The Impact of Interactive MRI-Based Radiologist Review on Radiotherapy Target Volume Delineation in Head and Neck Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Peer review of head and neck cancer radiation therapy target volumes by radiologists was introduced in our center to optimize target volume delineation. Our aim was to assess the impact of MR imaging-based radiologist peer review of head and neck radiation therapy gross tumor and nodal volumes, through qualitative and quantitative analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cases undergoing radical radiation therapy with a coregistered MR imaging, between April 2019 and March 2020, were reviewed. The frequency and nature of volume changes were documented, with major changes classified as per the guidance of The Royal College of Radiologists. Volumetric alignment was assessed using the Dice similarity coefficient, Jaccard index, and Hausdorff distance. RESULTS: Fifty cases were reviewed between April 2019 and March 2020. The median age was 59 years (range, 29-83 years), and 72% were men. Seventy-six percent of gross tumor volumes and 41.5% of gross nodal volumes were altered, with 54.8% of gross tumor volume and 66.6% of gross nodal volume alterations classified as "major." Undercontouring of soft-tissue involvement and unidentified lymph nodes were predominant reasons for change. Radiologist review significantly altered the size of both the gross tumor volume (P = .034) and clinical target tumor volume (P = .003), but not gross nodal volume or clinical target nodal volume. The median conformity and surface distance metrics were the following: gross tumor volume Dice similarity coefficient = 0.93 (range, 0.82-0.96), Jaccard index = 0.87 (range, 0.7-0.94), Hausdorff distance = 7.45 mm (range, 5.6-11.7 mm); and gross nodular tumor volume Dice similarity coefficient = 0.95 (0.91-0.97), Jaccard index = 0.91 (0.83-0.95), and Hausdorff distance = 20.7 mm (range, 12.6-41.6). Conformity improved on gross tumor volume-to-clinical target tumor volume expansion (Dice similarity coefficient = 0.93 versus 0.95, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: MR imaging-based radiologist review resulted in major changes to most radiotherapy target volumes and significant changes in volume size of both gross tumor volume and clinical target tumor volume, suggesting that this is a fundamental step in the radiotherapy workflow of patients with head and neck cancer.

Evaluation of a multi-atlas CT synthesis approach for MRI-only radiotherapy treatment planning.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Computed tomography (CT) imaging is the current gold standard for radiotherapy treatment planning (RTP). The establishment of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) only RTP workflow requires the generation of a synthetic CT (sCT) for dose calculation. This study evaluates the feasibility of using a multi-atlas sCT synthesis approach (sCTa) for head and neck and prostate patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The multi-atlas method was based on pairs of non-rigidly aligned MR and CT images. The sCTa was obtained by registering the MRI atlases to the patient's MRI and by fusing the mapped atlases according to morphological similarity to the patient. For comparison, a bulk density assignment approach (sCTbda) was also evaluated. The sCTbda was obtained by assigning density values to MRI tissue classes (air, bone and soft-tissue). After evaluating the synthesis accuracy of the sCTs (mean absolute error), sCT-based delineations were geometrically compared to the CT-based delineations. Clinical plans were re-calculated on both sCTs and a dose-volume histogram and a gamma analysis was performed using the CT dose as ground truth. RESULTS: Results showed that both sCTs were suitable to perform clinical dose calculations with mean dose differences less than 1% for both the planning target volume and the organs at risk. However, only the sCTa provided an accurate and automatic delineation of bone. CONCLUSIONS: Combining MR delineations with our multi-atlas CT synthesis method could enable MRI-only treatment planning and thus improve the dosimetric and geometric accuracy of the treatment, and reduce the number of imaging procedures.

Dysphagia-optimised Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Techniques in Pharyngeal Cancers: Is Anyone Going to Swallow it?

Dysphagia after primary chemoradiotherapy or radiation alone in pharyngeal cancers can have a devastating impact on a patient's physical, social and emotional state. Establishing and validating efficient dysphagia-optimised radiotherapy techniques is, therefore, of paramount importance in an era where health-related quality of life measures are increasingly influential determinants of curative management strategies, particularly as the incidence of good prognosis, human papillomavirus-driven pharyngeal cancer in younger patients continues to rise. The preferential sparing achievable with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of key swallowing structures implicated in post-radiation dysfunction, such as the pharyngeal constrictor muscles (PCM), has generated significant research into toxicity-mitigating strategies. The lack of randomised evidence, however, means that there remains uncertainty about the true clinical benefits of the dosimetric gains offered by technological advances in radiotherapy. As a result, we feel that IMRT techniques that spare PCM cannot be incorporated into routine practice. In this review, we discuss the swallowing structures responsible for functional impairment, analyse the studies that have explored the dose-response relationship between these critical structures and late dysphagia, and consider the merits of reported dysphagia-optimised IMRT (Do-IMRT) approaches, thus far. Finally, we discuss the dysphagia/aspiration-related structures (DARS) study (ISRCTN 25458988), which is the first phase III randomised controlled trial designed to investigate the impact of swallow-sparing strategies on improving long-term function. To maximise patient benefits, improvements in radiation delivery will need to integrate with novel treatment paradigms and comprehensive rehabilitation strategies to eventually provide a patient-centric, personalised treatment plan.

Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) Modelling of Severe Acute Mucositis using a Novel Oral Mucosal Surface Organ at Risk.

AIMS: A normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model of severe acute mucositis would be highly useful to guide clinical decision making and inform radiotherapy planning. We aimed to improve upon our previous model by using a novel oral mucosal surface organ at risk (OAR) in place of an oral cavity OAR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Predictive models of severe acute mucositis were generated using radiotherapy dose to the oral cavity OAR or mucosal surface OAR and clinical data. Penalised logistic regression and random forest classification (RFC) models were generated for both OARs and compared. Internal validation was carried out with 100-iteration stratified shuffle split cross-validation, using multiple metrics to assess different aspects of model performance. Associations between treatment covariates and severe mucositis were explored using RFC feature importance. RESULTS: Penalised logistic regression and RFC models using the oral cavity OAR performed at least as well as the models using mucosal surface OAR. Associations between dose metrics and severe mucositis were similar between the mucosal surface and oral cavity models. The volumes of oral cavity or mucosal surface receiving intermediate and high doses were most strongly associated with severe mucositis. CONCLUSIONS: The simpler oral cavity OAR should be preferred over the mucosal surface OAR for NTCP modelling of severe mucositis. We recommend minimising the volume of mucosa receiving intermediate and high doses, where possible.

The impact of carcinoembryonic antigen flare in patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) flare may have a favourable response to chemotherapy, but its impact on survival is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of CEA flare and its impact on objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically proven advanced colorectal cancer undergoing first-line chemotherapy with three or more serial CEA measurements (one at baseline and two or more during treatment) were included. Patients were grouped according to CEA kinetic as flare (F), decreasing CEA, normal baseline CEA, stable CEA and increasing CEA (I). RESULTS: From January 2000 to February 2008, 837 patients were screened of whom 670 were eligible. CEA flare occurred in 78 (11.6%) patients. On multivariate analysis, compared with patients with increasing CEA, patients with CEA flare had a significantly better ORR [I versus F: 11% versus 73%; risk ratio (RR): 27.96; 95% confidence interval (CI): 9.55-81.88; P < 0.001], PFS (median 3.1 versus 8.3 months; RR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.26-0.56; P < 0.001) and OS (median 10.9 versus 17.7 months; RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.34-0.82; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients with rising CEA, flare was an independent favourable predictive and prognostic factor for tumour response and survival.