No abstract

BackgroundTo evaluate in-silico the performance of a model-based optimization process for volumetric modulated arc therapy (RapidArc) applied to hepatocellular cancer treatments.Patients and methods45 clinically accepted RA plans were selected to train a knowledge-based engine for the prediction of individualized dose-volume constraints. The model was validated on the same plans used for training (closed-loop) and on a set of other 25 plans not used for the training (open-loop). Dose prescription, target size, localization in the liver and arc configuration were highly variable in both sets to appraise the power of generalization of the engine. Quantitative dose volume histogram analysis was performed as well as a pass-fail analysis against a set of 8 clinical dose-volume objectives to appraise the quality of the new plans.ResultsQualitative and quantitative equivalence was observed between the clinical and the test plans. The use of model-based optimization lead to a net improvement in the pass-rate of the clinical objectives compared to the plans originally optimized with standard methods (this pass-rate is the frequency of cases where the objectives are respected vs. the cases where constraints are not fulfilled). The increase in the pass-rate resulted of 2.0%, 0.9% and 0.5% in a closed-loop and two different open-loop validation experiments.ConclusionsA knowledge-based engine for the optimization of RapidArc plans was tested and lead to clinically acceptable plans in the case of hepatocellular cancer radiotherapy. More studies are needed before a broad clinical use.

We report on a dosimetrical study comparing supine (S) and prone-crawl (P) position for radiotherapy of whole breast (WB) and loco-regional lymph node regions, including the internal mammary chain (LN_IM). Six left sided breast cancer patients were CT-simulated in S and P positions and four patients only in P position. Treatment plans were made using non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc photon therapy (VMAT) or pencil beam scanning intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Dose prescription was 15*2.67 Gy(GyRBE). The average mean heart doses for S or P VMAT were 5.6 or 4.3 Gy, respectively (p = 0.16) and 1.02 or 1.08 GyRBE, respectively for IMPT (p = 0.8; p < 0.001 for IMPT versus VMAT). The average mean lung doses for S or P VMAT were 5.91 or 2.90 Gy, respectively (p = 0.002) and 1.56 or 1.09 GyRBE, respectively for IMPT (p = 0.016). In high-risk patients, average (range) thirty-year mortality rates from radiotherapy-related cardiac injury and lung cancer were estimated at 6.8(5.4–9.4)% or 3.8(2.8–5.1)% for S or P VMAT (p < 0.001), respectively, and 1.6(1.1–2.0)% or 1.2(0.8–1.6)% for S or P IMPT (p = 0.25), respectively. Radiation-related mortality risk could outweigh the ~8% disease-specific survival benefit of WB + LN_IM radiotherapy for S VMAT but not P VMAT. IMPT carries the lowest radiation-related mortality risks.

We report on a comparative dosimetrical study between deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) and shallow breathing (SB) in prone crawl position for photon and proton radiotherapy of whole breast (WB) and locoregional lymph node regions, including the internal mammary chain (LN_MI). We investigate the dosimetrical effects of DIBH in prone crawl position on organs-at-risk for both photon and proton plans. For each modality, we further estimate the effects of lung and heart doses on the mortality risks of different risk profiles of patients. Thirty-one patients with invasive carcinoma of the left breast and pathologically confirmed positive lymph node status were included in this study. DIBH significantly decreased dose to heart for photon and proton radiotherapy. DIBH also decreased lung doses for photons, while increased lung doses were observed using protons because the retracting heart is displaced by low-density lung tissue. For other organs-at-risk, DIBH resulted in significant dose reductions using photons while minor differences in dose deposition between DIBH and SB were observed using protons. In patients with high risks for cardiac and lung cancer mortality, average thirty-year mortality rates from radiotherapy-related cardiac injury and lung cancer were estimated at 3.12% (photon DIBH), 4.03% (photon SB), 1.80% (proton DIBH) and 1.66% (proton SB). The radiation-related mortality risk could not outweigh the ~ 8% disease-specific survival benefit of WB + LN_MI radiotherapy in any of the assessed treatments.

High-density materials, such as titanium, used for spinal stabilization, introduces several critical issues in proton therapy (PT). Artefacts affect both contouring and dose calculation. Subsequently, artefacts need to be corrected which is a time-consuming process. Besides, titanium causes proton interactions that are unaccounted for in dose calculation. The result is a suboptimal treatment plan, and indeed decreased local controls have been reported for these patients. Carbon fiber reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) implant material, which is of low density, potentially solves these issues. For this study, we designed a unique phantom to compare the effects of titanium and CFR-PEEK implants in PT. The phantom contains four interchangeable spinal inserts representing a native spine, and three different spinal stabilizations consisting of titanium only, CFR-PEEK only, and a combination of titanium and CFR-PEEK. All phantom scenarios received the standard treatment workup. Two planning approaches were investigated: a single field plan and a multi-field optimized plan with spinal cord sparing. For both plans we analyzed the following aspects: total volume of artefacts on CT images, time required for artefact correction, effect of planning CT correction on dose calculation, plan robustness to range and set up uncertainties, and finally the discrepancy between the calculated dose and the delivered dose with Gafchromic® film. The CFR-PEEK implant had a 90% reduction of artefacts on CT images and subsequently severely reduced the time for artefact correction with respect to the titanium-only implant. Furthermore, the CFR-PEEK as opposed to titanium did not influence the robustness of the plan. Finally, the titanium implants led to hardware-related discrepancies between the planned and the measured dose while the CFR-PEEK implant showed good agreement. As opposed to titanium, CFR-PEEK has none to minor effects on PT. The use of CFR-PEEK is expected to optimize treatment and possibly improve outcomes for patients that require spinal stabilization.