA SRS represents a fast and effective approach for patients with up to 10 BM. The dosimetric effects of residual set-up and intrafraction positioning errors are modest, although a GTV-to-PTV margin of 1 mm is recommended.

A new standardized data collection system for brain stereotactic external radiotherapy: the PRE.M.I.S.E project.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, novel radiation therapy techniques have moved clinical practice toward tailored medicine. An essential role is played by the decision support system, which requires a standardization of data collection. The Aim of the Prediction Models In Stereotactic External radiotherapy (PRE.M.I.S.E.) project is the implementation of systems that analyze heterogeneous datasets. This article presents the project design, focusing on brain stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). MATERIALS & METHODS: First, raw ontology was defined by exploiting semiformal languages (block and entity relationship diagrams) and the natural language; then, it was transposed in a Case Report Form, creating a storage system. RESULTS: More than 130 brain SRT's variables were selected. The dedicated software Beyond Ontology Awareness (BOA-Web) was set and data collection is ongoing. CONCLUSION: The PRE.M.I.S.E. project provides standardized data collection for a specific radiation therapy technique, such as SRT. Future aims are: including other centers and validating an extracranial SRT ontology.

Neurological outcome and memory performance in patients with 10 or more brain metastases treated with frameless linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: To assess the neurocognitive function and neurological toxicity of frameless linear accelerator (LINAC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with 10 or more brain metastases (BM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive adult patients who received SRS for ten or more 10 BM < 3 cm in maximum size were evaluated. All plans were generated using a single-isocenter multiple-target (SIMT) SRS technique with doses of 22 Gy for lesions < 2 cm and 16-18 Gy for those ≥ 2 cm in size. Survival analyses were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method from the date of SRS. Neurocognitive function using the Hopkins verbal learning test-revised (HVLT-R) and activity of daily living scale (ADLS) were collected prospectively at baseline and at 3,6 and 12-month follow-up. Toxicity was assessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (Version 5.0). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 10.8 months, 1-year survival and local control rates were 65% and 86%, respectively. Grade 2 or 3 toxicity occurred in eleven patients, being associated with radiological changes suggestive of radiation necrosis in seven patients. Three months after SRS, the mean relative decline was 14.2% for HVLT-R delayed recall, 12.3% for HVLT-R recognition, and 9.8% for HVLT-R total recall. A significant deterioration of HVLT-R scores ranged from 5.5 to 18.7% of patients at different time points. ADLS scores declined over time, but changes were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: SRS is an effective and safe approach for patients with 10 or more BM able to maintain the pretreatment neurocognitive function in the majority of patients.

Plan quality improvement by DVH sharing and planner's experience: Results of a SBRT multicentric planning study on prostate.

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in a multi-institutional context, the role of Dose Volume Histogram (DVH) sharing in order to achieve higher plan quality, to harmonize prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) plans and to assess if the planner's experience in SBRT could lead to lower dose at organs at risk (OARs). METHODS: During the first phase five patients enrolled for prostate SBRT were planned by multiple physicists according to common protocol. The prescription dose was 35 Gy in 5 fractions. Dosimetric parameters, modulation index (MIt), plan parameters, and planner experience level (EL) were statistically analyzed. During the second phase median DVHs from all centers were shared and physicists replanned one patient of the five, aiming at inter-planner harmonization and further OARs sparing. Data were summarized by Spearman-correlogram (p < 0.05) and boxplots. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the re-plans to the original plans. RESULTS: Seventy-eight SBRT plans from 13 centers were evaluated. EL correlated with modulation of plan parameters and reduction of OARs doses, such as volume receiving 28 Gy of rectum (rectum-V28Gy), rectum-V32Gy, and bladder-V30Gy. The re-plans showed significant reduced variability in rectum-V28Gy and increased PTV dose homogeneity. No significant difference in plan complexity metrics and plan parameters between plans and re-plans were obtained. CONCLUSIONS: Planner's experience in prostate SBRT was correlated with dosimetric parameters. Sharing median DVHs reduced variability among centers whilst keeping the same level of plan complexity. SBRT planning skills can benefit from a replanning phase after sharing DVHs from multiple centers, improving plan quality and concordance among centers.

Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy as a potential curative treatment in duodenal adenocarcinoma: a case report.

PURPOSE: One of the rarest gastrointestinal neoplasm is small bowel cancer. Experience with its treatment modalities is limited. Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) has improved, with image-guided radiation therapy becoming a curative option in many tumors. Especially when surgery cannot be performed due to comorbidities, SABR provides a good toxicity profile and an excellent tumor control rate owing to its specific schedule: high dose on a limited and well-defined area. METHODS: An 83-year-old man had arterial hypertension and congestive cardiomyopathy, with recent history of upper abdominal pain, weight loss over 10 kg, and progressive severe fatigue. The patient underwent endoscopy that showed a large mass partially obstructing the second part of the duodenum; a biopsy revealed a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma. A staging CT scan confirmed localized disease. Due to the patient's age and comorbidities, a SABR was proposed as the preferred treatment. In order to localize the tumor during radiotherapy sessions, surgical clips were placed endoscopically next to the lesion as fiducial markers. The patient received 25 Gy in 5 fractions on alternate days. RESULTS: Resolution of duodenal obstruction and bleeding lasted for 14 months. The patient died of myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: This case suggests that SABR could have a role in the palliative treatment of small bowel cancers, with good toxicity profile, particularly in patients for whom surgical treatment is not a viable option.

Technical Note: Multicenter study of TrueBeam FFF beams with a new stereotactic diode: Can a common small field signal ratio curve be defined?

PURPOSE: Small radiation fields (<30 mm) are typically involved in stereotactic body radiation therapy procedures. Output factor measurements are subjected to large uncertainties. The signal ratio (SR) readings, defined as the ratio of central axis reading, respectively, in the actual field size and in the reference field size, were evaluated in several centers and a common mathematical description of the SR curve was investigated. METHODS: A couple of new unshielded stereotactic diodes (Razor, IBA) was tested under eight different TrueBeams using 10 MV flattering filter free beams with high dose rate (2400 MU/min). Small fields, ranging from 6 to 50 mm, were analyzed in terms of profiles and central axis point measurements. SRs were normalized to 30 mm field and were calculated as a function of nominal field size (NFS) and effective field size (EFS). From SRs acquired using Razor1 (four centers), a theoretical equation was extrapolated. Three centers with Razor2 were used to test the mathematical relationship. Finally, the two diodes were directly compared in the last center. RESULTS: The EFS was systematically smaller than NFS (p < 0.01) for all field size ranges, with mean difference of 0.9 ± 0.5 mm. The SR fits using the NFS and EFS had, respectively, R2 = 0.989 and R2 ≫ 0.999. The Razor2 centers' mean deviation from the predicted SRs, using the NFS and EFS fits, was, respectively, 3.4% and 0.5%. The maximum deviations were 5.0% (6 mm field size) for NFS and 1.9% for EFS. Maximum deviation of 0.5% between the two Razors was observed. CONCLUSIONS: EFS measurements were confirmed to be mandatory when comparing SRs over different centers. An equation establishing a functional relation between SRs and the EFS was obtained and tested for the new Razor diode.

Lung stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy: A large scale multi-institutional planning comparison for interpreting results of multi-institutional studies.

PURPOSE: A large-scale multi-institutional planning comparison on lung cancer SABR is presented with the aim of investigating possible criticism in carrying out retrospective multicentre data analysis from a dosimetric perspective. METHODS: Five CT series were sent to the participants. The dose prescription to PTV was 54Gy in 3 fractions of 18Gy. The plans were compared in terms of PTV-gEUD2 (generalized Equivalent Uniform Dose equivalent to 2Gy), mean dose to PTV, Homogeneity Index (PTV-HI), Conformity Index (PTV-CI) and Gradient Index (PTV-GI). We calculated the maximum dose for each OAR (organ at risk) considered as well as the MLD2 (mean lung dose equivalent to 2Gy). The data were stratified according to expertise and technology. RESULTS: Twenty-six centers equipped with Linacs, 3DCRT (4% - 1 center), static IMRT (8% - 2 centers), VMAT (76% - 20 centers), CyberKnife (4% - 1 center), and Tomotherapy (8% - 2 centers) collaborated. Significant PTV-gEUD2 differences were observed (range: 105-161Gy); mean-PTV dose, PTV-HI, PTV-CI, and PTV-GI were, respectively, 56.8±3.4Gy, 14.2±10.1%, 0.70±0.15, and 4.9±1.9. Significant correlations for PTV-gEUD2 versus PTV-HI, and MLD2 versus PTV-GI, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in terms of PTV-gEUD2 may suggest the inclusion of PTV-gEUD2 calculation for retrospective data inter-comparison.

A feasibility dosimetric study on prostate cancer : are we ready for a multicenter clinical trial on SBRT?

PURPOSE: The Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM) started a working group dedicated to stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) treatment. In this work, we performed a multicenter planning study on patients who were candidates for SBRT in the treatment of prostate cancer with the aim of evaluating the dosimetric consistency among the different hospitals. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fourteen centers were provided the contours of 5 patients. Plans were performed following the dose prescription and constraints for organs at risk (OARs) of a reference paper. The dose prescription was 35 Gy in five fractions for the planning target volume (PTV). Different techniques were used (3D-CRT, fixed-Field IMRT, VMAT, CyberKnife). Plans were compared in terms of dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters. Furthermore, the median DVH was calculated and one patient was re-planned. RESULTS: A total of 70 plans were compared. The maximum dose to the body was 107.9 ± 4.5 % (range 101.5-116.3 %). Dose at 98 % (D98 %) and mean dose to the clinical target volume (CTV) were 102.0 ± 0.9 % (global range 101.1-102.9 %) and 105.1 ± 0.6 % (range 98.6-124.6 %). Similar trends were found for D95 % and mean dose to the PTV. Important differences were found in terms of the homogeneity index. Doses to OARs were heterogeneous. The subgroups with the same treatment planning system showed differences comparable to the differences of the whole group. In the re-optimized plans, DVH differences among institutes were reduced and OAR sparing improved. CONCLUSION: Important dosimetric differences with possible clinical implications, in particular related to OARs, were found. Replanning allowed a reduction in the OAR dose and decreased standard deviations. Multicenter clinical trials on SBRT should require a preplanning study to standardize the optimization procedure.

Clinical implications in the use of the PBC algorithm versus the AAA by comparison of different NTCP models/parameters.

PURPOSE: Retrospective analysis of 3D clinical treatment plans to investigate qualitative, possible, clinical consequences of the use of PBC versus AAA. METHODS: The 3D dose distributions of 80 treatment plans at four different tumour sites, produced using PBC algorithm, were recalculated using AAA and the same number of monitor units provided by PBC and clinically delivered to each patient; the consequences of the difference on the dose-effect relations for normal tissue injury were studied by comparing different NTCP model/parameters extracted from a review of published studies. In this study the AAA dose calculation is considered as benchmark data. The paired Student t-test was used for statistical comparison of all results obtained from the use of the two algorithms. RESULTS: In the prostate plans, the AAA predicted lower NTCP value (NTCPAAA) for the risk of late rectal bleeding for each of the seven combinations of NTCP parameters, the maximum mean decrease was 2.2%. In the head-and-neck treatments, each combination of parameters used for the risk of xerostemia from irradiation of the parotid glands involved lower NTCPAAA, that varied from 12.8% (sd=3.0%) to 57.5% (sd=4.0%), while when the PBC algorithm was used the NTCPPBC's ranging was from 15.2% (sd=2.7%) to 63.8% (sd=3.8%), according the combination of parameters used; the differences were statistically significant. Also NTCPAAA regarding the risk of radiation pneumonitis in the lung treatments was found to be lower than NTCPPBC for each of the eight sets of NTCP parameters; the maximum mean decrease was 4.5%. A mean increase of 4.3% was found when the NTCPAAA was calculated by the parameters evaluated from dose distribution calculated by a convolution-superposition (CS) algorithm. A markedly different pattern was observed for the risk relating to the development of pneumonitis following breast treatments: the AAA predicted higher NTCP value. The mean NTCPAAA varied from 0.2% (sd = 0.1%) to 2.1% (sd = 0.3%), while the mean NTCPPBC varied from 0.1% (sd = 0.0%) to 1.8% (sd = 0.2%) depending on the chosen parameters set. CONCLUSIONS: When the original PBC treatment plans were recalculated using AAA with the same number of monitor units provided by PBC, the NTCPAAA was lower than the NTCPPBC, except for the breast treatments. The NTCP is strongly affected by the wide-ranging values of radiobiological parameters.