Clinical outcome of hypofractionated breath-hold image-guided SABR of primary lung tumors and lung metastases

Background: Stereotactic Ablative RadioTherapy (SABR) of lung tumors/metastases has been shown to be an effective treatment modality with low toxicity. Outcome and toxicity were retrospectively evaluated in a unique single-institution cohort treated with intensity-modulated image-guided breath-hold SABR (igSABR) without external immobilization. The dose–response relationship is analyzed based on Biologically Equivalent Dose (BED). Patients and methods: 50 lesions in 43 patients with primary NSCLC (n = 27) or lung-metastases of various primaries (n = 16) were consecutively treated with igSABR with Active-Breathing-Coordinator (ABC®) and repeat-breath-hold cone-beam-CT. After an initial dose-finding/-escalation period, 5x12 Gy for peripheral lesions and single doses of 5 Gy to varying dose levels for central lesions were applied. Overall-survival (OS), progression-free-survival (PFS), progression pattern, local control (LC) and toxicity were analyzed. Results: The median BED2 was 83 Gy. 12 lesions were treated with a BED2 of &lt;80 Gy, and 38 lesions with a BED2 of <80 Gy. Median follow-up was 15 months. Actuarial 1- and 2-year OS were 67% and 43%; respectively. Cause of death was non-disease-related in 27%. Actuarial 1- and 2-year PFS was 42% and 28%. Progression site was predominantly distant. Actuarial 1- and 2 year LC was 90% and 85%. LC showed a trend for a correlation to BED2 (p = 0.1167). Pneumonitis requiring conservative treatment occurred in 23%. Conclusion: Intensity-modulated breath-hold igSABR results in high LC-rates and low toxicity in this unfavorable patient cohort with inoperable lung tumors or metastases. A BED2 of <80 Gy was associated with reduced local control

Non-coplanar VMAT combined with non-uniform dose prescription markedly reduces lung dose in breath-hold lung SBRT

Background and purpose: In this retrospective treatment planning study, the effect of a uniform and non-uniform planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage as well as a coplanar and non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery approach for lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) were compared. Materials and methods: For 46 patients with lesions in the peripheral lungs, three different treatment plans were generated: First, a coplanar 220° VMAT sequence with a uniform PTV dose prescription (UC). Second, a coplanar 220° VMAT treatment plan with a non-uniform dose distribution in the PTV (nUC). Third, a non-coplanar VMAT dose delivery with four couch angles (0°, ±35°, 90°) and a non-uniform prescription (nUnC) was used. All treatment plans were optimized for pareto-optimality with respect to PTV coverage and ipsilateral lung dose. Treatment sequences were delivered on a flattening-filter-free linear accelerator and beam-on times were recorded. Dosimetric comparison between the three techniques was performed. Results: For the three scenarios (UC, nUC, nUnC), median gross tumor volume (GTV) doses were 63.4 ± 2.5, 74.4 ± 3.6, and 77.9 ± 3.8 Gy, and ipsilateral V10Gy lung volumes were 15.7 ± 6.1, 13.9 ± 4.7, and 12.0 ± 5.1%, respectively. Normal tissue complication probability of the ipsilateral lung was 3.9, 3.1, and 2.8%, respectively. The number of monitor units were 5141 ± 1174, 4104 ± 786, and 3657 ± 710 MU and the corresponding beam-on times were 177 ± 54, 143 ± 29, and 148 ± 26 s. Conclusion: For SBRT treatments in DIBH, a non-uniform dose prescription in the PTV, combined with a non-coplanar VMAT arc arrangement, significantly spares the ipsilateral lung while increasing dose to the GTV without major treatment time increase

Dünndarmschonung bei der IMRT des Rektumkarzinoms: Dosimetrische Studie zur Bauch- und Rückenlagerung

Background: This treatment planning study analyzes dose coverage and dose to organs at risk (OAR) in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of rectal cancer and compares prone vs. supine positioning as well as the effect of dose optimization for the small bowel (SB) by additional dose constraints in the inverse planning process. Patients and methods: Based on the CT datasets of ten male patients in both prone and supine position, a&nbsp;total of four different IMRT plans were created for each patient. OAR were defined as the SB, bladder, and femoral heads. In half of the plans, two additional SB cost functions were used in the inverse planning process. Results: There was a&nbsp;statistically significant dose reduction for the SB in prone position of up to 41% in the high and intermediate dose region, compared with the supine position. Furthermore, the femoral heads showed a&nbsp;significant dose reduction in prone position in the low dose region. Regarding the additional active SB constraints, the dose in the high dose region of the SB was significantly reduced by up to 14% with the additional cost functions. There were no significant differences in the dose distribution of the planning target volume (PTV) and the bladder. Conclusion: Prone positioning can significantly reduce dose to the SB in IMRT for rectal cancer and therefore should not only be used in 3D conformal radiotherapy but also in IMRT of rectal cancer. Further protection of the SB can be achieved by additional dose constraints in inverse planning without jeopardizing the homogeneity of the PTV

Radiation-induced optic neuropathy after stereotactic and image guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)

Background/purpose: To quantify the risk of radiation-induced optic neuropathy (RION) after stereotactic/image-guided positioning and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with ≥50 Gy to the anterior visual pathway (AVP). Methods: Patients irradiated with ≥50 Gy to the AVP using stereotactic/image-guided positioning between 2002 and 2011 in Mannheim were identified. Detailed dosimetric data were collected and patients or family members were retrospectively asked to rate visual acuity and visual disorders. Results: 125 patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Average maximum equivalent point dose (D max -EQD-2 [α/β=1.6] ) to the AVP was 53.1 ± 3.9 Gy. 99 patients received ≥50 Gy bilaterally (chiasm or both optic nerves), resulting in 224 (99x2 bilateral plus 26 unilateral) visual-fields-at-risk (VFAR) for RION. Eighty-two patients provided pre/post-IMRT visual status information (n = 151 VFARs). Permanent visual deterioration occurred in 18 (22%) patients. In seven, visual deterioration was possibly related to radiotherapy (two-sided deterioration in one patient) for a crude incidence of 8.5% (7/82 patients) and 5.3% (8/151 VFARs). Two cases were caused by chronic keratitis/conjunctivitis; in five patients RION could not be excluded (one two-sided). In one of 13 patients with D max -EQD-2 &gt; 58 Gy, RION could not be excluded. In all affected patients, visual acuity post-IMRT had decreased only mildly (1–2 points on the 5-point-scale). One patient with relevant baseline visual impairment (3/5) developed unilateral blindness (crude incidence of blindness on patient-/VFAR-level: 1.2% and 0.66%; competing risk-adjusted/actuarial 24-month incidence: patient/VFAR-level: 1.8% and 0.95%). Conclusion: Risk of RION was low in this cohort with accurate positioning and precise dosimetric information. Less conservative tolerance doses may be considered in patients with high risk of recurrence