Dataset Information

Dose accumulation to assess the validity of treatment plans with reduced margins in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background and purpose

Literature has reported reduced treatment toxicity in head-and-neck radiotherapy (HNRT) when reducing the planning target volume (PTV) margin from 5 to 3?mm but loco-regional control was not always preserved. This study used deformable image registration (DIR)-facilitated dose accumulation to assess clinical target volume (CTV) coverage in the presence of anatomical changes.

Materials and methods

VMAT plans for 12 patients were optimized using 3 or 5?mm PTV and planning risk volume (PRV) margins. The planning computed tomography (pCT) scan was registered to each daily cone beam CT (CBCT) using DIR. The inverse registration was used to reconstruct and accumulate dose ( Dacc ). CTV coverage was assessed using the dose-volume histogram (DVH) metric D99%acc and by individual voxel analysis. Both approaches included an uncertainty estimate using the 95% level of confidence.

Results

D99%acc was less than 95% of the prescribed dose Dpresc for three cases including only one case where this was at the 95% level of confidence. However for many patients, the accumulated dose included a substantial volume of voxels receiving less than 95% Dpresc independent of margin expansion, which predominantly occurred in the subdermal region. Loss in target coverage was very patient specific but tightness of target volume coverage at planning was a common factor leading to underdosage.

Conclusion

This study agrees with previous literature that PTV/PRV margin reduction did not significantly reduce CTV coverage during treatment, but also highlighted that tight coverage of target volumes at planning increases the risk of clinically unacceptable dose delivery. Patient-specific verification of dose delivery to assess the dose delivered to each voxel is recommended.

SUBMITTER: Lowther NJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7807697 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dose accumulation to assess the validity of treatment plans with reduced margins in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer.

Lowther Nicholas J NJ Marsh Steven H SH Louwe Robert J W RJW

Physics and imaging in radiation oncology 20200401

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Literature has reported reduced treatment toxicity in head-and-neck radiotherapy (HNRT) when reducing the planning target volume (PTV) margin from 5 to 3 mm but loco-regional control was not always preserved. This study used deformable image registration (DIR)-facilitated dose accumulation to assess clinical target volume (CTV) coverage in the presence of anatomical changes.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>VMAT plans for 12 patients were optimized using 3 or 5 mm PTV ...[more]

PMID: 33458315

Similar Datasets

Project description:To demonstrate that novice dosimetry planners efficiently create clinically acceptable IMRT plans for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients using a commercially available multicriteria optimization (MCO) system.Twenty HNC patients were enrolled in this in-silico comparative planning study. Per patient, novice planners with less experience in dosimetry planning created an IMRT plan using an MCO system (RayStation). Furthermore, a conventionally planned clinical IMRT plan was available (Pinnacle(3)). All conventional IMRT and MCO-plans were blind-rated by two expert radiation-oncologists in HNC, using a 5-point scale (1-5 with 5 the highest score) assessment form comprising 10 questions. Additionally, plan quality was reported in terms of planning time, dosimetric and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) comparisons. Inter-rater reliability was derived using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).In total, the radiation-oncologists rated 800 items on plan quality. The overall plan score indicated no differences between both planning techniques (conventional IMRT: 3.8 ± 1.2 vs. MCO: 3.6 ± 1.1, p = 0.29). The inter-rater reliability of all ratings was 0.65 (95% CI: 0.57-0.71), indicating substantial agreement between the radiation-oncologists. In 93% of cases, the scoring difference of the conventional IMRT and MCO-plans was one point or less. Furthermore, MCO-plans led to slightly higher dose uniformity in the therapeutic planning target volume, to a lower integral body dose (13.9 ± 4.5 Gy vs. 12.9 ± 4.0 Gy, p < 0.001), and to reduced dose to the contra-lateral parotid gland (28.1 ± 11.8 Gy vs. 23.0 ± 11.2 Gy, p < 0.002). Consequently, NTCP estimates for xerostomia reduced by 8.4 ± 7.4% (p < 0.003). The hands-on time of the conventional IMRT planning was approximately 205 min. The time to create an MCO-plan was on average 43 ± 12 min.MCO planning enables novice treatment planners to create high quality IMRT plans for HNC patients. Plans were created with vastly reduced planning times, requiring less resources and a short learning curve.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Although FDG-avid tumors are recognized as a potential target for dose escalation, there is no clear basis for selecting a boost dose to counter this apparent radioresistance. Using a novel analysis method, based on the new concept of an outcome-equivalent dose, we estimate the extra dose required to equalize local control between FDG-avid and non-avid head and neck tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Based on a literature review, five reports of head and neck cancer (423 patients in total), along with an internal validation dataset from our institution (135 oropharynx patients), were used in this analysis. To compensate for the heterogeneity among multi-institutional patient cohorts and corresponding treatment techniques, local control data of the cohorts were fit to a single dose-response curve with a clinically representative steepness (?50=2), thereby defining an 'outcome-equivalent dose' (OED) for each institutional cohort. Separate dose-response curves were then determined for the FDG-avid and FDG-non-avid patient cohorts, and the ratio of TD50 (tumor dose required for 50% of control) values between the high- and low-FDG-uptake groups (TD50,high/TD50,low) was estimated, resulting in an estimated metabolic dose-modifying factor (mDMF) due to FDG-avidity. RESULTS:For individual datasets, the estimated mDMFs were found to be in the range of 1.07-1.62, decreasing if the assumed slope (?50) increased. Weighted logistic regression for the six datasets resulted in a mDMF of 1.19 [95% CI: 1.04-1.34] for a ?50 value of 2, which translates to a needed dose increase of about 1.5Gy per unit increase in the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVm) of FDG-PET [95% CI: 0.3-2.7]. Assumptions of lower or higher ?50 values (1.5 or 2.5) resulted in slightly different mDMFs: 1.26 or 1.15, respectively. A validation analysis with seven additional datasets, based on relaxed criteria, was consistent with the estimated mDMF. CONCLUSIONS:We introduced a novel outcome-equivalent dose analysis method to estimate the dose-response modifying effect of FDG uptake variation. To reach equal response rates, FDG-avid tumors are likely to require 10% to 30% more dose than FDG-non-avid tumors. These estimates provide a rational starting point for selecting IMRT boosts for FDG-avid tumors. However, independent tests and refinements of the estimated dose-modifying effect, using high-quality prospective clinical trial data, are needed.

Project description:PurposeAccurate contouring in head and neck cancer (HNC) is critical. International consensus guidelines recommend the 5 + 5 mm rule for expansions around the primary tumor, wherein high- and low-dose clinical target volumes (CTV-P1 and CTV-P2, respectively) are created using successive 5 mm expansions on the gross tumor volume. To our knowledge, the necessity of a low-dose CTV-P2 has never been assessed; therefore, we evaluated the dosimetric impact of adding a CTV-P2 expansion using the 5 + 5 mm rule compared with contouring with a high-dose CTV-P1 alone.Methods and materialsA retrospective study of clinically delivered (chemo)radiation therapy treatment plans for HNC was conducted. All patients were treated with 70 Gy in 35 fractions using volumetric modulated arc therapy in a single phase. CTV-P2 was retrospectively contoured per guidelines as a 5 mm expansion on CTV-P1 from the clinical plan, carving off specified barriers to spread. We used a 5 mm planning target volume (PTV) expansion. Our primary outcome was whether 95% of the volume of the PTV for the CTV-P2 contour (ie, PTV-P2) received at least 56 Gy. To assess dose falloff, the coverage of a PTV ring structure was created by subtracting PTV-P1 from PTV-P2.ResultsTwenty-seven patients from 4 HNC subsites (base of tongue, tonsil, hypopharynx, and supraglottic larynx) were included. In all 108 treatment plans, at least 95% of the PTV-P2 structure received at least 56 Gy. The minimum volume of the PTV-P2 structure receiving at least 56 Gy was 97.4%. Eight of 108 treatment plans had borderline coverage of the PTV ring substructure alone.ConclusionsAdding a CTV-P2 structure using the 5 + 5 mm rule had no dosimetric impact, adds contouring time, adds treatment planning complexity, and could potentially introduce errors. The 5 + 5 mm rule may have value in other settings, such as when smaller PTV margins are used, and warrants further evaluation with prospective or randomized studies.

Dataset Information

Dose accumulation to assess the validity of treatment plans with reduced margins in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer.

Background and purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Dose accumulation to assess the validity of treatment plans with reduced margins in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets