Comparison of conventional and hippocampus-sparing radiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: In silico study and systematic review.

Background and purpose: Radiation-induced damage to the hippocampi can cause cognitive decline. International recommendations for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) radiotherapy (RT) lack specific guidelines for protecting the hippocampi. Our study evaluates if hippocampi-sparing (HS) RT in NPC ensures target coverage and meets recommended dose limits for other at-risk organs. Materials and methods: In a systematic literature review, we compared hippocampal D40% in conventional and HS RT plans. In an in silico dosimetric study, conventional and HS-VMAT plans were created for each patient, following international recommendations for OAR delineation, dose prioritization and acceptance criteria. We assessed the impact on neurocognitive function using a previously published normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model. Results: In four previous studies (n = 79), researchers reduced D40% hippocampal radiation doses in HS plans compared to conventional RT on average from 24.9 Gy to 12.6 Gy.Among 12 NPC patients included in this in silico study, statistically significant differences between HS and conventional VMAT plans were observed in hippocampal EQD2 Dmax (23.8 vs. 46.4 Gy), Dmin (3.8 vs. 4.6 Gy), Dmean (8.1 vs. 15.1 Gy), and D40% (8.3 vs. 15.8 Gy). PTV coverage and OAR doses were similar, with less homogeneous PTV coverage in HS plans (p = 0.038). This translated to a lower probability of memory decline in HS plans (interquartile range 15.8-29.6 %) compared to conventional plans (33.8-81.1 %) based on the NTCP model (p = 0.002). Conclusion: Sparing the hippocampus in NPC RT is safe and feasible. Given the life expectancy of many NPC patients, their cognitive well-being must be paramount in radiotherapy planning.

Treatment planning and delivery practice of lung SBRT: Results of the 2022 ESTRO physics survey.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The use of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) in lung cancer is increasing. However, there is no consensus on the most appropriate treatment planning and delivery practice for lung SBRT. To gauge the range of practice, quantify its variability and identify where consensus might be achieved, ESTRO surveyed the medical physics community. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey was distributed to ESTRO's physicist membership in 2022, covering experience, dose and fractionation, target delineation, dose calculation and planning practice, imaging protocols, and quality assurance. RESULTS: Two-hundred and forty-four unique answers were collected after data cleaning. Most respondents were from Europe the majority of which had more than 5 years' experience in SBRT. The large majority of respondents deliver lung SBRT with the VMAT technique on C-arm Linear Accelerators (Linacs) employing daily pre-treatment CBCT imaging. A broad spectrum of fractionation schemes were reported, alongside an equally wide range of dose prescription protocols. A clear preference was noted for prescribing to 95% or greater of the PTV. Several issues emerged regarding the dose calculation algorithm: 22% did not state it while 24% neglected to specify the conditions under which the dose was calculated. Contouring was usually performed on Maximum or Average Intensity Projection images while dose was mainly computed on the latter. No clear indications emerged for plan homogeneity, complexity, and conformity assessment. Approximately 40% of the responders participated in inter-centre credentialing of SBRT in the last five years. Substantial differences emerged between high and low experience centres, with the latter employing less accurate algorithms and older equipment. CONCLUSION: The survey revealed an evident heterogeneity in numerous aspects of the clinical implementation of lung SBRT treatments. International guidelines and codes of practice might promote harmonisation.

Breast size and dose to cardiac substructures in adjuvant three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy compared to tangential intensity modulated radiotherapy.

Background The aim of the study was to quantify planned doses to the heart and specific cardiac substructures in free-breathing adjuvant three-dimensional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and tangential intensity modulated radiotherapy (t-IMRT) for left-sided node-negative breast cancer, and to assess the differences in planned doses to organs at risk according to patients' individual anatomy, including breast volume. Patients and methods In the study, the whole heart and cardiac substructures were delineated for 60 patients using cardiac atlas. For each patient, 3D-CRT and t-IMRT plans were generated. The prescribed dose was 42.72 Gy in 16 fractions. Patients were divided into groups with small, medium, and large clinical target volume (CTV). Calculated dose distributions were compared amongst the two techniques and the three different groups of CTV. Results Mean absorbed dose to the whole heart (MWHD) (1.9 vs. 2.1 Gy, P < 0.005), left anterior descending coronary artery mean dose (8.2 vs. 8.4 Gy, P < 0.005) and left ventricle (LV) mean dose (3.0 vs. 3.2, P < 0.005) were all significantly lower with 3D-CRT technique compared to t-IMRT. Apical (8.5 vs. 9.0, P < 0.005) and anterior LV walls (5.0 vs. 5.4 Gy, P < 0.005) received the highest mean dose (Dmean). MWHD and LV-Dmean increased with increasing CTV size regardless of the technique. Low MWHD values (< 2.5 Gy) were achieved in 44 (73.3%) and 41 (68.3%) patients for 3D-CRT and t-IMRT techniques, correspondingly. Conclusions Our study confirms a considerable range of the planned doses within the heart for adjuvant 3D-CRT or t-IMRT in node-negative breast cancer. We observed differences in heart dosimetric metrics between the three groups of CTV size, regardless of the radiotherapy planning technique.

Breast size impact on adjuvant radiotherapy adverse effects and dose parameters in treatment planning.

Background Breast radiotherapy is an established adjuvant treatment after breast conserving surgery. One of the important individual factors affecting the final cosmetic outcome after radiation is breast size. The purpose of this review is to summarise the clinical toxicity profile of adjuvant radiotherapy in women with breasts of various sizes, and to evaluate the treatment planning studies comparing target coverage and dose to thoracic organs at risk in relation to breast size. Conclusions Inhomogeneity and excessive radiation dose (hot spots) in the planning of target volume as well as large volume of the breast per se, all contribute to a higher rate of acute adverse events and suboptimal final cosmetic outcome in adjuvant breast cancer radiotherapy, regardless of the fractionation schedule. Improved homogeneity leads to a lower rate of ≥ grade 2 toxicity and can be achieved with three-dimensional conformal or modulated radiotherapy techniques. There may be an association between body habitus (higher body mass index, bigger breast size, pendulous breast, and large chest wall separation) and a higher mean dose to the ipsilateral lung and whole heart. A combination of the technical innovations (i.e. the breath-hold technique, prone position with or without holding breath, lateral decubitus position, and thermoplastic bra), dose prescription (i.e. moderate hypofractionation), and irradiated volume (i.e. partial breast irradiation) should be tailored to every single patient in clinical practice to mitigate the risk of radiation adverse effects.