Planning Benchmark Study for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy of Liver Metastases: Results of the DEGRO/DGMP Working Group on Stereotactic Radiation Therapy and Radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate whether liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning can be harmonized across different treatment planning systems, delivery techniques, and institutions by using a specific prescription method and to minimize the knowledge gap concerning intersystem and interuser differences. We provide best practice guidelines for all used techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multiparametric specification of target dose (gross target volume [GTV]D50%, GTVD0.1cc, GTVV90%, planning target volume [PTV]V70%) with a prescription dose of GTVD50% = 3 × 20 Gy and organ-at-risk (OAR) limits were distributed with computed tomography and structure sets from 3 patients with liver metastases. Thirty-five institutions provided 132 treatment plans using different irradiation techniques. These plans were first analyzed for target and OAR doses. Four different renormalization methods were performed (PTVDmin, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, PTVDmax). The resulting 660 treatments plans were evaluated regarding target doses to study the effect of dose renormalization to different prescription methods. A relative scoring system was used for comparisons. RESULTS: GTVD50% prescription can be performed in all systems. Treatment plan harmonization was overall successful, with standard deviations for Dmax, PTVD98%, GTVD98%, and PTVDmean of 1.6, 3.3, 1.9, and 1.5 Gy, respectively. Primary analysis showed 55 major deviations from clinical goals in 132 plans, whereas in only <20% of deviations GTV/PTV dose was traded for meeting OAR limits. GTVD50% prescription produced the smallest deviation from target planning objectives and between techniques, followed by the PTVDmax, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, and PTVDmin prescription. Deviations were significant for all combinations but for the PTVDmax prescription compared with GTVD50% and PTVD98%. Based on the various dose prescription methods, all systems significantly differed from each other, whereas GTVD50% and PTVD98% prescription showed the least difference between the systems. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the feasibility of harmonizing liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans across different treatment planning systems and delivery techniques when a sufficient set of clinical goals is given.

Pediatric craniospinal irradiation with a short partial-arc VMAT technique for medulloblastoma tumors in dosimetric comparison.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to contrast four different irradiation methods for pediatric medulloblastoma tumors in a dosimetric comparison regarding planning target volume (PTV) coverage and sparing of organs at risk (OARs). METHODS: In sum 24 treatment plans for 6 pediatric patients were realized. Besides the clinical standard of a 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) treatment plan taken as a reference, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans ("VMAT_AVD" vs. "noAVD" vs. "FullArc") were optimized and calculated for each patient. For the thoracic and abdominal region, the short partial-arc VMAT_AVD technique uses an arc setup with reduced arc-length by 100°, using posterior and lateral beam entries. The noAVD uses a half 180° (posterior to lateral directions) and the FullArc uses a full 360° arc setup arrangement. The prescription dose was set to 35.2 Gy. RESULTS: We identified a more conformal dose coverage for PTVs and a better sparing of OARs with used VMAT methods. For VMAT_AVD mean dose reductions in organs at risk can be realized, from 16 to 6.6 Gy, from 27.1 to 8.7 Gy and from 8.0 to 1.9 Gy for the heart, the thyroid and the gonads respectively, compared to the 3D-CRT treatment method. In addition we have found out a superiority of VMAT_AVD compared to the noAVD and FullArc trials with lower exposure to low-dose radiation to the lungs and breasts. CONCLUSIONS: With the short partial-arc VMAT_AVD technique, dose exposures to radiosensitive OARS like the heart, the thyroid or the gonads can be reduced and therefore, maybe the occurrence of late sequelae is less likely. Furthermore the PTV conformity is increased. The advantages of the VMAT_AVD have to be weighed against the potentially risks induced by an increased low dose exposure compared to the 3D-CRT method.

Planning benchmark study for SBRT of early stage NSCLC : Results of the DEGRO Working Group Stereotactic Radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The aim was to evaluate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning variability for early stage nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with respect to the published guidelines of the Stereotactic Radiotherapy Working Group of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Planning computed tomography (CT) scan and the structure sets (planning target volume, PTV; organs at risk, OARs) of 3 patients with early stage NSCLC were sent to 22 radiotherapy departments with SBRT experience: each department was asked to prepare a treatment plan according to the DEGRO guidelines. The prescription dose was 3 fractions of 15 Gy to the 65% isodose. RESULTS: In all, 87 plans were generated: 36 used intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMAT), 21 used three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), 6 used static field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SF-IMRT), 9 used helical radiotherapy and 15 used robotic radiosurgery. PTV dose coverage and simultaneously kept OARs doses were within the clinical limits published in the DEGRO guidelines. However, mean PTV dose (mean 58.0 Gy, range 52.8-66.4 Gy) and dose conformity indices (mean 0.75, range 0.60-1.00) varied between institutions and techniques (p ≤ 0.02). OARs doses varied substantially between institutions, but appeared to be technique independent (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION: All studied treatment techniques are well suited for SBRT of early stage NSCLC according to the DEGRO guidelines. Homogenization of SBRT practice in Germany is possible through the guidelines; however, detailed treatment plan characteristics varied between techniques and institutions and further homogenization is warranted in future studies and recommendations. Optimized treatment planning should always follow the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle.

Gold marker displacement due to needle insertion during HDR-brachytherapy for treatment of prostate cancer: a prospective cone beam computed tomography and kilovoltage on-board imaging (kV-OBI) study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate gold marker displacement due to needle insertion during HDR-brachytherapy for therapy of prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 18 patients entered into this prospective evaluation. Three gold markers were implanted into the prostate during the first HDR-brachytherapy procedure after the irradiation was administered. Three days after marker implantation all patients had a CT-scan for planning purpose of the percutaneous irradiation. Marker localization was defined on the digitally-reconstructed-radiographs (DRR) for daily (VMAT technique) or weekly (IMRT) set-up error correction. Percutaneous therapy started one week after first HDR-brachytherapy. After the second HDR-brachytherapy, two weeks after first HDR-brachtherapy, a cone-beam CT-scan was done to evaluate marker displacement due to needle insertion. In case of marker displacement, the actual positions of the gold markers were adjusted on the DRR. RESULTS: The value of the gold marker displacement due to the second HDR-brachytherapy was analyzed in all patients and for each gold marker by comparison of the marker positions in the prostate after soft tissue registration of the prostate of the CT-scans prior the first and second HDR-brachytherapy. The maximum deviation was 5 mm, 7 mm and 12 mm for the anterior-posterior, lateral and superior-inferior direction. At least one marker in each patient showed a significant displacement and therefore new marker positions were adjusted on the DRRs for the ongoing percutaneous therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Needle insertion in the prostate due to HDR-brachytherapy can lead to gold marker displacements. Therefore, it is necessary to verify the actual position of markers after the second HDR-brachytherapy. In case of significant deviations, a new DRR with the adjusted marker positions should be generated for precise positioning during the ongoing percutaneous irradiation.