QA for helical tomotherapy: report of the AAPM Task Group 148.

Helical tomotherapy is a relatively new modality with integrated treatment planning and delivery hardware for radiation therapy treatments. In view of the uniqueness of the hardware design of the helical tomotherapy unit and its implications in routine quality assurance, the Therapy Physics Committee of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine commissioned Task Group 148 to review this modality and make recommendations for quality assurance related methodologies. The specific objectives of this Task Group are: (a) To discuss quality assurance techniques, frequencies, and tolerances and (b) discuss dosimetric verification techniques applicable to this unit. This report summarizes the findings of the Task Group and aims to provide the practicing clinical medical physicist with the insight into the technology that is necessary to establish an independent and comprehensive quality assurance program for a helical tomotherapy unit. The emphasis of the report is to describe the rationale for the proposed QA program and to provide example tests that can be performed, drawing from the collective experience of the task group members and the published literature. It is expected that as technology continues to evolve, so will the test procedures that may be used in the future to perform comprehensive quality assurance for helical tomotherapy units.

Helical tomotherapy significantly reduces dose to normal tissues when compared to 3D-CRT for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Combined modality treatment (neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery) for locally advanced rectal cancer requires special attention to various organs at risk (OAR). As a result, the use of conformal dose delivery methods has become more common in this disease setting. Helical tomotherapy is an image-guided intensity modulated delivery system that delivers dose in a fan-beam manner at 7 degree intervals around the patient and can potentially limit normal tissue from high dose radiation while adequately treating targets. In this study we dosimetrically compare helical tomotherapy to 3D-CRT for stage T3 rectal cancer. The helical tomotherapy plans were optimized in the TomoPlan system to achieve an equivalent uniform dose of 45 Gy for 10 patients with T3N0M0 disease that was at least 5cm from the anal verge. The GTV included the rectal thickening and mass evident on colonoscopy and CT scan as well as with the help of a colorectal surgeon. The CTV included the internal iliac, obturator, and pre-sacral lymphatic chains. The OAR that were outlined included the small bowel, pelvic bone marrow, femoral heads, and bladder. Anatom-e system was used to assist in delineating GTV, CTV and OAR. These 10 plans were then duplicated and optimized into 3-field 3D-CRT plans within the Pinnacle planning system.The V[45], V[40], V[30], V[20], V[10], and mean dose to the OAR were compared between the helical tomotherapy and 3D-CRT plans. Statistically significant differences were achieved in the doses to all OAR, including all volumes and means except for V[10] for the small bowel and the femoral heads. Adequate dosimetric coverage of targets were achieved with both helical tomotherapy and 3D-CRT. Helical tomotherapy reduces the volume of normal tissue receiving high-dose RT when compared to 3D-CRT treatment. Both modalities adequately dose the tumor. Clinical studies addressing the dosimetric benefits are on-going.

Radiation proctopathy in the treatment of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To compile and review data on radiation proctopathy in the treatment of prostate cancer with respect to epidemiology, clinical manifestations, pathogenesis, risk factors, and treatment. METHODS: Medical literature databases including PubMed and Medline were screened for pertinent reports, and critically analyzed for relevance in the scope of our purpose. RESULTS: Rectal toxicity as a complication of radiotherapy has received attention over the past decade, especially with the advent of dose-escalation in prostate cancer treatment. A number of clinical criteria help to define acute and chronic radiation proctopathy, but lack of a unified grading scale makes comparing studies difficult. A variety of risk factors, related to either radiation delivery or patient, are the subject of intense study. Also, a variety of treatment options, including medical therapy, endoscopic treatments, and surgery have shown varied results, but a lack of large randomized trials evaluating their efficacy prevents forming concrete recommendations. CONCLUSION: Radiation proctopathy should be an important consideration for the clinician in the treatment of prostate cancer especially with dose escalation. With further study of possible risk factors, the advent of a standardized grading scale, and more randomized trials to evaluate treatments, patients and physicians will be better armed to make appropriate management decisions.

Rectal wall sparing by dosimetric effect of rectal balloon used during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer.

The use of an air-filled rectal balloon has been shown to decrease prostate motion during prostate radiotherapy. However, the perturbation of radiation dose near the air-tissue interfaces has raised clinical concerns of underdosing the prostate gland. The aim of this study was to investigate the dosimetric effects of an air-filled rectal balloon on the rectal wall/mucosa and prostate gland. Clinical rectal toxicity and dose-volume histogram (DVH) were also assessed to evaluate for any correlation. A film phantom was constructed to simulate the 4-cm diameter air cavity created by a rectal balloon. Kodak XV2 films were utilized to measure and compare dose distribution with and without air cavity. To study the effect in a typical clinical situation, the phantom was computed tomography (CT) scanned on a Siemens DR CT scanner for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning. A target object was drawn on the phantom CT images to simulate the treatment of prostate cancer. Because patients were treated in prone position, the air cavity was situated superiorly to the target. The treatment used a serial tomotherapy technique with the Multivane Intensity Modulating Collimator (MIMiC) in arc treatment mode. Rectal toxicity was assessed in 116 patients treated with IMRT to a mean dose of 76 Gy over 35 fractions (2.17-Gy fraction size). They were treated in the prone position, immobilized using a Vac-Loktrade mark bag and carrier-box system. Rectal balloon inflated with 100 cc of air was used for prostate gland immobilization during daily treatment. Rectal toxicity was assessed using modifications of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and late effects Normal Tissue Task Force (LENT) scales systems. DVH of the rectum was also evaluated. From film dosimetry, there was a dose reduction at the distal air-tissue interface as much as 60% compared with the same geometry without the air cavity for 15-MV photon beam and 2x2-cm field size. The dose beyond the interface recovered quickly and the dose reductions due to air cavity were 50%, 28%, 11%, and 1% at 2, 5, 10, and 15 mm, respectively, from the distal air-tissue interface. Evaluating the dose profiles of the more clinically relevant situation revealed the dose at air-tissue interface was approximately 15% lower in comparison to that without an air cavity. The dose built up rapidly so that at 1 and 2 mm, there was only an 8% and 5% differential, respectively. The dosimetric coverage at the depth of the posterior prostate wall was essentially equal with or without the air cavity. The median follow-up was 31.3 months. Rectal toxicity profile was very favorable: 81% (94/116) patients had no rectal complaint while 10.3% (12/116), 6.9% (8/116), and 1.7% (2/116) had grade 1, 2, and 3 toxicity, respectively. There was no grade 4 rectal toxicity. DVH analysis revealed that none of the patients had more than 25% of the rectum receiving 70 Gy or greater. Rectal balloon has rendered anterior rectal wall sparing by its dosimetric effects. In addition, it has reduced rectal volume, especially posterior and lateral rectal wall receiving high-dose radiation by rectal wall distension. Both factors may have contributed to decreased rectal toxicity achieved by IMRT despite dose escalation and higher than conventional fraction size. The findings have clinical significance for future very high-dose escalation trials whereby radiation proctitis is a major limiting factor.

Impact of setup uncertainty in the dosimetry of prostate and surrounding tissues in prostate cancer patients treated with Peacock/IMRT.

The purpose of this paper was to assess the effect of setup uncertainty on dosimetry of prostate, seminal vesicles, bladder, rectum, and colon in prostate cancer patients treated with Peacock intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Ten patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scans using the "prostate box" for external, and an "endorectal balloon" for target immobilization devices, and treatment plans were generated (T1). A maximum of +/-5-mm setup error was chosen to model dosimetric effects. Isodose lines from the T1 treatment plan were then superimposed on each patient's CT anatomy shifted by 5 mm toward the cephalad and caudal direction, generating 2 more dosimetric plans (H1 and H2, respectively). Average mean doses ranged from 74.5 to 74.92 Gy for prostate and 73.65 to 74.94 Gy for seminal vesicles. Average percent target volume below 70 Gy increased significantly for seminal vesicles, from 0.53% to 6.26%, but minimally for prostate, from 2.08% to 4.4%. Dose statistics adhered to prescription limits for normal tissues. Setup uncertainty had minimum impact on target dose escalation and normal tissue dosing. The impact of target dose inhomogeneity is currently evaluated in clinical studies.

Using technology to decrease xerostomia for head and neck cancer patients treated with radiation therapy.

The treatment of head and neck cancer has evolved from conventional fields encompassing large volumes of normal tissue to focused treatment aimed at conforming the dose around the target while avoiding normal tissue. Intensity modulated radiation therapy has changed the way radiation oncologists think about head and neck cancer. Using the concepts of conformal treatment and avoidance, the therapeutic ratio can be improved and technology exploited to the patients' advantage. This is particularly evident with head and neck irradiation, where a common side effect is xerostomia. By decreasing xerostomia through conformal avoidance of the parotid glands, we can improve patient satisfaction and quality of life. In this study, xerostomia is assessed through a subjective salivary gland function questionnaire. This article examines the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer to decrease xerostomia. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the significance of parotid gland dosimetry in relation to subjective salivary gland function.

The evolution of quality assurance for intensity- modulated radiation therapy (IMRT): sequential tomotherapy.

PURPOSE: To identify the pertinent issues to be addressed in successfully implementing IMRT using sequential tomotherapy into clinical reality and presenting the maturation of quality assurance (QA) programs for both the delivery system and patient treatments that allow routine clinical use of the system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Initially, a cubic phantom containing silver halide film was exposed to the entire treatment before patient treatment. The processed films were digitized with a laser densitometer and the dose distributions were compared with that generated by the planning system. Later, software that calculates the dose delivered to any phantom employing the intensity patterns developed in the inverse planning system for an individual patient was implemented for point checks of dose. A measurement phantom for use with this software was developed and evaluated on a large number of patients. Invasive fixation was used for all cranial patients initially. To use sequential tomotherapy for other sites and larger targets, noninvasive immobilization systems using two types of thermoplastic masks for cranial targets and reusable, evacuated body cradles were evaluated for positional accuracy and suitability for use with port films for patient QA. RESULTS: The program for equipment validation is divided into daily, weekly, and monthly programs that add only small amounts of time to routine QA programs. For the first 15 patients treated with this modality, the maximum dose measured on the film was within 5% of that predicted by the planning computer. The prescription isodose line was measured in the anteroposterior and lateral dimensions and the average discrepancy between measured and predicted was less than 2 mm. For an isodose line between 50% and 70% of the prescribed dose, the agreement was better than 3 mm. Success with the volume QA program was followed by a point check QA program that reduced the time required for individual patient QA from days to hours. Phantom measurements compared with computer predictions for 588 data points resulted in only 8% being outside a +/-5% criterion. These cases were identified and allow a further reduction in the frequency of tests. Thermoplastic mask materials have adequate restraint characteristics for use with the system and port films on 21 patients resulted in one standard deviation = 1.3 mm. Body cradles are less accurate and require more frequent port films. A QA system that reduces the frequency of port films was developed. CONCLUSIONS: The evolution of sequential tomotherapy in our department has been from a maximum of 3 cranial patients per day with invasive fixation to 60 patients per day for treatment of cranial, head-and-neck, and prostate tumors using different immobilization techniques. With proper preparation and refinement of tools used in commissioning and validation, sequential tomotherapy IMRT can become a routine clinical treatment modality.

Post-nerve-sparing prostatectomy, dose-escalated intensity-modulated radiotherapy: effect on erectile function.

PURPOSE: The advent of widespread prostate-specific antigen screening has resulted in more younger, potent men being diagnosed with early-stage, organ-confined prostate cancer amenable to definitive surgery. Nerve-sparing prostatectomy is a relatively new surgical advance in the treatment of prostate cancer. Very few data exist on the effect of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) on erectile function after nerve-sparing prostatectomy. They are based on conventional techniques using moderate doses of radiation, 45-54 Gy. Intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) is becoming more widespread because it allows dose escalation with increased sparing of the surrounding normal tissue. We investigated the effect of postprostatectomy, high-dose IMRT on patients' erectile function. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A review of patient records found 51 patients treated between April 1998 and December 2000 with IMRT after unilateral or bilateral nerve-sparing prostatectomy. The pathologic disease stage in these patients was T2 in 47.4% and T3 in 52.6%. Postoperatively, 4 patients received hormonal ablation consisting of one injection of Lupron Depot (30 mg) 2 months before RT. The median age was 65 years (range 46-77) at the time of RT. The prescribed dose was 64 Gy (range 60-66). The mean dose was 69.6 Gy (range 64.0-72.3). Erectile function was assessed before and after RT by questionnaires. Sexual potency was defined as erectile rigidity adequate for vaginal penetration. RESULTS: Of the 51 patients, 18 (35.3%) maintained their potency and 33 (64.7%) became impotent after nerve-sparing prostatectomy. Patients who underwent bilateral nerve-sparing prostatectomy had higher rates of postoperative potency than did those who underwent unilateral nerve-sparing surgery (72.2% vs. 27.8%; p = 0.025). The follow-up for the entire group was 19.5 months. All 18 patients (100%) who were potent postoperatively remained potent after RT. The median follow-up for the 18 potent patients was 27.2 months, significantly longer than that of the impotent group, 13.0 months (p <0.001). CONCLUSION: This is the first report on the effects of dose-escalated IMRT on men who have undergone nerve-sparing prostatectomy. Despite the high dose (mean dose 69.6 Gy) to the prostate bed and nerves, postoperative IMRT had no negative effect on erectile function for the patients who remained potent after nerve-sparing prostatectomy. Longer term follow-up and a larger cohort of patients are warranted to confirm these findings.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for meningioma.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and efficacy of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of intracranial meningioma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty patients with intracranial meningioma (excluding optic nerve sheath meningiomas) were treated using IMRT with the NOMOS Peacock system between 1994 and 1999. Twenty-five patients received IMRT after surgery either as adjuvant therapy for incomplete resection or for recurrence, and 15 patients received definitive IMRT after presumptive diagnosis based on imaging. Thirty-two patients had skull base lesions, and 8 had nonskull base lesions. The prescribed dose ranged from 40 to 56 Gy (median 50.4 Gy) at 1.71 to 2 Gy per fraction, and the volume of the primary target ranged from 1.55 to 324.57 cc (median 20.22 cc). The mean dose to the target ranged from 44 to 60 Gy (median 53 Gy). Follow-up ranged from 6 to 71 months (median 30 months). Acute and chronic toxicity were assessed using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) morbidity criteria and tumor response was assessed by patient report, examination, and imaging. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and local control were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Cumulative 5-year local control, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 93%, 88%, and 89%, respectively. Two patients progressed after IMRT, one locally and one distantly. Each was treated with IMRT after multiple recurrences of benign meningioma over many years. Both were found to have malignant meningioma at the time of relapse after IMRT, and it is likely their tumors had already undergone malignant change by the time IMRT was given. Defined normal structures generally received a significantly lower dose than the target. The most common acute central nervous system (CNS) toxicity was mild headache, usually relieved with steroids. One patient experienced RTOG Grade 3 acute CNS toxicity, and 2 experienced Grade 3 or higher late CNS toxicity, with one possible treatment-related death. No toxicity was observed with mean doses to the optic nerve/chiasm up to 47 Gy and maximum doses up to 55 Gy. CONCLUSION: IMRT is a promising new technology that is safe and efficacious in the primary and adjuvant treatment of intracranial meningiomas. A history of local aggression may indicate malignant degeneration and predict a poorer outcome. Toxicity data are encouraging, but the potential for serious side effects exists, as demonstrated by one possible treatment-related death. Larger cohort and longer follow-up are needed to better define efficacy and late toxicity of IMRT.

Hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for primary glioblastoma multiforme.

PURPOSE: A pilot study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel regimen of hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (RT) in the adjuvant treatment of primary glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). The rationale of the study was to combine the potential radiobiologic advantage of hypofractionation to GBM with a highly conformal radiotherapeutic technique. The study was designed to measure the acute and chronic morbidity of patients treated with this regimen, response of GBM to the treatment, overall survival, and time to disease progression after therapy completion. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty eligible patients were accrued between February 1999 and May 2000 for the study. All patients had Karnofsky performance scores of >/=70. All patients were treated with intensity-modulated RT using the NOMOS Peacock system. A dose of 50 Gy was delivered in 5-Gy daily fractions within 2 weeks to enhancing primary disease, residual tumor, or surgical cavity. Simultaneously, 30 Gy was prescribed in 3-Gy daily fractions to surrounding edema. The time to progression was measured with serial neurologic examinations and MRI or CT scans after RT completion. Acute and late toxicity was graded using Radiation Therapy Oncology Group neurotoxicity scores. RESULTS: Of the 20 patients, 18 were evaluated for outcome. The median time to disease progression was 6 months after RT completion. The median overall survival was 7 months after treatment completion. All recurrences were within 2 cm of the operative bed. Neurotoxicity during therapy was minimal, with all patients experiencing Grade 0 or 1 toxicity. Late toxicity included 10 patients with Grade 0, 2 patients with Grade 2, and 3 patients with Grade 4 toxicity, manifesting as brain necrosis requiring surgical reexcision. The survival of the 3 patients with brain necrosis was 23, 20, and 9 months. Mortality in all cases was the result of tumor recurrence, with no mortality resulting from brain necrosis. CONCLUSION: This regimen of hypofractionated intensity-modulated RT did not improve the time to disease progression or overall survival compared with historical experience using conventional fractionation. However, the treatment duration was reduced from 6 weeks to 2 weeks, which may be of palliative benefit in certain subsets of patients. This treatment regimen demonstrated a greater incidence of brain necrosis requiring surgical intervention; however, the 3 patients experiencing this toxicity had longer survival times. Future investigation may be useful to determine which fraction size may be optimal for GBM when highly conformal RT is used in the adjuvant setting.

Dosimetric predictors of xerostomia for head-and-neck cancer patients treated with the smart (simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy) boost technique.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the predictors of xerostomia in the treatment of head-and-neck cancers treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), using the simultaneous modulated accelerated radiation therapy (SMART) boost technique. Dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands are correlated to subjective salivary gland function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1996 and June 2000, 30 patients with at least 6 months follow-up were evaluated for subjective xerostomia after being treated definitively for head-and-neck cancer with the SMART boost technique. Threshold limits for the ipsilateral and contralateral parotid glands were 35 Gy and 25 Gy, respectively. Dosimetric parameters to the parotid glands were evaluated. The median follow-up time was 38.5 months (mean 39.9 months). The results of the dosimetric parameters and questionnaire were statistically correlated. RESULTS: Xerostomia was assessed with a 10-question subjective salivary gland function questionnaire. The salivary gland function questionnaire (questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9) correlated significantly with the dosimetric parameters (mean and maximum doses and volume and percent above tolerance) of the parotid glands. These questions related to overall comfort, eating, and abnormal taste. Questions related to thirst, difficulty with speech or sleep, and the need to carry water daily did not correlate statistically with the dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands. CONCLUSIONS: Questions regarding overall comfort, eating, and abnormal taste correlated significantly with the dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands. Questions related to thirst, difficulty with speech or sleep, and the need to carry water daily did not correlate statistically with the dosimetric parameters of the parotid glands. Dosimetric sparing of the parotid glands improved subjective xerostomia. IMRT in the treatment of head-and-neck cancer can be exploited to preserve the parotid glands and decrease xerostomia. This is feasible even with an accelerated treatment regimen like the SMART boost. More patients need to be evaluated using IMRT to identify relevant dosimetric parameters.

IMRT for prostate cancer: defining target volume based on correlated pathologic volume of disease.

PURPOSE: The intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning system generates tightly constricted isodose lines. It is very important to define the margins that are acceptable in the treatment of prostate cancer to maximize the dose escalation and normal tissue avoidance advantages offered by IMRT. It is necessary to take into account subclinical disease and the potential for extracapsular spread. Organ and patient motion as well as setup errors are variables that must be minimized and defined to avoid underdosing the tumor or overdosing the normal tissues. We have addressed these issues previously. The purpose of the study was twofold: to quantify the radial distance of extracapsular extension in the prostatectomy specimens, and to quantify differences between the pathologic prostate volume (PPV), CT-based gross tumor volume (GTV), and planning target volume (PTV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two related studies were undertaken. A total of 712 patients underwent prostatectomy between August 1983 and September 1995. Pathologic assessment of the radial distance of extracapsular extension was performed. Shrinkage associated with fixation was accounted for with a linear shrinkage factor. Ten patients had preoperative staging studies including a CT scan of the pelvis. The GTV was outlined and volume determined from these CT scans. The PTV, defined as GTV with a 5-mm margin in all dimensions, was then calculated. The Peacock inverse planning system (NOMOS Corp., Sewickley, PA) was used. The PPV, GTV, and PTV were compared for differences and evaluated for correlation. RESULTS: Extracapsular extension (ECE) (i.e., prostatic capsular invasion level 3 [both focal and established]) was found in 299 of 712 patients (42.0%). Measurable disease extending radially outside the prostatic capsule (i.e., ECE level 3 established) was noted in 185 of 712 (26.0%). The median radial extension was 2.0 mm (range 0.50-12.00 mm) outside the prostatic capsule. As a group, 20 of 712 (2.8%) had extracapsular extension of more than 5 mm. In the volumetric comparison and correlation study of the GTV and PTV to the PPV, the average GTV was 2 times larger than the PPV. The average PTV was 4.1 times larger than the PPV. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest series in the literature quantitatively assessing prostatic capsular invasion (i.e., the radial extracapsular extension). It is the first report of a comparison of PPV to CT-planned GTV and PTV. Using patient and prostate immobilization, 5 mm of margin to the GTV in this study provided sufficient coverage of the tumor volume based on data gathered from 712 patients. In the absence of prostate immobilization, additional margins of differing amounts depending on the technique employed would have to be placed to account for target, patient, and setup uncertainties. The large mean difference between CT-based estimates of the tumor volume and target volume (GTV+PTV) and PPV added further evidence for adequacy of tumor coverage. Target immobilization, setup error, and coverage of subclinical disease must be addressed carefully before successful implementation of IMRT to maximize its ability to escalate dose and to spare normal tissue simultaneously and safely.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy for pediatric medulloblastoma: early report on the reduction of ototoxicity.

PURPOSE: The combination of cisplatin chemotherapy and radiation therapy for the treatment of medulloblastoma has been shown to cause significant ototoxicity, impairing a child's cognitive function and quality of life. Our purpose is to determine whether the new conformal technique of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) can achieve lower rates of hearing loss by decreasing the radiation dose delivered to the cochlea and eighth cranial nerve (auditory apparatus). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-six pediatric patients treated for medulloblastoma were retrospectively divided into two groups that received either conventional radiotherapy (Conventional-RT Group) or IMRT (IMRT Group). One hundred thirteen pure-tone audiograms were evaluated retrospectively, and hearing function was graded on a scale of 0 to 4 according to the Pediatric Oncology Group's toxicity criteria. Statistical analysis comparing the rates of ototoxicity was performed using Fisher's exact test with two-tailed analysis. RESULTS: When compared to conventional radiotherapy, IMRT delivered 68% of the radiation dose to the auditory apparatus (mean dose: 36.7 vs. 54.2 Gy). Audiometric evaluation showed that mean decibel hearing thresholds of the IMRT Group were lower at every frequency compared to those of the Conventional-RT Group, despite having higher cumulative doses of cisplatin. The overall incidence of ototoxicity was lower in the IMRT Group. Thirteen percent of the IMRT Group had Grade 3 or 4 hearing loss, compared to 64% of the Conventional-RT Group (p < 0.014). CONCLUSION: The conformal technique of IMRT delivered much lower doses of radiation to the auditory apparatus, while still delivering full doses to the desired target volume. Our findings suggest that, despite higher doses of cisplatin, and despite radiotherapy before cisplatin therapy, treatment with IMRT can achieve a lower rate of hearing loss.

Initial experience using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To report our initial experience on the feasibility, toxicity, and tumor control using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for retreatment of recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 49 patients with locoregional recurrent carcinoma in the nasopharynx were treated with IMRT between January 2001 and February 2002 at the Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China. The average time to the nasopharyngeal recurrence was 30.2 months after initial conventional RT. The median isocenter dose to the nasopharynx was 70 Gy (range 60.9-78.0) for the initial conventional RT. All patients were restaged at the time of recurrence according to the 1992 Fuzhou, China staging system on NPC. The number of patients with Stage I, II, III and IV disease was 4, 9, 10, and 26, respectively. T1, T2, T3, and T4 disease was found in 4, 9, 11, and 25 patients, respectively. N0, N1, N2, and N3 disease was found in 46, 2, 0, and 1 patient, respectively. Invasion of the nasal cavity, maxillary sinus, ethmoid sinus, sphenoid sinus, and cavernous sinus and erosion of the base of the skull was found in 8, 1, 3, 8, 15, and 20 patients, respectively. The gross tumor volume (GTV) was contoured according to the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Report 62 guidelines. The critical structures were contoured, and the doses to critical structures were constrained according to ICRU 50 guidelines. The GTV in the nasopharynx and positive lymph nodes in the neck received a prescription dose of 68-70 Gy and 60 Gy, respectively. All patients received full-course IMRT. Three patients who had positive lymph nodes were treated with five to six courses of chemotherapy (cisplatin + 5-fluorouracil) after IMRT. RESULTS: The treatment plans showed that the percentage of GTV receiving 95% of the prescribed dose (V(95-GTV)) was 98.5%, and the dose encompassing 95% of GTV (D(95-GTV)) was 68.1 Gy in the nasopharynx. The mean dose to the GTV was 71.4 Gy. The average doses of the surrounding critical structures were much lower than the tolerable thresholds. At a median follow-up of 9 months (range 3-13), the locoregional control rate was 100%. Three cases (6.1%) of locoregional residual disease were seen at the completion of IMRT, but had achieved a complete response at follow-up. Three patients developed metastases at a distant site: two in the bone and one in the liver and lung at 13 months follow-up. Acute toxicity (skin, mucosa, and xerostomia) was acceptable according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria. Tumor necrosis was seen toward the end of IMRT in 14 patients (28.6%). CONCLUSION: The improvement in tumor target coverage and significant sparing of adjacent critical structures allow the feasibility of IMRT as a retreatment option for recurrent NPC after initial conventional RT. This is the first large series using IMRT to reirradiate local recurrent NPC after initial RT failed. The treatment-related toxicity profile was acceptable. The initial tumor response/local control was also very encouraging. In contrast to primary NPC, recurrent NPC reirradiated with high-dose IMRT led to the shedding of tumor necrotic tissue toward the end of RT. More patients and longer term follow-up are warranted to evaluate late toxicity and treatment outcome.

Prostate immobilization using a rectal balloon.

We use a rectal balloon for prostate immobilization during intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) prostate treatment. To improve the accuracy of our prostate planning target volume, we have measured prostate displacements using computed tomography (CT)-CT fusion on patients that previously received gold seed implants. The study consists of ten patients that were scanned twice per week during the course of IMRT treatment. In addition to biweekly scans, breathing studies were performed on each patient to estimate organ motion during treatment. The prostate displacement in the anterior-posterior and the lateral direction is minimal, on the order of measurement uncertainty (~1 mm). The standard deviation of the superior-inferior (SI) displacements is 1.78 mm. The breathing studies show that no organ displacement was detected during normal breathing conditions with a rectal balloon.

Clinical experience with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer with the use of rectal balloon for prostate immobilization.

The implementation of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is the result of advances in imaging, radiotherapy planning technologies, and computer-controlled linear accelerators. IMRT allows both conformal treatment of tumors and conformal avoidance of the surrounding normal structures. The first patient treated with Peacock IMRT at Baylor College of Medicine took place in March 1994. To date, more than 1500 patients have been treated with IMRT; more than 700 patients were treated for prostate cancer. Our experience in treating prostate cancer with IMRT was reviewed. Patient and prostate motions are important issues to address in delivering IMRT. The Vac-Lok bag-and-box system, as well as rectal balloon for immobilization of patient and prostate gland, respectively, are employed. Treatment planning also plays a very important role. IMRT as a boost after conventional external beam radiotherapy is not our treatment strategy. To derive maximal benefits with this new technology, all patients received full course IMRT. Three separate groups of patients receiving (1) primary IMRT, (2) combined radioactive seed implant and IMRT, and (3) post-prostatectomy IMRT were addressed. Overall, toxicity profiles in these patients were very favorable. IMRT has the potential to improve treatment outcome with dose escalation while minimizing treatment-related toxicity.

Prostate-specific antigen bounce after intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To report prostate-specific antigen (PSA) bounce in patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) alone. Previous studies have reported PSA bounce in prostate cancer patients treated with conventional radiotherapy, 3D conformal radiotherapy, and permanent seed brachytherapy. METHODS: From January 1997 to July 2002, 102 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated with IMRT alone. No patients received androgen ablation. PSA bounce was defined as a PSA increase of at least 0.4 ng/mL, followed by any PSA decrease. Biochemical failure was defined by both the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology 1996 and 2006 consensus definitions. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 76 months. The median length of time until the first PSA bounce was 13.6 months. Thirty-three patients (32.4%) had at least 1 PSA bounce, with 25 (24.5%) having 1 bounce; 6 (5.9%), 2 bounces; and 2 (2.0%), 4 bounces. PSA bounce was not significantly associated with biochemical no evidence of disease survival, clinical stage, pretreatment PSA, Gleason combined score, prostate planning target volume, PSA nadir, or mean dose to the prostate. The rate of PSA bounce in patients aged ≤ 70 and > 70 years was 44.4% and 22.8%, respectively (P = .032). CONCLUSIONS: Our patient series is the first report on PSA bounce in patients treated with IMRT. Our study confirms that the majority of patients with a bouncing PSA remain biochemically and clinically free of disease with extended follow-up.

Tolerance of endorectal balloon in 396 patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To report patient tolerance and acute anorectal toxicity of an endorectal balloon used for prostate immobilization during 35 daily fractions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of 396 patients treated for prostate cancer from October 1997 to November 2001 were reviewed. Patients were treated with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Endorectal balloon catheter was inserted daily, inflated with 100 mL of air for immobilizing the prostate gland. Patient and treatment factors were analyzed. Patients received a mean dose of 77 Gy/35 fractions/7 weeks with no rectal block. RESULTS: None of the 396 patients halted treatment because of associated ano-rectal toxicity. No patient stated that he would decline to be treated again with rectal balloon. Three of 396 (0.8%) patients required a reduction in the volume of the balloon to 50 mL. Seventeen of 396 (4.3%) patients required Lidocaine jelly with the insertion of balloon. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grades 1 and 2 rectal toxicity occurred in 55/396 (13.9%) and 73/396 (18.4%), respectively. No RTOG grade 3 or 4 toxicities occurred. Topical anal medications were prescribed for 46 of 396 (11.6%) patients and antidiarrhea medication for 27 of 396 (6.8%) patients. Of patients with pretreatment anorectal disease, 50% developed rectal toxicities over the 7 weeks. Rectal toxicity occurred most frequently in the third, fourth, fifth, or sixth week; 19.5%, 20.8%, 18.2%, and 16.9%, respectively. The duration of the toxicity measured lasted 1 week, 35.2%; 2 weeks, 31.0%; 3 weeks, 15.5%; 4 weeks, 11.3%; 5 weeks, 4.2%; and 6 weeks, 2.8%. CONCLUSION: Most of the patients, 393/396 (99.2%), tolerated a 100 mL endorectal immobilization balloon for IMRT. The rate of acute anorectal toxicity was acceptable with no grade 3 or 4 toxicities. Duration of the toxicities typically was 1 to 2 weeks. Patients with pre-existing anorectal disease are at higher risk of developing acute anorectal toxicity with the use of an endorectal balloon.