Dataset Information

Online adaptive radiotherapy compared to plan selection for rectal cancer: quantifying the benefit.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To compare online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) to a clinically implemented plan selection strategy (PS) with respect to dose to the organs at risk (OAR) for rectal cancer. METHODS:The first 20 patients treated with PS between May-September 2016 were included. This resulted in 10 short (SCRT) and 10 long (LCRT) course radiotherapy treatment schedules with a total of 300 Conebeam CT scans (CBCT). New dual arc VMAT plans were generated using auto-planning for both the online ART and PS strategy. For each fraction bowel bag, bladder and mesorectum were delineated on daily Conebeam CTs. The dose distribution planned was used to calculate daily DVHs. Coverage of the CTV was calculated, as defined by the dose received by 99% of the CTV volume (D99%). The volume of normal tissue irradiated with 95% of the prescribed fraction dose was calculated by calculating the volume receiving 95% of the prescribed fraction or more dose minus the volume of the CTV. For each fraction the difference between the plan selection and online adaptive strategy of each DVH parameter was calculated, as well as the average difference per patient. RESULTS:Target coverage remained the same for online ART. The median volume of the normal tissue irradiated with 95% of the prescribed dose dropped from 642?cm3 (PS) to 237?cm3 (online-ART)(p

SUBMITTER: de Jong R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7371470 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Online adaptive radiotherapy compared to plan selection for rectal cancer: quantifying the benefit.

de Jong R R Crama K F KF Visser J J van Wieringen N N Wiersma J J Geijsen E D ED Bel A A

Radiation oncology (London, England) 20200708 1

<h4>Background</h4>To compare online adaptive radiation therapy (ART) to a clinically implemented plan selection strategy (PS) with respect to dose to the organs at risk (OAR) for rectal cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>The first 20 patients treated with PS between May-September 2016 were included. This resulted in 10 short (SCRT) and 10 long (LCRT) course radiotherapy treatment schedules with a total of 300 Conebeam CT scans (CBCT). New dual arc VMAT plans were generated using auto-planning for both the ...[more]

PMID: 32641080

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOnline adaptive radiotherapy has the potential to reduce toxicity for patients treated for rectal cancer because smaller planning target volumes (PTV) margins around the entire clinical target volume (CTV) are required. The aim of this study is to describe the first clinical experience of a Conebeam CT (CBCT)-based online adaptive workflow for rectal cancer, evaluating timing of different steps in the workflow, plan quality, target coverage and patient compliance.MethodsTwelve consecutive patients eligible for 5 × 5 Gy pre-operative radiotherapy were treated on a ring-based linear accelerator with a multidisciplinary team present at the treatment machine for each fraction. The accelerator is operated using an integrated software platform for both treatment planning and delivery. In all directions for all CTVs a PTV margin of 5 mm was used, except for the cranial/caudal borders of the total CTV where a margin of 8 mm was applied. A reference plan was generated based on a single planning CT. After aligning the patient the online adaptive procedure started with acquisition of a CBCT. The planning CT scan was registered to the CBCT using deformable registration and a synthetic CT scan was generated. With the support of artificial intelligence, structure guided deformation and the synthetic CT scan contours were adapted by the system to match the anatomy on the CBCT. If necessary, these contours were adjusted before a new plan was generated. A second and third CBCT were acquired to validate the new plan with respect to CTV coverage just before and after treatment delivery, respectively. Treatment was delivered using volumetric modulated arc treatment (VMAT). All steps in this process were defined and timed.ResultsOn average the timeslot needed at the treatment machine was 34 min. The process of acquiring a CBCT, evaluating and adjusting the contours, creating the new plan and verifying the CTV on the CBCT scan took on average 20 min. Including delivery and post treatment verification this was 26 min. Manual adjustments of the target volumes were necessary in 50% of fractions. Plan quality, target coverage and patient compliance were excellent.ConclusionsFirst clinical experience with CBCT-based online adaptive radiotherapy shows it is feasible for rectal cancer. Trial registration Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) does not apply to this study and was retrospectively approved by the Medical Ethics review Committee of the Academic Medical Center (W21_087 # 21.097; Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands).

Project description:The purpose of this study was to characterize the motion and define the required treatment margins of the pathological mesorectal lymph nodes (GTVln) for two online adaptive MRI-guided strategies for sequential boosting. Secondly, we determine the margins required for the primary gross tumor volume (GTVprim). Twenty-eight patients treated on a 1.5T MR-Linac were included in the study. On T2-weighted images for adaptation (MRIadapt) before and verification after irradiation (MRIpost) of five treatment fractions per patient, the GTVln and GTVprim were delineated. With online adaptive MRI-guided radiotherapy, daily plan adaptation can be performed through the use of two different strategies. In an adapt-to-shape (ATS) workflow the interfraction motion is effectively corrected by redelineation and the only relevant motion is intrafraction motion, while in an adapt-to-position (ATP) workflow the margin (for GTVln) is dominated by interfraction motion. The margin required for GTVprim will be identical to the ATS workflow, assuming each fraction would be perfectly matched on GTVprim. The intrafraction motion was calculated between MRIadapt and MRIpost for the GTVln and GTVprim separately. The interfraction motion of the GTVln was calculated with respect to the position of GTVprim, assuming each fraction would be perfectly matched on GTVprim. PTV margins were calculated for each strategy using the Van Herk recipe. For GTVln we randomly sampled the original dataset 20 times, with each subset containing a single randomly selected lymph node for each patient. The resulting margins for ATS ranged between 3 and 4 mm (LR), 3 and 5 mm (CC) and 5 and 6 mm (AP) based on the 20 randomly sampled datasets for GTVln. For ATP, the margins for GTVln were 10-12 mm in LR and AP and 16-19 mm in CC. The margins for ATS for GTVprim were 1.7 mm (LR), 4.7 mm (CC) and 3.2 mm anterior and 5.6 mm posterior. Daily delineation using ATS of both target volumes results in the smallest margins and is therefore recommended for safe dose escalation to the primary tumor and lymph nodes.

Dataset Information

Online adaptive radiotherapy compared to plan selection for rectal cancer: quantifying the benefit.

Publications

Online adaptive radiotherapy compared to plan selection for rectal cancer: quantifying the benefit.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets