Dataset Information

Dosimetric Comparison of Upfront Boosting With Stereotactic Radiosurgery Versus Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Glioblastoma

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To simulate and analyze the dosimetric differences of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) or pre-operative single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in addition to post-operative external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in Glioblastoma (GB).

Methods

Imaging series of previously treated patients with adjuvant radiochemotherapy were analyzed. For SRS target definition, pre-operative MRIs were co-registered to planning CT scans and a pre-operative T1-weighted gross target volume (GTV) plus a 2-mm planning target volume (PTV) were created. For IORT, a modified (m)GTV was expanded from the pre-operative volume, in order to mimic a round cavity as during IORT. Dose prescription was 20 Gy, homogeneously planned for SRS and calculated at the surface for IORT, to cover 99% and 90% of the volumes, respectively. For tumors > 2cm in maximum diameter, a 15 Gy dose was prescribed. Plan assessment was performed after calculating the 2-Gy equivalent doses (EQD2) for both boost modalities and including them into the EBRT plan. Main points of interest encompass differences in target coverage, brain volume receiving 12 Gy or more (V12), and doses to various organs-at-risk (OARs).

Results

Seventeen pre-delivered treatment plans were included in the study. The mean GTV was 21.72 cm3 (SD ± 19.36) and mGTV 29.64 cm3 (SD ± 25.64). The mean EBRT and SRS PTV were 254.09 (SD ± 80.0) and 36.20 cm3 (SD ± 31.48), respectively. Eight SRS plans were calculated to 15 Gy according to larger tumor sizes, while all IORT plans to 20 Gy. The mean EBRT D95 was 97.13% (SD ± 3.48) the SRS D99 99.91% (SD ± 0.35) and IORT D90 83.59% (SD ± 3.55). Accounting for only-boost approaches, the brain V12 was 49.68 cm3 (SD ± 26.70) and 16.94 cm3 (SD ± 13.33) (p<0.001) for SRS and IORT, respectively. After adding EBRT results respectively to SRS and IORT doses, significant lower doses were found in the latter for mean Dmax of chiasma (p=0.01), left optic nerve (p=0.023), right (p=0.008) and left retina (p<0.001). No significant differences were obtained for brainstem and cochleae.

Conclusion

Dose escalation for Glioblastoma using IORT results in lower OAR exposure as conventional SRS.

SUBMITTER: Sarria G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8581360 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose/objectivesTo perform a dosimetric comparison between kilovoltage intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) simulating both deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) and free-breathing (FB) modalities for patients with liver metastases.Methods/materialsDiagnostic computed tomographies (CT) of patients carrying one or two lesions <4 cm and who underwent surgery were retrospectively screened and randomly selected for the study. For DIBH-SRS, a gross target volume (GTV) plus planning target volume (PTV) were delineated. For FB-SRS, a GTV plus an internal target volume (ITV) and PTV were defined. Accounting for the maximal GTV diameters, a modified GTV (GTV-IORT) was expanded circumferentially to simulate a resection cavity. The best suitable round-applicator size was thereafter selected. All treatment plans were calculated homogeneously to deliver 40 Gy. Doses delivered to organs at risk (OAR) and target volumes were compared for IORT vs. both SRS modalities.ResultsEight patients encompassing 10 lesions were included in the study. The mean liver volume was 2,050.97 cm3 (SD, 650.82), and the mean GTV volume was 12.23 cm3 (SD, 12.62). As for target structures, GTV-IORT [19.44 cm3 (SD, 17.26)] were significantly smaller than both PTV DIBH-SRS [30.74 cm3 (SD, 24.64), p = 0.002] and PTV FB-SRS [75.82 cm3 (SD, 45.65), p = 0.002]. The median applicator size was 3 cm (1.5-4.5), and the mean IORT simulated delivery time was 45.45 min (SD, 19.88). All constraints were met in all modalities. Liver V9.1 showed significantly smaller volumes with IORT [63.39 cm3 (SD, 35.67)] when compared to DIBH-SRS [150.12 cm3 (SD, 81.43), p = 0.002] or FB-SRS [306.13 cm3 (SD, 128.75), p = 0.002]. No other statistical or dosimetrically relevant difference was observed for stomach, spinal cord, or biliary tract. Mean IORT D90 was 85.3% (SD, 6.05), whereas D95 for DIBH-SRS and FB-SRS were 99.03% (SD, 1.71; p = 0.042) and 98.04% (SD, 3.46; p = 0.036), respectively.ConclusionKilovoltage IORT bears the potential as novel add-on treatment for resectable liver metastases, significantly reducing healthy liver exposure to radiation in comparison to SRS. Prospective clinical evidence is required to confirm this hypothesis.

Project description:PurposeTo compare the dosimetric differences in stereotactic radiosurgery between use of passively scattered protons (PSRS) versus photons (XSRS) for pituitary adenomas.Methods and materialsNine patients with pituitary adenomas were selected among patients receiving single-fraction proton stereotactic radiosurgery (PSRS) between 2016 and 2017. These cases were replanned with XSRS using volumetric-modulated arc therapy with 2.5 mm and 5 mm multileaf collimators (2.5XSRS and 5XSRS, respectively). PSRS was planned with a dedicated single scattering stereotactic proton unit delivered via 3 equally or unequally weighted isocentric fields. XSRS plans were created with optimization to spare organs at risk. Plans were generated using the original total treatment dose delivered in 1 fraction.ResultsPlans were evaluated for target volume dosimetry and estimated clinical toxicity. There was no significant difference in clinical target volume V100%, V95%, V90% or homogeneity index between treatment modalities. PSRS offered lower maximum dose (Dmax) to organs at risk and equivalent uniform dose (EUD) compared with 5XSRS and 2.5XSRS, respectively, for critical structures including optic nerve (right, Dmax 4.18, 5.32, 5.41; EUD 3.35, 4.08, 4.20) and hypothalamus (Dmax 1.71, 3.94, 3.77; EUD 0.94, 2.47, 2.39; P < .05 for PSRS vs 5XSRS and 2.5XSRS). The projected risk of secondary tumors in excess of baseline was lowest for PSRS plans (PSRS 5.28, 5XSRS 12.93, 2.5XSRS 12.66 cases per 10,000 patient-years; P = .008 for PSRS vs 5XSRS, PSRS vs 2.5XSRS, and P = .77 for 5XSRS vs 2.5XSRS).ConclusionsWe demonstrate that neither modality has empirically superior dosimetry and identify potential clinical advantages as well as limitations of each technique. PSRS, 5XSRS and 2.5XSRS demonstrate comparable target volume dosimetry for pituitary adenoma. PSRS compared with XSRS modalities offers modestly decreased maximum dose and EUD to critical proximal structures and decreases risk of radiation-induced secondary tumors by more than half.

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer rates have been steadily increasing in recent years. As high-precision radiation therapy methods, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and carbon-ion radiation therapy (CIRT) have unique advantages. Analyzing the dosimetric differences between SBRT and CIRT in the treatment of localized prostate cancer can help provide patients with more accurate, individualized treatment plans.MethodsWe selected computed tomography positioning images and the contours of target volumes of 16 patients with localized prostate cancer who received radiotherapy. We delineated the organs at risk (OARs) on the CyberKnife (CK) treatment planning system (TPS) MultiPlan4.0, which were imported into the CIRT uniform scanning TPS HIMM-1 ci-Plan. Two treatment plans, SBRT and CIRT, were designed for the same patient, and we used SPSS 22.0 for the statistical analysis of data.ResultsBoth SBRT and CIRT plans met the prescribed dose requirements. In terms of target volume exposure dose, D2 (P<0.001), D5 (P<0.001), D50 (P<0.001), D90 (P=0.029), D95 (P<0.001), D98 (P<0.001), and Dmean (P<0.001) under SBRT were significantly higher than those under CIRT; the conformity index (CI) under SBRT was significantly better than that under CIRT (P<0.001); the target volume coverage rate (V95%) and dose homogeneity index (HI) under CIRT were significantly better than those under SBRT (P<0.001). In terms of OAR exposure dosage, the Dmax of the bladder and rectum under SBRT was significantly lower than that under CIRT (P<0.001), but Dmean was in the other direction; the exposure dose of the intestinal tract under CIRT was significantly lower than that under SBRT (P<0.05); Dmax of the femoral head under CIRT was significantly lower than that under SBRT (P<0.05), and there was no statistical difference between them at other doses.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that when CIRT was used for treating localized prostate cancer, the dose distribution in target volume was more homogeneous and the coverage rate was higher; the average dose of OARs was lower. SBRT had a better CI and higher dose in target volume; the dose hotspot was lower in OARs. It is important to comprehensively consider the dose relationship between local tumor and surrounding tissues when selecting treatment plans.

Project description:BackgroundIn patients with one to three brain metastases who undergo resection, options for post-operative treatments include whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of the resection cavity. In this meta-analysis, we sought to compare the efficacy of each post-operative radiation modality with respect to tumor recurrence and survival.MethodsPubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched through June 2016 for cohort studies reporting outcomes of SRS or WBRT after metastasis resection. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using fixed-effect and random-effect models for local recurrence, distant recurrence, and overall survival.ResultsEight retrospective cohort studies with 646 patients (238 with SRS versus 408 with WBRT) were included in the analysis. Comparing SRS to WBRT, the overall crude risk ratio using the fixed-effect model was 0.59 for local recurrence (95%-CI: 0.32-1.09, I2: 3.35%, P-heterogeneity = 0.36, 3 studies), 1.09 for distant recurrence (95%-CI: 0.74-1.60, I2: 50.5%, P-heterogeneity = 0.13; 3 studies), and 2.99 for leptomeningeal disease (95% CI 1.55-5.76; I2: 14.4% p-heterogeneity: 0.28; 2 studies). For the same comparison, the risk ratio for median overall survival was 0.47 (95% CI: 0.41-0.54; I2: 79.1%, P-heterogeneity < 0.01; 4 studies) in a fixed-effect model, but was no longer significant (0.63; 95%-CI: 0.40-1.00) in a random-effect model. SRS was associated with a lower risk of leukoencephalopathy (RR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.07-0.33, 1 study), yet with a higher risk of radiation-necrosis (RR: 19.4, 95% CI: 1.21-310, 1 study).ConclusionBased on retrospective cohort studies, the results of this study suggest that SRS of the resection cavity may offer comparable survival and similar local and distant control as adjuvant WBRT, yet may be associated with a higher risk for developing leptomeningeal disease. Future research on SRS should focus on achieving a better understanding of the various factors that may favor SRS over WBRT.

Project description:Maintenance of quality of life is the primary goal during treatment of brain metastases (BM). This is a protocol of an ongoing phase III randomised multicentre study. This study aims to determine the exact additional palliative value of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) over whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in patients with 4-10 BM.The study will include patients with 4-10 BM from solid primary tumours diagnosed on a high-resolution contrast-enhanced MRI scan with a maximum lesional diameter of 2.5 cm in any direction and a maximum cumulative lesional volume of 30 cm3. Patients will be randomised between WBRT in five fractions of 4 Gy to a total dose of 20 Gy (standard arm) and single dose SRS to the BMs (study arm) in the range of 15-24 Gy. The largest BM or a localisation in the brainstem will determine the prescribed SRS dose. The primary endpoint is difference in quality of life (EQ5D EUROQOL score) at 3 months after radiotherapy with regard to baseline. Secondary endpoints are difference in quality of life (EQ5D EUROQOL questionnaire) at 6, 9 and 12 months after radiotherapy with regard to baseline. Other secondary endpoints are at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after radiotherapy survival, Karnofsky ? 70, WHO performance status, steroid use (mg), toxicity according to CTCAE V4.0 including hair loss, fatigue, brain salvage during follow-up, type of salvage, time to salvage after randomisation and Barthel index. Facultative secondary endpoints are neurocognition with the Hopkins verbal learning test revised, quality of life EORTC QLQ-C30, quality of life EORTC BN20 brain module and fatigue scale EORTC QLQ-FA13.Worldwide, most patients with more than 4 BM will be treated with WBRT. Considering the potential advantages of SRS over WBRT, i.e. limiting radiation doses to uninvolved brain and a high rate of local tumour control by just a single treatment with fewer side effects, such as hair loss and fatigue, compared to WBRT, SRS might be a suitable alternative for patients with 4-10 BM.Trial registration number: NCT02353000 , trial registration date 15th January 2015, open for accrual 1st July 2016, nine patients were enrolled in this trial on 14th April 2017.