Dataset Information

Recurrence Patterns After IMRT/VMAT in Head and Neck Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), two advanced modes of high-precision radiotherapy (RT), have become standard of care in the treatment of head and neck cancer. The development in RT techniques has markedly increased the complexity of target volume definition and accurate treatment delivery. The aim of this study was to indirectly investigate the quality of current TV delineation and RT delivery by analyzing the patterns of treatment failure for head and neck cancer patients in our high-volume RT center.

Methods

Between 2004 and 2014, 385 patients with pharyngeal, laryngeal, and oral cavity tumors were curatively treated with primary RT (IMRT/VMAT). We retrospectively investigated locoregional recurrences (LRR), distant metastases (DM), and overall survival (OS).

Results

Median follow-up was 6.4 years (IQR 4.7-8.3 years) during which time 122 patients (31.7%) developed LRR (22.1%) and DM (17.7%). The estimated 2- and 5-year locoregional control was 78.2% (95% CI 73.3, 82.3) and 74.2% (95% CI 69.0, 78.8). One patient developed a local recurrence outside the high-dose volume and five patients developed a regional recurrence outside the high-dose volume. Four patients (1.0%) suffered a recurrence in the electively irradiated neck and two patients had a recurrence outside the electively irradiated neck. No marginal failures were observed. The estimated 2- and 5-year DM-free survival rates were 83.3% (95% CI 78.9, 86.9) and 80.0% (95% CI 75.2, 84.0). The estimated 2- and 5-year OS rates were 73.6% (95% CI 68.9, 77.8) and 52. 6% (95% CI 47.3, 57.6). Median OS was 5.5 years (95% CI 4.5, 6.7).

Conclusion

Target volume definition and treatment delivery were performed accurately, as only few recurrences occurred outside the high-dose regions and no marginal failures were observed. Research on dose intensification and identification of high-risk subvolumes might decrease the risk of locoregional relapses. The results of this study may serve as reference data for comparison with future studies, such as dose escalation or proton therapy trials.

SUBMITTER: Bollen H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8483718 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeRadical radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) may deliver significant doses to brain structures. There is evidence that this may cause a decline in neurocognitive function (NCF). Radiation dose to the medial temporal lobes, and particularly to the hippocampi, seems to be critical in determining NCF outcomes. We evaluated the feasibility of two alternative intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques to generate hippocampus- and brain-sparing HNC treatment plans to preserve NCF.Methods and materialsA planning study was undertaken for ten patients with HNC whose planning target volume (PTV) included the nasopharynx. Patients had been previously treated using standard (chemo)-IMRT techniques. Bilateral hippocampi were delineated according to the RTOG atlas, on T1w MRI co-registered to the RT planning CT. Hippocampus-sparing plans (HSRT), and whole-brain/hippocampus-sparing fixed-field non-coplanar IMRT (BSRT) plans, were generated. DVHs and dose difference maps were used to compare plans. NTCP calculations for NCF impairment, based on hippocampal dosimetry, were performed for all plans.ResultsSignificant reductions in hippocampal doses relative to standard plans were achieved in eight of ten cases for both HSRT and BSRT. EQD2 D40% to bilateral hippocampi was significantly reduced from a mean of 23.5 Gy (range 14.5-35.0) in the standard plans to a mean of 8.6 Gy (4.2-24.7) for HSRT (p = 0.001) and a mean of 9.0 Gy (4.3-17.3) for BSRT (p < 0.001). Both HSRT and BSRT resulted in a significant reduction in doses to the whole brain, brain stem, and cerebellum.ConclusionWe demonstrate that IMRT plans for HNC involving the nasopharynx can be successfully optimised to significantly reduce dose to the bilateral hippocampi and whole brain. The magnitude of the achievable dose reductions results in significant reductions in the probability of radiation-induced NCF decline. These results could readily be translated into a future clinical trial.

Project description:To assess whether, in addition to sparing the parotid glands (PGs), xerostomia after chemotherapy plus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (chemo-IMRT) for head-and-neck cancer is affected by reducing the dose to the other salivary glands.In a prospective study, 78 patients with Stage III-IV oropharynx/nasopharynx cancer underwent chemo-IMRT, with the aim of sparing the parts of the bilateral PGs, oral cavity (OC) containing the minor salivary glands, and contralateral submandibular gland (SMG) outside the target (when contralateral level I was not a target). Before therapy and periodically for 24 months, validated patient-reported xerostomia questionnaire (XQ) scores and observer-graded xerostomia scores were recorded. Also, the stimulated and unstimulated saliva was measured selectively from each of the PGs and SMGs. The mean OC doses served as surrogates of minor salivary gland dysfunction. Regression models assessed the XQ and observer-graded xerostomia predictors.Statistically significant predictors of the XQ score on univariate analysis included the OC, PG, and SMG mean doses and the baseline XQ score, time since RT, and both stimulated and unstimulated PG saliva flow rates. Similar factors were statistically significant predictors of observer-graded xerostomia. The OC, PG, and SMG mean doses were moderately intercorrelated (r = 0.47-0.55). On multivariate analyses, after adjusting for the PG and SMG doses, the OC mean dose (p < .0001), interval from RT (p < .0001), and stimulated PG saliva (p < .0025) were significant predictors of the XQ scores and the OC mean dose and time for observer-graded xerostomia. Although scatter plots showed no thresholds, an OC mean dose of <40 Gy and contralateral SMG mean dose of <50 Gy were each associated with low patient-reported and observer-rated xerostomia at almost all post-therapy points.The PG, SMG, and OC mean doses were significant predictors of both patient-reported and observer-rated xerostomia after chemo-IMRT, with OC doses remaining significant after adjusting for the PG and SMG doses. These results support efforts to spare all the salivary glands by IMRT, beyond the PGs alone.

Project description:The purpose of this study was to verify the dosimetric performance of Acuros XB (AXB), a grid-based Boltzmann solver, in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT).The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) head and neck (H&N) phantom was used for all calculations and measurements in this study. Clinically equivalent IMRT and VMAT plans were created on the RPC H&N phantom in the Eclipse treatment planning system (version 10.0) by using RPC dose prescription specifications. The dose distributions were calculated with two different algorithms, AXB 11.0.03 and anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) 10.0.24. Two dose report modes of AXB were recorded: dose-to-medium in medium (D(m,m)) and dose-to-water in medium (D(w,m)). Each treatment plan was delivered to the RPC phantom three times for reproducibility by using a Varian Clinac iX linear accelerator. Absolute point dose and planar dose were measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and GafChromic® EBT2 film, respectively. Profile comparison and 2D gamma analysis were used to quantify the agreement between the film measurements and the calculated dose distributions from both AXB and AAA. The computation times for AAA and AXB were also evaluated.Good agreement was observed between measured doses and those calculated with AAA or AXB. Both AAA and AXB calculated doses within 5% of TLD measurements in both the IMRT and VMAT plans. Results of AXB_D(m,m) (0.1% to 3.6%) were slightly better than AAA (0.2% to 4.6%) or AXB_D(w,m) (0.3% to 5.1%). The gamma analysis for both AAA and AXB met the RPC 7%/4 mm criteria (over 90% passed), whereas AXB_D(m,m) met 5%/3 mm criteria in most cases. AAA was 2 to 3 times faster than AXB for IMRT, whereas AXB was 4-6 times faster than AAA for VMAT.AXB was found to be satisfactorily accurate when compared to measurements in the RPC H&N phantom. Compared with AAA, AXB results were equal to or better than those obtained with film measurements for IMRT and VMAT plans. The AXB_D(m,m) reporting mode was found to be closer to TLD and film measurements than was the AXB_D(w,m) mode. AXB calculation time was found to be significantly shorter (× 4) than AAA for VMAT.

Project description:Radiotherapy (RT) is frequently used in the treatment of head and neck cancer, but different side-effects are frequently reported, including a higher frequency of radiation-related caries, what may be consequence of direct radiation to dental tissue. The intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was developed to improve tumor control and decrease patient's morbidity by delivering radiation beams only to tumor shapes and sparing normal tissue. However, teeth are usually not included in IMRT plannings and the real efficacy of IMRT in the dental context has not been addressed. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess whether IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than conformal 3D radiotherapy (3DRT).Radiation dose delivery to dental structures of 80 patients treated for head and neck cancers (oral cavity, tongue, nasopharynx and oropharynx) with IMRT (40 patients) and 3DRT (40 patients) were assessed by individually contouring tooth crowns on patients' treatment plans. Clinicopathological data were retrieved from patients' medical files.The average dose of radiation to teeth delivered by IMRT was significantly lower than with 3DRT (p?=?0.007); however, only patients affected by nasopharynx and oral cavity cancers demonstrated significantly lower doses with IMRT (p?=?0.012 and p?=?0.011, respectively). Molars received more radiation with both 3DRT and IMRT, but the latter delivered significantly lower radiation in this group of teeth (p?<?0.001), whereas no significant difference was found for the other dental groups. Maxillary teeth received lower doses than mandibular teeth, but only IMRT delivered significantly lower doses (p?=?0.011 and p?=?0.003). Ipsilateral teeth received higher doses than contralateral teeth with both techniques and IMRT delivered significantly lower radiation than 3DRT for contralateral dental structures (p?<?0.001).IMRT delivered lower radiation doses to teeth than 3DRT, but only for some groups of patients and teeth, suggesting that this decrease was more likely due to the protection of other high risk organs, and was not enough to remove teeth from the zone of high risk for radiogenic disturbance (>30Gy).