Volumetric-modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy for large volume retroperitoneal sarcomas: A comparative analysis of dosimetric and treatment delivery parameters

Radiation Therapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: A Strass-Ful Situation

Locoregional recurrence (LRR) is the predominant pattern of relapse and often the cause of death in patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS). As a result, reducing LRR is a critical objective for RPS patients. However, unlike soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the superficial trunk and extremity where the benefits of radiation therapy (RT) are well-established, the role of RT in the retroperitoneum remains controversial. Historically, preoperative or postoperative RT, either alone or in combination with intraoperative radiation (IORT), was commonly justified for RPS based on extrapolation from the superficial trunk and extremity STS literature. However, long-awaited results were recently published from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) STRASS study of preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for patients with RPS; there was no statistical difference in the primary endpoint of abdominal recurrence-free survival. However, several subset analyses and study limitations complicate the interpretation of the results. This review explores and contextualizes the body of evidence regarding RT's role in managing RPS.

Dosimetric Comparison of VMAT and IMRT Pre-Operative Radiotherapy for Soft Tissue Sarcoma of the Extremities

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy is a standard part of limb conserving therapy for extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS) at high risk of recurrence. Toxicities increase with radiation dose and volume of normal tissue irradiated. This study sought to compare dosimetry of volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT), with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and to investigate the optimal planning technique.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Twenty patients with extremity STS who underwent preoperative radiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions) between 2016 and 2020 at a sarcoma specialist centre were included. The original treatment techniques were sliding window IMRT or 3D conformal. VMAT plans were retrospectively generated according to the original tumour and organ at risk constraints. Quality assurance was performed as per departmental protocol. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare dosimetric parameters (for planning target volume, in-field bone, and soft tissue structures), monitor units (MU) and treatment time.

RESULTS

Median patient age was 65 years and majority were male (n=14, 70%). Commonest subtype was undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (n=14, 70%) and most tumours were located on the thigh (n=12, 60%). Median PTV volume was 1110 cm³ and median volume of in-field bone 236 cm³. VMAT plans had significantly lower average MU (480 vs 862 MU, p<0.001) and overall treatment time (300 vs 153 seconds, p<0.001). PTV coverage favoured VMAT, with marginally higher mean, minimum, and maximum doses, and higher Conformity Index. However, differences were not statistically significant. Dose to infield bone and soft tissue structures were similar or slightly lower with VMAT.

CONCLUSIONS

In extremity soft tissue sarcoma, VMAT plans demonstrated a favourable trend toward tumour coverage and dose conformity compared to IMRT along with significantly lower monitor units and half the overall treatment time.

Adaptive radiotherapy in patients receiving neoadjuvant radiation for soft tissue sarcoma

AIM

The aim of this study is to evaluate tumor volume changes during preoperative radiotherapy and to assess the role of adaptive radiation.

BACKGROUND

Contemporary neoadjuvant radiotherapy utilizes image guidance for precise treatment delivery. Moreover, it may depict changes in tumor size and shape.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2016 and 2018, 23 patients aged ≥18 years with soft tissue sarcoma were treated with neoadjuvant radiation followed by surgical resection. The tumor volumes (cc) were measured using the Pinnacle planning system prior to starting radiotherapy and during treatment, the changes in volume and absolute differences were estimated. Moreover, patient's position on the machine was evaluated to assess setup offsets. The triggers for plan adaptation were >1 cm expansion or unacceptable setup offsets.

RESULTS

The mean tumors volume at presentation was 810 cc (range, 55-4000). At last cone beam CT the tumor volume had changed in 14 patients (61%); it was stable in nine patients (39%). Disease regression was documented in eight patients (35%), with median shrinkage of -20.5% (range, -2 to -29%), while tumor progression was observed in six cases (26%), the median change was 12.5% (range, +10 to +25%).Adaptive radiation was required in four patients (17%). For the remaining 19 cases (83%), the dose distribution was adequate to cover target volumes.

CONCLUSIONS

Change in soft tissue sarcoma volume during radiation is not uncommon. Image guidance should be used to reduce setup errors and to detect differences in tumor volume. Image guidance and adaptive radiation are paramount to ensure optimal radiation delivery.

Radiation pneumonitis in lung cancer treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy

Background

Few studies to date have assessed the incidence of radiation pneumonitis (RP) in lung cancer patients who have been treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). This study is aimed at reporting the RP incidence rate and the risk factors associated with a symptomatic RP in patients with lung cancer treated with VMAT.

Methods

A total of 77 consecutive lung cancer patients treated with VMAT from 2013 through 2015 were reviewed. RP severity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCEA) v.4. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the significant factors associated with RP.

Results

VMAT allowed us to achieve most planning objectives on the target volumes and organs at risk, for PTV V_95% =96.8%±3.1%, for lung V₅ =41.3%±8.7%, V₁₀ =30.0%±7.1%, V₂₀ =20.9%±5.7%, for heart V₅ =43.2%±29.9%, for esophagus V₆₀ =8.1%±12.9%. The maximum dose of spinal cord was 34.4±9.5 Gy. The overall incidence of symptomatic RP (grade ≥2 by CTCAE) was 28.6% in the entire cohort, and the rate of grade ≥3 RP was 11.7%. Based on the multivariate analysis, factors predictive of symptomatic RP included lung volume receiving ≥10 Gy (V₁₀) (P=0.019) and C-reactive protein changing level (P=0.013).

Conclusions

Our data showed that the incidence rate of RP was acceptable in lung cancer patients treated with VMAT. Additionally, we found that V₁₀ might be an important factor for predicting the development of RP when VMAT was used; but this observation needs to be validated in future studies.