1
|
Chhabra AM, Amos RA, Simone CB, Kaiser A, Perles LA, Giap H, Hallemeier CL, Johnson JE, Lin H, Wroe AJ, Diffenderfer ES, Wolfgang JA, Sakurai H, Lu HM, Hong TS, Koay EJ, Terashima K, Vitek P, Rule WG, Apisarnthanarax SJ, Badiyan SN, Molitoris JK, Chuong M, Nichols RC. Proton Beam Therapy for Pancreatic Tumors: A Consensus Statement from the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Gastrointestinal Subcommittee. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2025; 122:19-30. [PMID: 39761799 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.12.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2024] [Revised: 11/02/2024] [Accepted: 12/14/2024] [Indexed: 01/24/2025]
Abstract
Radiation therapy manages pancreatic cancer in various settings; however, the proximity of gastrointestinal (GI) luminal organs at risk (OARs) poses challenges to conventional radiation therapy. Proton beam therapy (PBT) may reduce toxicities compared to photon therapy. This consensus statement summarizes PBT's safe and optimal delivery for pancreatic tumors. Our group has specific expertise using PBT for GI indications and has developed expert recommendations for treating pancreatic tumors with PBT. Computed tomography (CT) simulation: Patients should be simulated supine (arms above head) with custom upper body immobilization. For stomach/duodenum filling consistency, patients should restrict oral intake within 3 hours before simulation/treatments. Fiducial markers may be implanted for image guidance; however, their design and composition require scrutiny. The reconstruction field-of-view should encompass all immobilization devices at the target level (CT slice thickness 2-3 mm). Four-dimensional CT should quantify respiratory motion and guide motion mitigation. Respiratory gating is recommended when motion affects OAR sparing or reduces target coverage. Treatment planning: Beam-angle selection factors include priority OAR-dose minimization, water-equivalent-thickness stability along the beam path, and enhanced relative biological effect consideration due to the increased linear energy transfer at the proton beam end-of-range. Posterior and right-lateral beam angles that avoid traversing GI luminal structures are preferred (minimizing dosimetric impacts of variable anatomies). Pencil beam scanning techniques should use robust optimization. Single-field optimization is preferable to increase robustness, but if OAR constraints cannot be met, multifield optimization may be used. Treatment delivery: Volumetric image guidance should be used daily. CT scans should be acquired ad hoc as necessary (at minimum every other week) to assess the dosimetric impacts of anatomy changes. Adaptive replanning should be performed as required. Our group has developed recommendations for delivering PBT to safely and effectively manage pancreatic tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arpit M Chhabra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, New York.
| | - Richard A Amos
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, New York
| | - Adeel Kaiser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida
| | - Luis A Perles
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Huan Giap
- Department of Radiation Oncology, OSF HealthCare Cancer Institute, Peoria, IL
| | | | | | - Haibo Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew J Wroe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida
| | - Eric S Diffenderfer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelmen School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - John A Wolfgang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Hideyuki Sakurai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tsukuba Faculty of Medicine, Tsukuba, Japan
| | - Hsiao-Ming Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hefei Ion Medical Center, Hefei, Anhui, People's Republic of China
| | - Theodore S Hong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Department of GI Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Kazuki Terashima
- Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, Tatsuno, Japan
| | - Pavel Vitek
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Proton Therapy Center Czech, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - William G Rule
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | | | - Shahed N Badiyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT Southwestern, Dallas, Texas
| | - Jason K Molitoris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical System, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Michael Chuong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida
| | - Romaine C Nichols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Grimbergen G, Eijkelenkamp H, Snoeren LM, Bahij R, Bernchou U, van der Bijl E, Heerkens HD, Binda S, Ng SS, Bouchart C, Paquier Z, Brown K, Khor R, Chuter R, Freear L, Dunlop A, Mitchell RA, Erickson BA, Hall WA, Godoy Scripes P, Tyagi N, de Leon J, Tran C, Oh S, Renz P, Shessel A, Taylor E, Intven MP, Meijer GJ. Treatment planning for MR-guided SBRT of pancreatic tumors on a 1.5 T MR-Linac: A global consensus protocol. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 47:100797. [PMID: 38831754 PMCID: PMC11145226 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100797] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2024] [Revised: 05/17/2024] [Accepted: 05/17/2024] [Indexed: 06/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Treatment planning for MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for pancreatic tumors can be challenging, leading to a wide variation of protocols and practices. This study aimed to harmonize treatment planning by developing a consensus planning protocol for MR-guided pancreas SBRT on a 1.5 T MR-Linac. Materials and methods A consortium was founded of thirteen centers that treat pancreatic tumors on a 1.5 T MR-Linac. A phased planning exercise was conducted in which centers iteratively created treatment plans for two cases of pancreatic cancer. Each phase was followed by a meeting where the instructions for the next phase were determined. After three phases, a consensus protocol was reached. Results In the benchmarking phase (phase I), substantial variation between the SBRT protocols became apparent (for example, the gross tumor volume (GTV) D99% ranged between 36.8 - 53.7 Gy for case 1, 22.6 - 35.5 Gy for case 2). The next phase involved planning according to the same basic dosimetric objectives, constraints, and planning margins (phase II), which led to a large degree of harmonization (GTV D99% range: 47.9-53.6 Gy for case 1, 33.9-36.6 Gy for case 2). In phase III, the final consensus protocol was formulated in a treatment planning system template and again used for treatment planning. This not only resulted in further dosimetric harmonization (GTV D99% range: 48.2-50.9 Gy for case 1, 33.5-36.0 Gy for case 2) but also in less variation of estimated treatment delivery times. Conclusion A global consensus protocol has been developed for treatment planning for MR-guided pancreatic SBRT on a 1.5 T MR-Linac. Aside from harmonizing the large variation in the current clinical practice, this protocol can provide a starting point for centers that are planning to treat pancreatic tumors on MR-Linac systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guus Grimbergen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hidde Eijkelenkamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Louk M.W. Snoeren
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Rana Bahij
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark
| | - Uffe Bernchou
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
| | - Erik van der Bijl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Hanne D. Heerkens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Shawn Binda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sylvia S.W. Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Christelle Bouchart
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HUB Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Zelda Paquier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, HUB Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Kerryn Brown
- Radiation Oncology, ONJ Centre, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard Khor
- Radiation Oncology, ONJ Centre, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia
| | | | | | - Alex Dunlop
- The Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Robert Adam Mitchell
- The Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Beth A. Erickson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - William A. Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Paola Godoy Scripes
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Neelam Tyagi
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Charles Tran
- GenesisCare, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Seungjong Oh
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Paul Renz
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Andrea Shessel
- Princess Margaret Cancer Center, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Edward Taylor
- Princess Margaret Cancer Center, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Martijn P.W. Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gert J. Meijer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Fernández R, Soza-Ried C, Iagaru A, Stephens A, Müller A, Schieferstein H, Sandoval C, Amaral H, Kramer V. Imaging GRPr Expression in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer with [ 68Ga]Ga-RM2-A Head-to-Head Pilot Comparison with [ 68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 16:173. [PMID: 38201600 PMCID: PMC10778208 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16010173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2023] [Revised: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 12/24/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRPr) is highly overexpressed in several solid tumors, including treatment-naïve and recurrent prostate cancer. [68Ga]Ga-RM2 is a well-established radiotracer for PET imaging of GRPr, and [177Lu]Lu-RM2 has been proposed as a therapeutic alternative for patients with heterogeneous and/or low expression of PSMA. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the expression of GRPr and PSMA in a group of patients diagnosed with castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) by means of PET imaging. METHODS Seventeen mCRPC patients referred for radio-ligand therapy (RLT) were enrolled and underwent [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and [68Ga]Ga-RM2 PET/CT imaging, 8.8 ± 8.6 days apart, to compare the biodistribution of each tracer. Uptake in healthy organs and tumor lesions was assessed by SUV values, and tumor-to-background ratios were analyzed. RESULTS [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 showed significantly higher uptake in tumor lesions in bone, lymph nodes, prostate, and soft tissues and detected 23% more lesions compared to [68Ga]Ga-RM2. In 4/17 patients (23.5%), the biodistribution of both tracers was comparable. CONCLUSIONS Our results show that in our cohort of mCRPC patients, PSMA expression was higher compared to GRPr. Nevertheless, RLT with [177Lu]Lu-RM2 may be an alternative treatment option for selected patients or patients in earlier disease stages, such as biochemical recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- René Fernández
- Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT Center PositronMed, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile; (C.S.-R.); (H.A.); (V.K.)
| | - Cristian Soza-Ried
- Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT Center PositronMed, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile; (C.S.-R.); (H.A.); (V.K.)
- Positronpharma SA, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile
| | - Andrei Iagaru
- Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA;
| | - Andrew Stephens
- Life Molecular Imaging GmbH, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (A.S.); (A.M.)
| | - Andre Müller
- Life Molecular Imaging GmbH, 13353 Berlin, Germany; (A.S.); (A.M.)
| | - Hanno Schieferstein
- Formerly Piramal Imaging GmbH, 13353 Berlin, Germany;
- Merck Healthcare KGaA, 64293 Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Camilo Sandoval
- Fundación Arturo López Pérez, Providencia, Santiago 750069, Chile;
| | - Horacio Amaral
- Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT Center PositronMed, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile; (C.S.-R.); (H.A.); (V.K.)
- Positronpharma SA, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile
| | - Vasko Kramer
- Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT Center PositronMed, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile; (C.S.-R.); (H.A.); (V.K.)
- Positronpharma SA, Providencia, Santiago 7501068, Chile
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kisivan K, Farkas A, Kovacs P, Glavak C, Lukacs G, Mahr K, Szabo Z, Csima MP, Gulyban A, Toth Z, Kaposztas Z, Lakosi F. Pancreatic SABR using peritumoral fiducials, triggered imaging and breath-hold. Pathol Oncol Res 2023; 29:1611456. [PMID: 38188611 PMCID: PMC10767757 DOI: 10.3389/pore.2023.1611456] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/09/2024]
Abstract
Background: We aim to present our linear accelerator-based workflow for pancreatic stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in order to address the following issues: intrafractional organ motion management, Cone Beam CT (CBCT) image quality, residual errors with dosimetric consequences, treatment time, and clinical results. Methods: Between 2016 and 2021, 14 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with induction chemotherapy and SABR using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Internal target volume (ITV) concept (5), phase-gated (4), or breath hold (5) techniques were used. Treatment was verified by CBCT before and after irradiation, while tumor motion was monitored and controlled by kV triggered imaging and beam hold using peritumoral surgical clips. Beam interruptions and treatment time were recorded. The CBCT image quality was scored and supplemented by an agreement analysis (Krippendorff's-α) of breath-hold CBCT images to determine the position of OARs relative to the planning risk volumes (PRV). Residual errors and their dosimetry impact were also calculated. Progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by the Kaplan-Meier analysis with acute and late toxicity reporting (CTCAEv4). Results: On average, beams were interrupted once (range: 0-3) per treatment session on triggered imaging. The total median treatment time was 16.7 ± 10.8 min, significantly less for breath-hold vs. phase-gated sessions (18.8 ± 6.2 vs. 26.5 ± 13.4, p < 0.001). The best image quality was achieved by breath hold CBCT. The Krippendorff's-α test showed a strong agreement among five radiation therapists (mean K-α value: 0.8 (97.5%). The mean residual errors were <0.2 cm in each direction resulting in an average difference of <2% in dosimetry for OAR and target volume. Two patients received offline adaptation. The median OS/PFS after induction chemotherapy and SABR was 20/12 months and 15/8 months. No Gr. ≥2 acute/late RT-related toxicity was noted. Conclusion: Linear accelerator based pancreatic SABR with the combination of CBCT and triggered imaging + beam hold is feasible. Peritumoral fiducials improve utility while breath-hold CBCT provides the best image quality at a reasonable treatment time with offline adaptation possibilities. In well-selected cases, it can be an effective alternative in clinics where CBCT/MRI-guided online adaptive workflow is not available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katalin Kisivan
- Department of Radiotherapy, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Andrea Farkas
- Department of Radiotherapy, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Peter Kovacs
- Department of Radiotherapy, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Csaba Glavak
- Department of Radiotherapy, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Gabor Lukacs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Karoly Mahr
- Department of Medical Oncology, Zala County Szent Raphael Hospital, Zalaegerszeg, Hungary
| | - Zsolt Szabo
- Department of Medical Oncology, Zala County Szent Raphael Hospital, Zalaegerszeg, Hungary
| | - Melinda Petone Csima
- Institute of Education, Hungarian University of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Gödöllő, Hungary
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pecs, Pecs, Hungary
| | - Akos Gulyban
- Department of Medical Physics, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium
- Radiophysics and MRI Physics Laboratory, Université Libre De Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Zoltan Toth
- Medicopus Nonprofit Ltd., Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
- PET Center, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Zsolt Kaposztas
- Department of Surgery, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
| | - Ferenc Lakosi
- Department of Radiotherapy, Somogy County Kaposi Mór Teaching Hospital, Kaposvár, Hungary
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pecs, Pecs, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Taniguchi CM, Frakes JM, Aguilera TA, Palta M, Czito B, Bhutani MS, Colbert LE, Abi Jaoude J, Bernard V, Pant S, Tzeng CWD, Kim DW, Malafa M, Costello J, Mathew G, Rebueno N, Koay EJ, Das P, Ludmir EB, Katz MHG, Wolff RA, Beddar S, Sawakuchi GO, Moningi S, Slack Tidwell RS, Yuan Y, Thall PF, Beardsley RA, Holmlund J, Herman JM, Hoffe SE. Stereotactic body radiotherapy with or without selective dismutase mimetic in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:1387-1398. [PMID: 38039992 PMCID: PMC11955909 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00478-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2023] [Revised: 09/19/2023] [Accepted: 09/21/2023] [Indexed: 12/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has the potential to ablate localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Selective dismutase mimetics sensitise tumours while reducing normal tissue toxicity. This trial was designed to establish the efficacy and toxicity afforded by the selective dismutase mimetic avasopasem manganese when combined with ablative SBRT for localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS In this adaptive, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer who had received at least 3 months of chemotherapy and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at six academic sites in the USA. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), with block randomisation (block sizes of 6-12) with a maximum of 24 patients per group, to receive daily avasopasem (90 mg) or placebo intravenously directly before (ie, within 180 min) SBRT (50, 55, or 60 Gy in five fractions, adaptively assigned in real time by Bayesian estimates of 90-day safety and efficacy). Patients and physicians were masked to treatment group allocation, but not to SBRT dose. The primary objective was to find the optimal dose of SBRT with avasopasem or placebo as determined by the late onset EffTox method. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03340974, and is complete. FINDINGS Between Jan 25, 2018, and April 29, 2020, 47 patients were screened, of whom 42 were enrolled (median age was 71 years [IQR 63-75], 23 [55%] were male, 19 [45%] were female, 37 [88%] were White, three [7%] were Black, and one [2%] each were unknown or other races) and randomly assigned to avasopasem (n=24) or placebo (n=18); the placebo group was terminated early after failing to meet prespecified efficacy parameters. At data cutoff (June 28, 2021), the avasopasem group satisfied boundaries for both efficacy and toxicity. Late onset EffTox efficacy response was observed in 16 (89%) of 18 patients at 50 Gy and six (100%) of six patients at 55 Gy in the avasopasem group, and was observed in three (50%) of six patients at 50 Gy and nine (75%) of 12 patients at 55 Gy in the placebo group, and the Bayesian model recommended 50 Gy or 55 Gy in five fractions with avasopasem for further study. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in three (17%) of 18 patients in the placebo group and six (25%) of 24 in the avasopasem group. In the placebo group, grade 3 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were abdominal pain, acute cholangitis, pyrexia, increased blood lactic acid, and increased lipase (one [6%] each); no grade 4 events occurred. In the avasopasem group, grade 3-4 adverse events within 90 days of SBRT were acute kidney injury, increased blood alkaline phosphatase, haematoma, colitis, gastric obstruction, lung infection, abdominal abscess, post-surgical atrial fibrillation, and pneumonia leading to respiratory failure (one [4%] each).There were no treatment-related deaths but one late death in the avasopasem group due to sepsis in the setting of duodenal obstruction after off-study treatment was reported as potentially related to SBRT. INTERPRETATION SBRT that uses 50 or 55 Gy in five fractions can be considered for patients with localised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The addition of avasopasem might further enhance disease outcomes. A larger phase 2 trial (GRECO-2, NCT04698915) is underway to validate these results. FUNDING Galera Therapeutics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cullen M Taniguchi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jessica M Frakes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Todd A Aguilera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Manisha Palta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Brian Czito
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Manoop S Bhutani
- Department of Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Lauren E Colbert
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Joseph Abi Jaoude
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Vincent Bernard
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Shubham Pant
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ching-Wei D Tzeng
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Dae Won Kim
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Mokenge Malafa
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - James Costello
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Geena Mathew
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Neal Rebueno
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Prajnan Das
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ethan B Ludmir
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Matthew H G Katz
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Robert A Wolff
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sam Beddar
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gabriel O Sawakuchi
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Shalini Moningi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rebecca S Slack Tidwell
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ying Yuan
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Peter F Thall
- Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | | | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, Hempstead, NY, USA
| | - Sarah E Hoffe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mittauer KE, Yarlagadda S, Bryant JM, Bassiri N, Romaguera T, Gomez AG, Herrera R, Kotecha R, Mehta MP, Gutierrez AN, Chuong MD. Online adaptive radiotherapy: Assessment of planning technique and its impact on longitudinal plan quality robustness in pancreatic cancer. Radiother Oncol 2023; 188:109869. [PMID: 37657726 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109869] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2021] [Revised: 07/14/2023] [Accepted: 08/22/2023] [Indexed: 09/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Planning on a static dataset that reflects the simulation day anatomy is routine for SBRT. We hypothesize the quality of on-table adaptive plans is similar to the baseline plan when delivering stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) for pancreatic cancer (PCa). MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty-seven inoperable PCa patients were prescribed 50 Gy/5-fraction SMART. Baseline planning included: 3-5 mm gastrointestinal (GI) PRV, 50 Gy optimization target (PTVopt) based on GI PRV, conformality rings, and contracted GTV to guide the hotspot. For each adaptation, GI anatomy was re-contoured, followed by re-optimization. Plan quality was evaluated for target coverage (TC = PTVopt V100%/volume), PTV D90% and D80%, homogeneity index (HI = PTVopt D2%/D98%), prescription isodose/target volume (PITV), low-dose conformity (D2cm = maximum dose at 2 cm from PTVopt/Rx dose), and gradient index (R50%=50% Rx isodose volume/PTVopt volume).A novel global planning metric, termed the Pancreas Adaptive Radiotherapy Score (PARTS), was developed and implemented based on GI OAR sparing, PTV/GTV coverage, and conformality. Adaptive robustness (baseline to fraction 1) and stability (difference between two fractions with highest GI PRV variation) were quantified. RESULTS OAR constraints were met on all baseline (n = 67) and adaptive (n = 318) plans. Coverage for baseline/adaptive plans was mean ± SD at 44.9 ± 5.8 Gy/44.3 ± 5.5 Gy (PTV D80%), 50.1 ± 4.2 Gy/49.1 ± 4.7 Gy (PTVopt D80%), and 80%±18%/74%±18% (TC), respectively. Mean homogeneity and conformality for baseline/adaptive plans were 0.87 ± 0.25/0.81 ± 0.30 (PITV), 3.81 ± 1.87/3.87 ± 2.0 (R50%), 1.53 ± 0.23/1.55 ± 0.23 (HI), and 58%±7%/59%±7% (D2cm), respectively. PARTS was found to be a sensitive metric due to its additive influence of geometry changes on PARTS' sub-metrics. There were no statistical differences (p > 0.05) for stability, except for PARTS (p = 0.04, median difference -0.6%). Statistical differences for robustness when significant were small for most metrics (<2.0% median). Median adaptive re-optimizations were 2. CONCLUSION We describe a 5-fraction ablative SMART planning approach for PCa that is robust and stable during on-table adaption, due to gradients controlled by a GI PRV technique and the use of rings. These findings are noteworthy given that daily interfraction anatomic GI OAR differences are routine, thus necessitating on-table adaptation. This work supports feasibility towards utilizing a patient-independent, template on-table adaptive approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn E Mittauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Sreenija Yarlagadda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA.
| | - John M Bryant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Nema Bassiri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Tino Romaguera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Andres G Gomez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA.
| | - Robert Herrera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA.
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Alonso N Gutierrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| | - Michael D Chuong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Comito T, Massaro M, Teriaca MA, Franzese C, Franceschini D, Navarria P, Clerici E, Di Cristina L, Bertolini A, Tomatis S, Reggiori G, Bresolin A, Bozzarelli S, Rimassa L, Bonifacio C, Carrara S, Santoro A, Zerbi A, Scorsetti M. Can STEreotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) Improve the Prognosis of Unresectable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer? Long-Term Clinical Outcomes, Toxicity and Prognostic Factors on 142 Patients (STEP Study). Curr Oncol 2023; 30:7073-7088. [PMID: 37504373 PMCID: PMC10378012 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30070513] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2023] [Revised: 07/17/2023] [Accepted: 07/21/2023] [Indexed: 07/29/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM The gold standard of care for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the integrated treatment of surgery and chemotherapy (ChT), but about 50% of patients present with unresectable disease. Our study evaluated the efficacy in terms of local control, survival and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). METHODS A retrospective study (STEP study) analyzed patients with LAPC treated with a dose of 45 Gy in 6 fractions. Local control (LC), distant progression free survival (DPFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were analyzed according to the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS A total of 142 patients were evaluated. Seventy-six patients (53.5%) received induction ChT before SBRT. The median follow-up was 11 months. One-, 2- and 3-year LC rate was 81.9%, 69.1% and 58.5%. Median DPFS was 6.03 months; 1- and 2-year DPFS rate was 19.9% and 4.5%. Median OS was 11.6 months and 1-, 2- and 3-year OS rates were 45.4%, 16.1%, and 9.8%. At univariate analysis, performed by the log-rank test, age < 70 years (p = 0.037), pre-SBRT ChT (p = 0.004) and post-SBRT ChT (p = 0.019) were associated with better OS. No patients experienced G3 toxicity. CONCLUSION SBRT represents an effective and safe therapeutic option in the multimodal treatment of patients with LAPC in terms of increased LC. When SBRT was sequentially integrated with ChT, the treatment proved to be promising in terms of OS as well.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tiziana Comito
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Massaro
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Ausilia Teriaca
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20072 Milan, Italy
| | - Davide Franceschini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Pierina Navarria
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Elena Clerici
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Luciana Di Cristina
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Anna Bertolini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Tomatis
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Giacomo Reggiori
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Bresolin
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Silvia Bozzarelli
- Medical Oncology and Hematology Unit, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Lorenza Rimassa
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20072 Milan, Italy
- Medical Oncology and Hematology Unit, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Cristiana Bonifacio
- Department of Radiology, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Silvia Carrara
- Department of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Armando Santoro
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20072 Milan, Italy
- Medical Oncology and Hematology Unit, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandro Zerbi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20072 Milan, Italy
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Cancer Center, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, 20072 Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Gogineni E, Chen H, Istl AC, Johnston FM, Narang A, Deville C. Comparative In Silico Analysis of Ultra-Hypofractionated Intensity-Modulated Photon Radiotherapy (IMRT) Versus Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) in the Pre-Operative Treatment of Retroperitoneal Sarcoma. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3482. [PMID: 37444592 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15133482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND While pre-operative radiation did not improve abdominal recurrence-free survival for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) in the randomized STRASS trial, it did reduce rates of local recurrence. However, the risk of toxicity was substantial and the time to surgery was prolonged. A combination of hypofractionation and proton therapy may reduce delays from the initiation of radiation to surgery and limit the dose to surrounding organs at risk (OARs). We conducted a dosimetric comparison of the pre-operative ultra-hypofractionated intensity-modulated photon (IMRT) and proton radiotherapy (IMPT). METHODS Pre-operative IMRT and IMPT plans were generated on 10 RPS patients. The prescription was 25 Gy radiobiological equivalents (GyEs) (radiobiological effective dose of 1.1) to the clinical target volume and 30 GyEs to the margin at risk, all in five fractions. Comparisons were made using student T-tests. RESULTS The following endpoints were significantly lower with IMPT than with IMRT: mean doses to liver, bone, and all genitourinary and gastrointestinal OARs; bowel, kidney, and bone V5-V20; stomach V15; liver V5; maximum doses to stomach, spinal canal, and body; and whole-body integral dose. CONCLUSIONS IMPT maintained target coverage while significantly reducing the dose to adjacent OARs and integral dose compared to IMRT. A prospective trial treating RPS with pre-operative ultra-hypofractionated IMPT at our institution is currently being pursued.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emile Gogineni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA
| | - Hao Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA
| | - Alexandra C Istl
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
| | - Fabian M Johnston
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Amol Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Luo Y. The characteristic of stem-related genes with pancreatic carcinoma cell after irradiation. Heliyon 2023; 9:e17074. [PMID: 37484310 PMCID: PMC10361223 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2022] [Revised: 06/02/2023] [Accepted: 06/06/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To investigate stem-related differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and their potential mechanism in pancreatic cancer cells (MIAPaCa-2) exposed to x-ray and proton radiation, as well as how these factors affected the prognosis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PADC). Methods The stem-related DEGs were screened using the online tool Stemchecker after protons and x-rays were used to irradiate MIAPaCa-2 cells. Analysis was done on the probable processes and prognostic significance of the DEGs in PAC patients. Results Four datasets containing 401 DEGs were filtered, and the stem-related DEGs for each irradiation type indicated a variety of radiobiological characteristics. In pancreatic cancer cells, a number of stem-related DEGs may serve as biomarkers of radiation effects. Patients with pancreatic cancer demonstrated predictive significance for GRB7, B2M, and PMAIP1. Conclusions MIAPaCa-2 cells exposed to x-rays and protons repeatedly displayed heterogeneous expression of stem-related DEGs involved in complex radiosensitivity, radio-resistance, and radio-induced mortality pathways. GRB7 and B2M were considered potential radiation sensitivity indicators for pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
|
10
|
Wu TC, Yoon SM, Cao M, Raldow AC, Xiang M. Identifying predictors of on-table adaptation for pancreas stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2023; 40:100603. [PMID: 36896266 PMCID: PMC9989520 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100603] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2022] [Revised: 02/16/2023] [Accepted: 02/19/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To identify any clinical or dosimetric parameters that predict which individuals may benefit from on-table adaptation during pancreas stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with MRI-guided radiotherapy. Methods and materials This was a retrospective study of patients undergoing MRI-guided SBRT from 2016 to 2022. Pre-treatment clinical variables and dosimetric parameters on the patient's simulation scan were recorded for each SBRT course, and their ability to predict for on-table adaptation was analyzed using ordinal logistic regression. The outcome measure was number of fractions adapted. Results Sixty-three SBRT courses consisting of 315 fractions were analyzed. Median prescription dose was 40 Gy in five fractions (range, 33-50 Gy); 52% and 48% of courses were prescribed ≤40 Gy and >40 Gy, respectively. The median minimum dose delivered to 95% (D95) of the gross tumor volume (GTV) and planning target volume (PTV) was 40.1 Gy and 37.0 Gy, respectively. Median number of fractions adapted per course was three, with 58% (183 out of 315) total fractions adapted. On univariable analysis, the prescription dose (>40 Gy vs ≤40 Gy), GTV volume, stomach V20 and V25, duodenum V20 and dose maximum, large bowel V33 and V35, GTV dose minimum, PTV dose minimum, and gradient index were significant determinants for adaptation (all p < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, only the prescription dose was significant (adjusted odds ratio 19.7, p = 0.005), but did not remain significant after multiple test correction (p = 0.08). Conclusions The likelihood of needing on-table adaptation could not be reliably predicted a priori using pre-treatment clinical characteristics, dosimetry to nearby organs at risk, or other dosimetric parameters based on the patient's anatomy at the time of simulation, suggesting the critical importance of day-to-day variations in anatomy and increasing access to adaptive technology for pancreas SBRT. A higher (ablative) prescription dose was associated with increased use of adaptation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trudy C. Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Stephanie M. Yoon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Minsong Cao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Ann C. Raldow
- Corresponding authors at: 200 Medical Plaza Driveway, Suite #B265, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA (M. Xiang).
| | - Michael Xiang
- Corresponding authors at: 200 Medical Plaza Driveway, Suite #B265, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA (M. Xiang).
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Arumugam S, Young T, Johnston M, Pavey D, Lee M. The delivered dose assessment in pancreas SBRT with the target position determined using an in-house position monitoring system. Front Oncol 2022; 12:1009916. [PMID: 36518308 PMCID: PMC9743991 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1009916] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 11/01/2022] [Indexed: 08/01/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study assessed the delivered dose accuracy in pancreas SBRT by incorporating the real-time target position determined using an in-house position monitoring system. METHODS AND MATERIALS An online image-based position monitoring system, SeedTracker, was developed to monitor radiopaque marker positions using monoscopic x-ray images, available from the Elekta XVI imaging system. This system was applied to patients receiving SBRT for pancreatic cancer on the MASTERPLAN Pilot trial (ACTRN 12617001642370). All patients were implanted pre-treatment with at least three peri-tumoral radiopaque markers for target localisation. During treatment delivery, marker positions were compared to expected positions delineated from the planning CT. The position tolerance of ±3mm from the expected position of the markers was set to trigger a gating event (GE) during treatment. The dosimetric impact of position deviations and actual dose delivered with position corrections was assessed by convolving the plan control point dose matrices with temporal target positions determined during treatment. RESULTS Eight patients were treated within this study. At least one GE was observed in 38% of the treatment fractions and more than one GE was observed in 10% of the fractions. The position deviations resulted in the mean(range) difference of -0.1(-1.1 - 0.4)Gy in minimum dose to tumour and 1.9(-0.1- 4.6)Gy increase to Dmax to duodenum compared to planned dose. In actual treatment delivery with the patient realignment, the mean difference of tumour min dose and duodenal Dmax was reduced to 0.1(-1.0 - 1.1)Gy and 1.1 (-0.7 - 3.3)Gy respectively compared to the planned dose. CONCLUSIONS The in-house real-time position monitoring system improved the treatment accuracy of pancreatic SBRT in a general-purpose linac and enabled assessment of delivered dose by incorporating the temporal target position during delivery. The intrafraction motion impacts the dose to tumour even if target position is maintained within a 3mm position tolerance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sankar Arumugam
- Department of Medical Physics, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres and Ingham Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- South Western Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Tony Young
- Department of Medical Physics, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres and Ingham Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Meredith Johnston
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Darren Pavey
- Department of Radiology, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres and Ingham Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Mark Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Liverpool and Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centres, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ma SJ, Serra LM, Bartl AJ, Han HR, Fekrmandi F, Iovoli AJ, Prezzano KM, Hermann GM, Yu H, Singh AK. Association of survival with stereotactic body radiation therapy following induction chemotherapy for unresected locally advanced pancreatic cancer. JOURNAL OF RADIOTHERAPY IN PRACTICE 2022; 21:403-410. [PMID: 36016862 PMCID: PMC9398186 DOI: 10.1017/s1460396921000212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Induction chemotherapy (iC) followed by concurrent chemoradiation has been shown to improve overall survival (OS) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). However, the survival benefit of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus conventionally fractionated radiation therapy (CFRT) following iC remains unclear. METHODS The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for primary stage III, cT4N0-1M0 LAPC (2004-2015). Kaplan-Meier analysis, Cox proportional hazards method, and propensity score matching were used. RESULTS Among 872 patients, 738 patients underwent CFRT and 134 patients received SBRT. Median follow-up was 24.3 months and 22.9 months for the CFRT and SBRT cohorts, respectively. The use of SBRT showed improved survival in both the multivariate analysis (HR 0.78, p=0.025) and 120 propensity-matched pairs (median OS 18.1 vs 15.9 months, p=0.004) compared to the CFRT. CONCLUSION This NCDB analysis suggests survival benefit with the use of SBRT versus CFRT following iC for the LAPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sung Jun Ma
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Lucas M. Serra
- Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, the State University of New York, 955 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Austin J. Bartl
- Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, the State University of New York, 955 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Hye Ri Han
- Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, the State University of New York, 955 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Fatemeh Fekrmandi
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Austin J. Iovoli
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Kavitha M. Prezzano
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Gregory M. Hermann
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Han Yu
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| | - Anurag K. Singh
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, 665 Elm Street, Buffalo, NY 14203. USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Nenoff L, Buti G, Bobić M, Lalonde A, Nesteruk KP, Winey B, Sharp GC, Sudhyadhom A, Paganetti H. Integrating Structure Propagation Uncertainties in the Optimization of Online Adaptive Proton Therapy Plans. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14163926. [PMID: 36010919 PMCID: PMC9406068 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14163926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2022] [Revised: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 08/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Currently, adaptive strategies require time- and resource-intensive manual structure corrections. This study compares different strategies: optimization without manual structure correction, adaptation with physician-drawn structures, and no adaptation. Strategies were compared for 16 patients with pancreas, liver, and head and neck (HN) cancer with 1-5 repeated images during treatment: 'reference adaptation', with structures drawn by a physician; 'single-DIR adaptation', using a single set of deformably propagated structures; 'multi-DIR adaptation', using robust planning with multiple deformed structure sets; 'conservative adaptation', using the intersection and union of all deformed structures; 'probabilistic adaptation', using the probability of a voxel belonging to the structure in the optimization weight; and 'no adaptation'. Plans were evaluated using reference structures and compared using a scoring system. The reference adaptation with physician-drawn structures performed best, and no adaptation performed the worst. For pancreas and liver patients, adaptation with a single DIR improved the plan quality over no adaptation. For HN patients, integrating structure uncertainties brought an additional benefit. If resources for manual structure corrections would prevent online adaptation, manual correction could be replaced by a fast 'plausibility check', and plans could be adapted with correction-free adaptation strategies. Including structure uncertainties in the optimization has the potential to make online adaptation more automatable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena Nenoff
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
- Correspondence:
| | - Gregory Buti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
- Center of Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Institute of Experimental and Clinical Research (IREC), Université Catholique de Louvain, 1200 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mislav Bobić
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
- Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Arthur Lalonde
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Konrad P. Nesteruk
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Brian Winey
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Gregory Charles Sharp
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Atchar Sudhyadhom
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Diez P, Hanna GG, Aitken KL, van As N, Carver A, Colaco RJ, Conibear J, Dunne EM, Eaton DJ, Franks KN, Good JS, Harrow S, Hatfield P, Hawkins MA, Jain S, McDonald F, Patel R, Rackley T, Sanghera P, Tree A, Murray L. UK 2022 Consensus on Normal Tissue Dose-Volume Constraints for Oligometastatic, Primary Lung and Hepatocellular Carcinoma Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2022; 34:288-300. [PMID: 35272913 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2022.02.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
The use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in the UK has expanded over the past decade, in part as the result of several UK clinical trials and a recent NHS England Commissioning through Evaluation programme. A UK SABR Consortium consensus for normal tissue constraints for SABR was published in 2017, based on the existing literature at the time. The published literature regarding SABR has increased in volume over the past 5 years and multiple UK centres are currently working to develop new SABR services. A review and update of the previous consensus is therefore appropriate and timely. It is hoped that this document will provide a useful resource to facilitate safe and consistent SABR practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Diez
- Radiotherapy Physics, National Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance Group (RTTQA), Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - G G Hanna
- Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK; Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - K L Aitken
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey, UK; Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - N van As
- Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Chelsea, London, UK
| | - A Carver
- Department of Medical Physics, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - R J Colaco
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - J Conibear
- Radiotherapy Department, Barts Cancer Centre, London, UK
| | - E M Dunne
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - D J Eaton
- Radiotherapy Physics, National Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance Group (RTTQA), Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK; Department of Medical Physics, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - K N Franks
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leeds Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospitals, Leeds, UK
| | - J S Good
- Department of Clinical Oncology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - S Harrow
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - P Hatfield
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leeds Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospitals, Leeds, UK
| | - M A Hawkins
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomechanical Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Department of Clinical Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - S Jain
- Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK; Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - F McDonald
- Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Chelsea, London, UK
| | - R Patel
- Radiotherapy Physics, National Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance Group (RTTQA), Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK
| | - T Rackley
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff, UK
| | - P Sanghera
- Department of Clinical Oncology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
| | - A Tree
- Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey, UK; Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - L Murray
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leeds Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospitals, Leeds, UK; Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Simoni N, Rossi G, Cellini F, Vitolo V, Orlandi E, Valentini V, Mazzarotto R, Sverzellati N, D'Abbiero N. Ablative Radiotherapy (ART) for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer (LAPC): Toward a New Paradigm? Life (Basel) 2022; 12:life12040465. [PMID: 35454956 PMCID: PMC9025325 DOI: 10.3390/life12040465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2022] [Accepted: 03/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) represents a major urgency in oncology. Due to the massive involvement of the peripancreatic vessels, a curative-intent surgery is generally precluded. Historically, LAPC has been an indication for palliative systemic therapy. In recent years, with the introduction of intensive multi-agent chemotherapy regimens and aggressive surgical approaches, the survival of LAPC patients has significantly improved. In this complex and rapidly evolving scenario, the role of radiotherapy is still debated. The use of standard-dose conventional fractionated radiotherapy in LAPC has led to unsatisfactory oncological outcomes. However, technological advances in radiation therapy over recent years have definitively changed this paradigm. The use of ablative doses of radiotherapy, in association with image-guidance, respiratory organ-motion management, and adaptive protocols, has led to unprecedented results in terms of local control and survival. In this overview, principles, clinical applications, and current pitfalls of ablative radiotherapy (ART) as an emerging treatment option for LAPC are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola Simoni
- Radiotherapy Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, 43126 Parma, Italy
| | - Gabriella Rossi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Integrata, 37126 Verona, Italy
| | - Francesco Cellini
- Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Dipartimento Universitario Diagnostica per Immagini, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Roma, Italy
- Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, 00168 Roma, Italy
| | - Viviana Vitolo
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy
| | - Ester Orlandi
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Valentini
- Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Dipartimento Universitario Diagnostica per Immagini, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Roma, Italy
- Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, 00168 Roma, Italy
| | - Renzo Mazzarotto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Integrata, 37126 Verona, Italy
| | - Nicola Sverzellati
- Division of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, 43126 Parma, Italy
| | - Nunziata D'Abbiero
- Radiotherapy Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, 43126 Parma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Ermongkonchai T, Khor R, Muralidharan V, Tebbutt N, Lim K, Kutaiba N, Ng SP. Stereotactic radiotherapy and the potential role of magnetic resonance-guided adaptive techniques for pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28:745-754. [PMID: 35317275 PMCID: PMC8891728 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i7.745] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2021] [Revised: 11/11/2021] [Accepted: 01/22/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic cancer is a malignancy with one of the poorest prognoses amongst all cancers. Patients with unresectable tumours either receive palliative care or undergo various chemoradiotherapy regimens. Conventional techniques are often associated with acute gastrointestinal toxicities, as adjacent critical structures such as the duodenum ultimately limits delivered doses. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an advanced radiation technique that delivers highly ablative radiation split into several fractions, with a steep dose fall-off outside target volumes.
AIM To discuss the latest data on SBRT and whether there is a role for magnetic resonance-guided techniques in multimodal management of locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer.
METHODS We conducted a search on multiple large databases to collate the latest records on radiotherapy techniques used to treat pancreatic cancer. Out of 1229 total records retrieved from our search, 36 studies were included in this review.
RESULTS Studies indicate that SBRT is associated with improved clinical efficacy and toxicity profiles compared to conventional radiotherapy techniques. Further dose escalation to the tumour with SBRT is limited by the poor soft-tissue visualisation of computed tomography imaging during radiation planning and treatment delivery. Magnetic resonance-guided techniques have been introduced to improve imaging quality, enabling treatment plan adaptation and re-optimisation before delivering each fraction.
CONCLUSION Therefore, SBRT may lead to improved survival outcomes and safer toxicity profiles compared to conventional techniques, and the addition of magnetic resonance-guided techniques potentially allows dose escalation and conversion of unresectable tumours to operable cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tai Ermongkonchai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Centre at Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard Khor
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Centre at Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia
| | | | - Niall Tebbutt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Centre at Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia
| | - Kelvin Lim
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia
| | - Numan Kutaiba
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Centre at Austin Health, Heidelberg 3084, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Niedzielski JS, Liu Y, Ng SSW, Martin RM, Perles LA, Beddar S, Rebueno N, Koay EJ, Taniguchi C, Holliday EB, Das P, Smith GL, Minsky BD, Ludmir EB, Herman JM, Koong A, Sawakuchi GO. Dosimetric Uncertainties Resulting From Interfractional Anatomic Variations for Patients Receiving Pancreas Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Cone Beam Computed Tomography Image Guidance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 111:1298-1309. [PMID: 34400267 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2020] [Revised: 07/31/2021] [Accepted: 08/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To estimate the effects of interfractional anatomic changes on dose to organs at risk (OARs) and tumors, as measured with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image guidance for pancreatic stereotactic body radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS We evaluated 11 patients with pancreatic cancer whom were treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (33-40 Gy in 5 fractions) using daily CT-on-rails (CTOR) image guidance immediately before treatment with breath-hold motion management. CBCT alignment was simulated in the treatment planning software by aligning the original planning CT to each fractional CTOR image set via fiducial markers. CTOR data sets were used to calculate fractional doses after alignment by applying the rigid shift of the planning CT and CTOR image sets to the planning treatment isocenter and recalculating the fractional dose. Accumulated dose to the gross tumor volume (GTV), tumor vessel interface, duodenum, small bowel, and stomach were calculated by summing the 5 fractional absolute dose-volume histograms into a single dose-volume histogram for comparison with the original planned dose. RESULTS Four patients had a GTV D100% of at least 1.5 Gy less than the fractional planned value in several fractions; 4 patients had fractional underestimation of duodenum dose by 1.0 Gy per fraction. The D1.0 cm3 <35 Gy constraint was violated for at least 1 OAR in 3 patients, with either the duodenum (n = 2) or small bowel (n = 1) D1.0 cm3 being higher on the accumulated dose distribution (P = .01). D100% was significantly lower according to accumulated dose GTV (P = .01) and tumor vessel interface (P = .02), with 4 and 2 patients having accumulated D100% ≥4 Gy lower than the planned value for the GTV and tumor vessel interface, respectively. CONCLUSIONS For some patients, CBCT image guidance based on fiducial alignment may cause large dosimetric uncertainties for OARs and target structures, according to accumulated dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Yufei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Sylvia S W Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | | | - Luis A Perles
- Department of Radiation Physics, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Sam Beddar
- Department of Radiation Physics, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Neal Rebueno
- Department of Radiation Physics, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Eugene J Koay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | | | - Emma B Holliday
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Prajnan Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Grace L Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Bruce D Minsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Ethan B Ludmir
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Albert Koong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center
| | - Gabriel O Sawakuchi
- Department of Radiation Physics, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center; Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, UT-MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Abi Jaoude J, Thunshelle CP, Kouzy R, Nguyen ND, Lin D, Prakash L, Bumanlag IM, Noticewala SS, Niedzielski JS, Beddar S, Ludmir EB, Holliday EB, Das P, Minsky BD, Herman JM, Katz M, Koong AC, Koay EJ, Taniguchi CM. Stereotactic Versus Conventional Radiation Therapy for Patients With Pancreatic Cancer in the Modern Era. Adv Radiat Oncol 2021; 6:100763. [PMID: 34934858 PMCID: PMC8655391 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100763] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 07/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Patients with pancreatic cancer often receive radiation therapy before undergoing surgical resection. We compared the clinical outcomes differences between stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and 3-dimensional (3D)/intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS We retrospectively collected data from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Patients with borderline resectable/potentially resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer receiving neoadjuvant SBRT (median, 36.0 Gy/5fx), 3D conformal radiation (median, 50.4 Gy/28 fx) or IMRT (median, 50.4 Gy/28 fx) were included. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were analyzed using Cox regression. RESULTS In total, 104 patients were included in our study. Fifty-seven patients (54.8%) were treated with SBRT, and 47 patients (45.2%) were treated with 3D/IMRT. Patients in the SBRT group were slightly older (median age: 70.3 vs 62.7 in the 3D/IMRT group). Both groups had similar proportions of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SBRT: 30, 52.6%; 3D/IMRT: 24, 51.1%). All patients were treated with chemotherapy. Patients in the SBRT group underwent more surgical resection compared with the 3D/IMRT group (38.6% vs 23.4%, respectively). At a median follow-up of 22 months, a total of 60 patients (57.7%) died: 25 (25/57, 43.9%) in the SBRT group, and 35 (35/47, 74.5%) in the 3D/IMRT group. Median OS was slightly higher in the SBRT group (29.6 months vs 24.1 months in the 3D/IMRT group). On multivariable Cox regression, the choice of radiation therapy technique was not associated with differences in OS (adjusted hazard ratios [aHR] = 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2%-1.3%, P = .18). Moreover, patients that underwent surgical resection had better OS (aHR = 0.3, 95% CI, 0.1%-0.8%, P = .01). Furthermore, progression-free survival was also similar between patients treated with SBRT and those treated with 3D/IMRT (aHR = 0.9, 95% CI, 0.5%-1.8%, P = .81). CONCLUSIONS SBRT was associated with similar clinical outcomes compared with conventional radiation techniques, despite being delivered over a shorter period of time which would spare patients prolonged treatment burden. Future prospective data are still needed to better assess the role of SBRT in patients with pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph Abi Jaoude
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Connor P. Thunshelle
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ramez Kouzy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Nicholas D. Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Daniel Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Laura Prakash
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Isabela M. Bumanlag
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sonal S. Noticewala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Joshua S. Niedzielski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sam Beddar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ethan B. Ludmir
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Emma B. Holliday
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Prajnan Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Bruce D. Minsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Joseph M. Herman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, Hempstead, New York
| | - Matthew Katz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Albert C. Koong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Eugene J. Koay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Cullen M. Taniguchi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Doty DG, Chuong MD, Gomez AG, Bryant J, Contreras J, Romaguera T, Alvarez D, Kotecha R, Mehta MP, Gutierrez AN, Mittauer KE. Stereotactic MR-guided online adaptive radiotherapy reirradiation (SMART reRT) for locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A case report. Med Dosim 2021; 46:384-388. [PMID: 34120803 DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2021.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2021] [Accepted: 04/29/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Stereotactic MR-guided online adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) has demonstrated a superior radiotherapeutic ratio for pancreatic patients, by enabling dose escalation while minimizing the dose to the proximal gastrointestinal organs at risk through online adaptive radiotherapy. The safe delivery of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is of particular importance in the reirradiation setting and has been historically limited to CT-based nonadaptive modalities. Herein, we report the first use of online adaptive radiotherapy in the reirradiation setting, specifically for treatment of locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma through SMART reirradiation (SMART reRT). CASE DESCRIPTION We describe the treatment of a 68-year-old male who was diagnosed with, unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Initial treatment included FOLFIRINOX followed by 45 Gy in 25 fractions on a helical intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) device with concurrent capecitabine, followed by a boost of 14.4 Gy in 8 fractions to a on an MR-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) linac. At approximately 12 months from initial radiotherapy, the patient experienced local progression of the pancreas body/tail and therefore SMART reRT of 50 Gy in 5 fractions was initiated. The technical considerations of cumulative dose for gastrointestinal organs across multiple courses, treatment planning principles, and adaptive radiotherapy details are outlined in this case study. The patient tolerated treatment well with minimal fatigue. CONCLUSIONS The therapeutic ratio of reirradiation may be improved using daily MR guidance with online adaptive replanning, especially for lesions in proximity to critical structures. Future studies are warranted to assess long-term outcomes of dose escalated MR-guided reRT, define OAR dose constraints for reRT, and assess cumulative dose across the adapted SMART reRT fractions and the original RT plan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Delia G Doty
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA; Souther Illinois University, Carbondale, IL, USA
| | - Michael D Chuong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
| | - Andres G Gomez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA
| | - John Bryant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA
| | - Jessika Contreras
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
| | - Tino Romaguera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
| | - Diane Alvarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA
| | - Minesh P Mehta
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA
| | - Alonso N Gutierrez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA
| | - Kathryn E Mittauer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, FL 33176, USA; Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Ryckman JM, Reames BN, Klute KA, Hall WA, Baine MJ, Abdel-Wahab M, Lin C. The timing and design of stereotactic radiotherapy approaches as a part of neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: Is it time for change? Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2021; 28:124-128. [PMID: 33981865 PMCID: PMC8085778 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.04.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Revised: 04/06/2021] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic Radiotherapy (SRT) over 5-15 days can be interdigitated without delaying chemotherapy. Bridging chemotherapy may allow for extended intervals to surgery, potentially improving sterilization of surgical margins and overall survival. SRT for pancreatic adenocarcinoma should not be limited to the tumor, and should consider hypofractionated approaches to regional nodes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey M. Ryckman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, West Virginia University Cancer Institute, Parkersburg, WV, USA
| | - Bradley N. Reames
- Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Kelsey A. Klute
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - William A. Hall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Michael J. Baine
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - May Abdel-Wahab
- Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
| | - Chi Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Development of an Objective Scoring System for Endoscopic Assessment of Radiation-Induced Upper Gastrointestinal Toxicity. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13092136. [PMID: 33946696 PMCID: PMC8124711 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13092136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2021] [Accepted: 04/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary High-dose radiation therapy techniques have gained increasing interest in pancreatic cancer treatment, but toxicity to the upper gastrointestinal (GI) organs remains a major concern. We aimed to develop an objective toxicity scoring system to be used during endoscopic evaluation that allows for direct assessment of the stomach and duodenum before and after radiation treatment. Our toxicity scoring takes into account the pathological categories of erythema, edema, ulceration, and stricture to determine radiation-related GI toxicity. We assessed and validated the upper GI toxicity of 19 locally advanced pancreatic cancer trial patients undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). With future usage, we hope this scoring system will provide objective and reliable assessments of changes in GI toxicity during the radiation treatment of pancreatic cancer and for GI toxicity assessment during radiation therapy research trials. Abstract We developed and implemented an objective toxicity scoring system to be used during endoscopic evaluation of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract in order to directly assess changes in toxicity during the radiation treatment of pancreatic cancer. We assessed and validated the upper GI toxicity of 19 locally advanced pancreatic cancer trial patients undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Wilcoxon-signed rank tests were used to compare pre- and post-SBRT scores. Comparison of the toxicity scores measured before and after SBRT revealed a mild increase in toxicity in the stomach and duodenum (p < 0.005), with no cases of severe toxicity observed. Kappa and AC1 statistics analysis were used to evaluate interobserver agreement. Our toxicity scoring system was reliable in determining GI toxicity with a good overall interobserver agreement for pre-treatment scores (stomach, κ = 0.71, p < 0.005; duodenum, κ = 0.88, p < 0.005) and post-treatment scores (stomach, κ = 0.71, p < 0.005; duodenum, κ = 0.76, p < 0.005). The AC1 statistics yielded similar results. With future usage, we hope this scoring system will be a useful tool for objectively and reliably assessing changes in GI toxicity during the treatment of pancreatic cancer and for GI toxicity assessments and comparisons during radiation therapy research trials.
Collapse
|
22
|
Carrasquilla M, Creswell ML, Pepin AN, Wang E, Forsthoefel M, McGunigal M, Bullock E, Lei S, Collins BT, Lischalk JW, Esposito G, Aghdam N, Kumar D, Suy S, Leger P, Hankins RA, Dawson NA, Collins SP. Rationale for Involved Field Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy-Enhanced Intermittent Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Hormone-Sensitive Nodal Oligo-Recurrent Prostate Cancer Following Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy. Front Oncol 2021; 10:606260. [PMID: 33537236 PMCID: PMC7848164 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.606260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2020] [Accepted: 11/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Lymph node recurrent prostate cancer is a common clinical scenario that is likely to increase significantly with the widespread adoption of novel positron emission tomography (PET) agents. Despite increasing evidence that localized therapy is disease modifying, most men with lymph node recurrent prostate cancer receive only systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). For men who receive localized therapy the intent is often to delay receipt of systemic therapy. Little evidence exists on the optimal combination of local and systemic therapy in this patient population. In this hypothesis generating review, we will outline the rationale and propose a framework for combining involved field SBRT with risk adapted intermittent ADT for hormone sensitive nodal recurrent prostate cancer. In patients with a limited number of nodal metastases, involved field stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may have a role in eliminating castrate-resistant clones and possibly prolonging the response to intermittent ADT. We hypothesize that in a small percentage of patients, such a treatment approach may lead to long term remission or cure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Carrasquilla
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | | | - Abigail N. Pepin
- George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Edina Wang
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Matthew Forsthoefel
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Mary McGunigal
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Elizabeth Bullock
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Siyuan Lei
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Brian T. Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Jonathan W. Lischalk
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Giuseppe Esposito
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Nima Aghdam
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Deepak Kumar
- Biotechnology Research Institute, North Carolina Central University, Durham, NC, United States
| | - Simeng Suy
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Paul Leger
- Department of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Ryan A. Hankins
- Department of Urology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Nancy A. Dawson
- Department of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States
| | - Sean P. Collins
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Mazzarotto R, Simoni N, Guariglia S, Rossi G, Micera R, De Robertis R, Pierelli A, Zivelonghi E, Malleo G, Paiella S, Salvia R, Cavedon C, Milella M, Bassi C. Dosimetric Feasibility Study of Dose Escalated Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer (LAPC) Patients: It Is Time to Raise the Bar. Front Oncol 2020; 10:600940. [PMID: 33392093 PMCID: PMC7773844 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.600940] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2020] [Accepted: 11/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE To assess the dosimetric feasibility of a stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) dose escalated protocol, with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and a simultaneous integrated protection (SIP) approach, in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty LAPC lesions, previously treated with SBRT at our Institution, were re-planned. The original prescribed and administered dose was 50/30/25 Gy in five fractions to PTVsib (tumor-vessel interface [TVI])/PTVt (tumor volume)/PTVsip (overlap area between PTVt and planning organs at risk volume [PRVoars]), respectively. At re-planning, the prescribed dose was escalated up to 60/40/33 Gy in five fractions to PTVsib/PTVt/PTVsip, respectively. All plans were performed using an inspiration breath hold (IBH) technique and generated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Well-established and accepted OAR dose constraints were used (D0.5cc < 33 Gy for luminal OARs and D0.5cc < 38 Gy for corresponding PRVoars). The primary end-point was to achieve a median dose equal to the prescription dose for the PTVsib with D98≥ 95% (95% of prescription dose is the minimum dose), and a coverage for PTVt and PTVsip of D95≥95%, with minor deviations in OAR dose constraints in < 10% of the plans. RESULTS PTVsib median (± SD) dose/D95/conformity index (CI) were 60.54 (± 0.85) Gy/58.96 (± 0.86) Gy/0.99 (± 0.01), respectively; whilst PTVt median (± SD) dose/D95 were 44.51 (± 2.69) Gy/38.44 (± 0.82) Gy, and PTVsip median (± SD) dose/D95 were 35.18 (± 1.42) Gy/33.01 (± 0.84) Gy, respectively. With regard to OARs, median (± SD) maximum dose (D0.5cc) to duodenum/stomach/bowel was 29.31 (± 5.72) Gy/25.29 (± 6.90) Gy/27.03 (± 5.67) Gy, respectively. A minor acceptable deviation was found for a single plan (bowel and duodenum D0.5cc=34.8 Gy). V38 < 0.5 cc was achieved for all PRV luminal OARs. CONCLUSIONS In LAPC patients SBRT, with a SIB/SIP dose escalation approach up to 60/40/33 Gy in five fractions to PTVsib/PTVt/PTVsip, respectively, is dosimetrically feasible with adequate PTVs coverage and respect for OAR dose constraints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Renzo Mazzarotto
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Nicola Simoni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Stefania Guariglia
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Gabriella Rossi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Renato Micera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | | | - Alessio Pierelli
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Emanuele Zivelonghi
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Malleo
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Salvatore Paiella
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Carlo Cavedon
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Michele Milella
- Department of Oncology, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Claudio Bassi
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Moningi S, Abi Jaoude J, Kouzy R, Lin D, Nguyen ND, Garcia Garcia CJ, Phan JL, Avila S, Smani D, Cazacu IM, Singh BS, Smith GL, Holliday EB, Koay EJ, Das P, Bhutani MS, Herman JM, Minsky BD, Koong AC, Taniguchi CM. Impact of Fiducial Marker Placement Before Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 6:100621. [PMID: 33912734 PMCID: PMC8071717 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2020.11.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2020] [Revised: 11/03/2020] [Accepted: 11/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Localized pancreatic cancer is commonly treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), which often requires the placement of fiducial markers. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with and without fiducial markers. Methods and Materials We retrospectively collected data on patients with pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant SBRT at a single institution. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the placement of a fiducial marker. Local recurrence was the primary outcome. Time to event endpoints were analyzed using COX regression. Results We included 96 patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer: 46 patients (47.9%) did not have a fiducial marker, and 50 patients (52.1%) had a fiducial placed. Patients in the fiducial group were older and had more locally advanced pancreatic cancer compared with those who did not have a fiducial placed. Most patients in both groups (92.7%) received chemotherapy before SBRT treatment. SBRT was delivered to a median of 36 Gy over 5 fractions in the no-fiducial group, and 38 Gy over 5 fractions in the fiducial group. At a median follow-up of 20 months, local recurrence was similar irrespective of fiducial placement (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.3, P = .59). Furthermore, no difference in overall survival was noted between the 2 groups (aHR 0.8, 95% CI 0.3-1.9, P = .65). In patients who eventually underwent surgery post-SBRT, no difference in surgical margins (P = .40) or lymphovascular invasion (P = .76) was noted between the 2 groups. No patient developed acute pancreatitis after fiducial placement. Conclusions Our data suggest that the use of fiducial markers does not negatively affect clinical outcomes in patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Prospective confirmation of our results is still needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shalini Moningi
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Ramez Kouzy
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Daniel Lin
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | | | - Jae L Phan
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Santiago Avila
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Daniel Smani
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Irina M Cazacu
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Ben S Singh
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Grace L Smith
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Emma B Holliday
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Eugene J Koay
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Prajnan Das
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Joseph M Herman
- Radiation Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, New York
| | - Bruce D Minsky
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Albert C Koong
- University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Koay EJ, Hanania AN, Hall WA, Taniguchi CM, Rebueno N, Myrehaug S, Aitken KL, Dawson LA, Crane CH, Herman JM, Erickson B. Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: A Simultaneous Integrated Boost Approach. Pract Radiat Oncol 2020; 10:e495-e507. [PMID: 32061993 PMCID: PMC7423616 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2020.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2019] [Revised: 01/17/2020] [Accepted: 01/27/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To provide a detailed description of practical approaches to dose escalation in pancreatic cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS The current paper represents an international collaborative effort of radiation oncologists from the MR-linac consortium with expertise in pancreatic dose escalation. RESULTS A 15-fraction hypofractionated intensity modulated radiation therapy (67.5 Gy in 15 fractions) and 5-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy case (50 Gy in 5 fractions) are presented with information regarding patient selection, target volumes, organs at risk, dose constraints, and specific considerations regarding quality assurance. Additionally, we address barriers to dose escalation and briefly discuss future directions in dose escalation for pancreatic cancer, including particle therapy and magnetic resonance guided radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS This article on dose escalation for pancreatic cancer may help to guide academic and community based physicians and to serve as a reference for future therapeutic trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eugene J Koay
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| | | | | | | | - Neal Rebueno
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Sten Myrehaug
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Laura A Dawson
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Joseph M Herman
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Fasting Reduces Intestinal Radiotoxicity, Enabling Dose-Escalated Radiation Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 105:537-547. [PMID: 31271824 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.06.2533] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2019] [Revised: 05/20/2019] [Accepted: 06/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Chemotherapy combined with radiation therapy is the most commonly used approach for treating locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The use of curative doses of radiation in this disease setting is constrained because of the close proximity of the head of the pancreas to the duodenum. The purpose of this study was to determine whether fasting protects the duodenum from high-dose radiation, thereby enabling dose escalation for efficient killing of pancreatic tumor cells. METHODS AND MATERIALS C57BL/6J mice were either fed or fasted for 24 hours and then exposed to total abdominal radiation at 11.5 Gy. Food intake, body weight, overall health, and survival were monitored. Small intestines were harvested at various time points after radiation, and villi length, crypt depth, and number of crypts per millimeter of intestine were determined. Immunohistochemistry was performed to assess apoptosis and double-strand DNA breaks, and microcolony assays were performed to determine intestinal stem cell regeneration capacity. A syngeneic KPC model of pancreatic cancer was used to determine the effects of fasting on the radiation responses of both pancreatic cancer and host intestinal tissues. RESULTS We demonstrated that a 24-hour fast in mice improved intestinal stem cell regeneration, as revealed by microcolony assay, and improved host survival of lethal doses of total abdominal irradiation compared with fed controls. Fasting also improved survival of mice with orthotopic pancreatic tumors subjected to lethal abdominal radiation compared with controls with free access to food. Furthermore, fasting did not affect tumor cell killing by radiation therapy and enhanced γ-H2AX staining after radiation therapy, suggesting an additional mild radiosensitizing effect. CONCLUSIONS These results establish proof of concept for fasting as a dose-escalation strategy, enabling ablative radiation in the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
|
27
|
Bertholet J, Hunt A, Dunlop A, Bird T, Mitchell RA, Oelfke U, Nill S, Aitken K. Comparison of the dose escalation potential for two hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2019; 16:21-27. [PMID: 30911688 PMCID: PMC6416653 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2019.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2018] [Revised: 03/05/2019] [Accepted: 03/07/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the potential for dose escalation to a biological equivalent dose BED10 ≅ 100 Gy in hypofractionated radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS Ten unselected LAPC patients were retrospectively included in the study. Two fractionation regimens were compared (5 and 15 fractions). The aim was to cover 95% of the Planning Target Volume (PTV) with a BED10 = 54 Gy (base dose = 33 Gy in 5 fractions, 42.5 Gy in 15 fractions) whilst respecting organs-at-risk (OAR) constraints. Once the highest PTV coverage was achieved dose escalation to a BED10 ≅ 100 Gy (escalated dose = 50 Gy in 5 fractions, 67.5 Gy in 15 fractions) was attempted, limiting the PTV maximum dose to 130% of the escalated dose. RESULTS In 5 fractions, 95% PTV coverage by both base and escalated doses could be achieved for one patient with PTV more than 1 cm away from OAR. 95% and 90% PTV coverage by the base dose was achieved in one and two patients respectively. In all other patients, coverage even by the base dose had to be compromised to comply with OAR constraints. In 15 fractions, 95% PTV coverage by the base dose was feasible for all patients except one. Dose escalation allowed improvement in target coverage by the base dose in both fractionation regimen whilst covering a sub-volume of the PTV with a BED10 ≅ 100 Gy. Both fractionation schemes were equivalent in terms of dose escalation potential. CONCLUSION LAPC patients with OAR close to the PTV are generally not eligible for hypofractionation with dose escalation. However, this planning study shows that it is possible to cover PTV sub-volumes with a BED10 ≅ 100 Gy in addition to delivering a BED10 = 54 Gy to 90-95% of the PTV as commonly prescribed to this population. Combined with an adaptive approach, this may maximize PTV coverage by a high BED on days with favourable anatomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenny Bertholet
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, London SM2 5NG, UK
| | - Arabella Hunt
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London SM2 5PT, UK
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Rd, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK
| | - Alex Dunlop
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, London SM2 5NG, UK
| | - Thomas Bird
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Rd, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK
- The Bristol Cancer Institute, Bristol BS2 8ED, UK
| | - Robert A. Mitchell
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, London SM2 5NG, UK
| | - Uwe Oelfke
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, London SM2 5NG, UK
| | - Simeon Nill
- Joint Department of Physics, The Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, 15 Cotswold Road, London SM2 5NG, UK
| | - Katharine Aitken
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Downs Rd, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Wang S, Zheng D, Lin C, Lei Y, Verma V, Smith A, Ma R, Enke CA, Zhou S. Technical Assessment of an Automated Treatment Planning on Dose Escalation of Pancreas Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2019; 18:1533033819851520. [PMID: 31195891 PMCID: PMC6572905 DOI: 10.1177/1533033819851520] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2019] [Revised: 03/28/2019] [Accepted: 04/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stereotactic body radiotherapy has been suggested to provide high rates of local control for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. However, the close proximity of highly radiosensitive normal tissues usually causes the labor-intensive planning process and may impede further escalation of the prescription dose. PURPOSE The present study aims to evaluate the consistency and efficiency of Pinnacle Auto-Planning for pancreas stereotactic body radiotherapy with original prescription and escalated prescription. METHODS Twenty-four patients with pancreatic cancer treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy were studied retrospectively. The prescription is 40 Gy over 5 consecutive fractions. Most of patients (n = 21) also had 3 other different dose-level targets (6 Gy/fraction, 5 Gy/fraction, and 4 Gy/fraction). Two types of plans were generated by Pinnacle Auto-Planning with the original prescription (8 Gy/fraction, 6 Gy/fraction, 5 Gy/fraction, and 4 Gy/fraction) and escalated prescription (9 Gy/fraction, 7 Gy/fraction, 6 Gy/fraction, and 5 Gy/fraction), respectively. The same Auto-Planning template, including beam geometry, intensity-modulated radiotherapy objectives and intensity-modulated radiotherapy optimization parameters, were utilized for all the auto-plans in each prescription group. The intensity-modulated radiotherapy objectives do not include any manually created structures. Dosimetric parameters including percentage volume of PTV receiving 100% of the prescription dose, percentage volume of PTV receiving 93% of the prescription dose, and consistency of the dose-volume histograms of the target volumes were assessed. Dmax and D1 cc of highly radiosensitive organs were also evaluated. RESULTS For all the pancreas stereotactic body radiotherapy plans with the original or escalated prescriptions, auto-plans met institutional dose constraints for critical organs, such as the duodenum, small intestine, and stomach. Furthermore, auto-plans resulted in acceptable planning target volume coverage for all targets with different prescription levels. All the plans were generated in a one-attempt manner, and very little human intervention is necessary to achieve such plan quality. CONCLUSIONS Pinnacle3 Auto-Planning consistently and efficiently generate acceptable treatment plans for multitarget pancreas stereotactic body radiotherapy with or without dose escalation and may play a more important role in treatment planning in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuo Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Dandan Zheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Chi Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Yu Lei
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Vivek Verma
- Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - April Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Rongtao Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Charles A. Enke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Sumin Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| |
Collapse
|