cExternal beam radiation results in minimal changes in post void residual urine volumes during the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To evaluate the impact of external beam radiation therapy (XRT) on weekly ultrasound determined post-void residual (PVR) urine volumes in patients with prostate cancer.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>125 patients received XRT for clinically localized prostate cancer. XRT was delivered to the prostate only (n = 66) or if the risk of lymph node involvement was greater than 10% to the whole pelvis followed by a prostate boost (n = 59). All patients were irradiated in the prone position in a custom hip-fix mobilization device with an empty bladder and rectum. PVR was obtained at baseline and weekly. Multiple clinical and treatment parameters were evaluated as predictors for weekly PVR changes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mean patient age was 73.9 years with a mean pre-treatment prostate volume of 53.3 cc, a mean IPSS of 11.3 and a mean baseline PVR of 57.6 cc. During treatment, PVR decreased from baseline in both cohorts with the absolute difference within the limits of accuracy of the bladder scanner. Alpha-blockers did not predict for a lower PVR during treatment. There was no significant difference in mean PVR urine volumes or differences from baseline in either the prostate only or pelvic radiation groups (p = 0.664 and p = 0.458, respectively). Patients with a larger baseline PVR (>40 cc) had a greater reduction in PVR, although the greatest reduction was seen between weeks one and three. Patients with a small PVR (<40 cc) had no demonstrable change throughout treatment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Prostate XRT results in clinically insignificant changes in weekly PVR volumes, suggesting that radiation induced bladder irritation does not substantially influence bladder residual urine volumes.</p

Intrafraction motion of the prostate during an IMRT session: a fiducial-based 3D measurement with Cone-beam CT

Background: Image-guidance systems allow accurate interfractional repositioning of IMRT treatments, however, these may require up to 15 minutes. Therefore intrafraction motion might have an impact on treatment precision. 3D geometric data regarding intrafraction prostate motion are rare; we therefore assessed its magnitude with pre- and post-treatment fiducial-based imaging with cone-beam-CT (CBCT). Methods: 39 IMRT fractions in 5 prostate cancer patients after (125)I-seed implantation were evaluated. Patient position was corrected based on the (125)I-seeds after pre-treatment CBCT. Immediately after treatment delivery, a second CBCT was performed. Differences in bone- and fiducial position were measured by seed-based grey-value matching. Results: Fraction time was 13.6 +/- 1.6 minutes. Median overall displacement vector length of (125)Iseeds was 3 mm (M = 3 mm, Sigma = 0.9 mm, sigma = 1.7 mm; M: group systematic error, Sigma: SD of systematic error, sigma: SD of random error). Median displacement vector of bony structures was 1.84 mm (M = 2.9 mm, Sigma = 1 mm, sigma = 3.2 mm). Median displacement vector length of the prostate relative to bony structures was 1.9 mm (M = 3 mm, Sigma = 1.3 mm, sigma = 2.6 mm). Conclusion: a) Overall displacement vector length during an IMRT session is &lt; 3 mm. b) Positioning devices reducing intrafraction bony displacements can further reduce overall intrafraction motion. c) Intrafraction prostate motion relative to bony structures is &lt; 2 mm and may be further reduced by institutional protocols and reduction of IMRT duration

Systematisation of spatial uncertainties for comparison between a MR and a CT-based radiotherapy workflow for prostate treatments

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the present work we compared the spatial uncertainties associated with a MR-based workflow for external radiotherapy of prostate cancer to a standard CT-based workflow. The MR-based workflow relies on target definition and patient positioning based on MR imaging. A solution for patient transport between the MR scanner and the treatment units has been developed. For the CT-based workflow, the target is defined on a MR series but then transferred to a CT study through image registration before treatment planning, and a patient positioning using portal imaging and fiducial markers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An "open bore" 1.5T MRI scanner, Siemens Espree, has been installed in the radiotherapy department in near proximity to a treatment unit to enable patient transport between the two installations, and hence use the MRI for patient positioning. The spatial uncertainty caused by the transport was added to the uncertainty originating from the target definition process, estimated through a review of the scientific literature. The uncertainty in the CT-based workflow was estimated through a literature review.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The systematic uncertainties, affecting all treatment fractions, are reduced from 3-4 mm (1Sd) with a CT based workflow to 2-3 mm with a MR based workflow. The main contributing factor to this improvement is the exclusion of registration between MR and CT in the planning phase of the treatment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Treatment planning directly on MR images reduce the spatial uncertainty for prostate treatments.</p

Real-time prostate motion assessment: image-guidance and the temporal dependence of intra-fraction motion

BACKGROUND: The rapid adoption of image-guidance in prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) results in longer treatment times, which may result in larger intrafraction motion, thereby negating the advantage of image-guidance. This study aims to qualify and quantify the contribution of image-guidance to the temporal dependence of intrafraction motion during prostate IMRT. METHODS: One-hundred and forty-three patients who underwent conventional IMRT (n=67) or intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT/RapidArc, n=76) for localized prostate cancer were evaluated. Intrafraction motion assessment was based on continuous RL (lateral), SI (longitudinal), and AP (vertical) positional detection of electromagnetic transponders at 10 Hz. Daily motion amplitudes were reported as session mean, median, and root-mean-square (RMS) displacements. Temporal effect was evaluated by categorizing treatment sessions into 4 different classes: IMRT(c) (transponder only localization), IMRT(cc) (transponder + CBCT localization), IMAT(c) (transponder only localization), or IMAT(cc) (transponder + CBCT localization). RESULTS: Mean/median session times were 4.15/3.99 min (IMAT(c)), 12.74/12.19 min (IMAT(cc)), 5.99/5.77 min (IMRT(c)), and 12.98/12.39 min (IMRT(cc)), with significant pair-wise difference (p<0.0001) between all category combinations except for IMRT(cc) vs. IMAT(cc) (p>0.05). Median intrafraction motion difference between CBCT and non-CBCT categories strongly correlated with time for RMS (t-value=17.29; p<0.0001), SI (t-value=−4.25; p<0.0001), and AP (t-value=2.76; p<0.0066), with a weak correlation for RL (t-value=1.67; p=0.0971). Treatment time reduction with non-CBCT treatment categories showed reductions in the observed intrafraction motion: systematic error (Σ)<0.6 mm and random error (σ)<1.2 mm compared with ≤0.8 mm and <1.6 mm, respectively, for CBCT-involved treatment categories. CONCLUSIONS: For treatment durations >4-6 minutes, and without any intrafraction motion mitigation protocol in place, patient repositioning is recommended, with at least the acquisition of the lateral component of an orthogonal image pair in the absence of volumetric imaging

Change in prostate volume during extreme hypo-fractionation analysed with MRI

Background: Hypo-fractionated external beam radiotherapy with narrow CTV-PTV margins is increasingly applied for prostate cancer. This demands a precise target definition and knowledge on target location and extension during treatment. It is unclear how increase in fraction size affects changes in prostate volume during treatment. Our aim was to study prostate volume changes during extreme hypo-fractionation (7 x 6.1 Gy) by using sequential MRIs. Methods: Twenty patients treated with extreme hypo-fractionation were recruited from an on-going prospective randomized phase III trial. An MRI scan was done before start of treatment, at mid treatment and at the end of radiotherapy. The prostate was delineated at each MRI and the volume and maximum extension in left-right, anterior-posterior and cranial-caudal directions were measured. Results: There was a significant increase in mean prostate volume (14%) at mid treatment as compared to baseline. The prostate volume remained enlarged (9%) at the end of radiotherapy. Prostate swelling was most pronounced in the anterior-posterior and cranial-caudal directions. Conclusions: Extreme hypo-fractionation induced a significant prostate swelling during treatment that was still present at the time of last treatment fraction. Our results indicate that prostate swelling is an important factor to take into account when applying treatment margins during short extreme hypo-fractionation, and that tight margins should be applied with caution