A predictive model to guide management of the overlap region between target volume and organs at risk in prostate cancer volumetric modulated arc therapy

PURPOSE: The goal of this study is to determine whether the magnitude of overlap between planning target volume (PTV) and rectum (Rectumoverlap) or PTV and bladder (Bladderoverlap) in prostate cancer volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is predictive of the dose-volume relationships achieved after optimization, and to identify predictive equations and cutoff values using these overlap volumes beyond which the Quantitative Analyses of Normal Tissue Effects in the Clinic (QUANTEC) dose-volume constraints are unlikely to be met. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-seven patients with prostate cancer underwent VMAT planning using identical optimization conditions and normalization. The PTV (for the 50.4 Gy primary plan and 30.6 Gy boost plan) included 5 to 10 mm margins around the prostate and seminal vesicles. Pearson correlations, linear regression analyses, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to correlate the percentage overlap with dose-volume parameters. RESULTS: The percentage Rectumoverlap and Bladderoverlap correlated with sparing of that organ but minimally impacted other dose-volume parameters, predicted the primary plan rectum V45 and bladder V50 with R(2) = 0.78 and R(2) = 0.83, respectively, and predicted the boost plan rectum V30 and bladder V30 with R(2) = 0.53 and R(2) = 0.81, respectively. The optimal cutoff value of boost Rectumoverlap to predict rectum V75 >15% was 3.5% (sensitivity 100%, specificity 94%, p 10% was 5.0% (sensitivity 83%, specificity 100%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The degree of overlap between PTV and bladder or rectum can be used to accurately guide physicians on the use of interventions to limit the extent of the overlap region prior to optimization.

Comparison study of intensity modulated arc therapy using single or multiple arcs to intensity modulated radiation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer

PURPOSE: Intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) is a form of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) that delivers dose in single or multiple arcs. We compared IMRT plans versus single-arc field (1ARC) and multi-arc fields (3ARC) IMAT plans in high-risk prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen patients were studied. Prostate (PTVP), right pelvic (PTVRtLN) and left pelvic lymph nodes (PTVLtLN), and organs at risk were contoured. PTVP, PTVRtLN, and PTVLtLN received 50.40 Gy followed by a boost to PTVB of 28.80 Gy. Three plans were per patient generated: IMRT, 1ARC, and 3ARC. We recorded the dose to the PTV, the mean dose (DMEAN) to the organs at risk, and volume covered by the 50% isodose. Efficiency was evaluated by monitor units (MU) and beam on time (BOT). Conformity index (CI), Paddick gradient index, and homogeneity index (HI) were also calculated. RESULTS: Average Radiation Therapy Oncology Group CI was 1.17, 1.20, and 1.15 for IMRT, 1ARC, and 3ARC, respectively. The plans' HI were within 1% of each other. The DMEAN of bladder was within 2% of each other. The rectum DMEAN in IMRT plans was 10% lower dose than the arc plans (p < 0.0001). The GI of the 3ARC was superior to IMRT by 27.4% (p = 0.006). The average MU was highest in the IMRT plans (1686) versus 1ARC (575) versus 3ARC (1079). The average BOT was 6 minutes for IMRT compared to 1.3 and 2.9 for 1ARC and 3ARC IMAT (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For high-risk prostate cancer, IMAT may offer a favorable dose gradient profile, conformity, MU and BOT compared to IMRT.