1
|
Mirandola A, Russo S, Bonora M, Vischioni B, Camarda AM, Ingargiola R, Molinelli S, Ronchi S, Rossi E, Vai A, Iacovelli NA, Thariat J, Ciocca M, Orlandi E. A Patient Selection Approach Based on NTCP Models and DVH Parameters for Definitive Proton Therapy in Locally Advanced Sinonasal Cancer Patients. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14112678. [PMID: 35681661 PMCID: PMC9179408 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14112678] [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: 04/28/2022] [Revised: 05/20/2022] [Accepted: 05/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: In this work, we aim to provide selection criteria based on normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models and additional explanatory dose-volume histogram parameters suitable for identifying locally advanced sinonasal cancer patients with orbital invasion benefitting from proton therapy. (2) Methods: Twenty-two patients were enrolled, and two advanced radiation techniques were compared: intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and photon volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Plans were optimized with a simultaneous integrated boost modality: 70 and 56 Gy(RBE) in 35 fractions were prescribed to the high risk/low risk CTV. Several endpoints were investigated, classified for their severity and used as discriminating paradigms. In particular, when NTCP models were already available, a first selection criterion based on the delta-NTCP was adopted. Additionally, an overall analysis in terms of DVH parameters was performed. Furthermore, a second selection criterion based on a weighted sum of the ΔNTCP and ΔDVH was adopted. (3) Results: Four patients out of 22 (18.2%) were suitable for IMPT due to ΔNTCP > 3% for at least one severe toxicity, 4 (18.2%) due to ΔNTCP > 20% for at least three concurrent intermediate toxicities and 16 (72.7%) due to the mixed sum of ΔNTCP and ΔDVH criterion. Since, for some cases, both criteria were contemporary fulfilled, globally 17/22 patients (77.3%) would benefit from IMPT. (4) Conclusions: For this rare clinical scenario, the use of a strategy including DVH parameters and NTCPs when comparing VMAT and IMPT is feasible. We showed that patients affected by sinonasal cancer could profit from IMPT compared to VMAT in terms of optical and central nervous system organs at risk sparing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alfredo Mirandola
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (S.R.); (S.M.); (E.R.); (A.V.); (M.C.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-0382-078-514
| | - Stefania Russo
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (S.R.); (S.M.); (E.R.); (A.V.); (M.C.)
| | - Maria Bonora
- Radiotherapy Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (M.B.); (B.V.); (A.M.C.); (R.I.); (S.R.); (E.O.)
| | - Barbara Vischioni
- Radiotherapy Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (M.B.); (B.V.); (A.M.C.); (R.I.); (S.R.); (E.O.)
| | - Anna Maria Camarda
- Radiotherapy Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (M.B.); (B.V.); (A.M.C.); (R.I.); (S.R.); (E.O.)
| | - Rossana Ingargiola
- Radiotherapy Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (M.B.); (B.V.); (A.M.C.); (R.I.); (S.R.); (E.O.)
| | - Silvia Molinelli
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (S.R.); (S.M.); (E.R.); (A.V.); (M.C.)
| | - Sara Ronchi
- Radiotherapy Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (M.B.); (B.V.); (A.M.C.); (R.I.); (S.R.); (E.O.)
| | - Eleonora Rossi
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (S.R.); (S.M.); (E.R.); (A.V.); (M.C.)
| | - Alessandro Vai
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (S.R.); (S.M.); (E.R.); (A.V.); (M.C.)
| | | | - Juliette Thariat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Françoise Baclesse Center ARCHADE, Normandy University, 14000 Caen, France;
| | - Mario Ciocca
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (S.R.); (S.M.); (E.R.); (A.V.); (M.C.)
| | - Ester Orlandi
- Radiotherapy Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, 27100 Pavia, Italy; (M.B.); (B.V.); (A.M.C.); (R.I.); (S.R.); (E.O.)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Dell'Oro M, Wilson P, Short M, Hua CH, Merchant TE, Bezak E. Normal tissue complication probability modeling to guide individual treatment planning in pediatric cranial proton and photon radiotherapy. Med Phys 2021; 49:742-755. [PMID: 34796509 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15360] [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: 07/05/2021] [Revised: 11/05/2021] [Accepted: 11/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Proton therapy (PT) is broadly accepted as the gold standard of care for pediatric patients with cranial cancer. The superior dose distribution of PT compared to photon radiotherapy reduces normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for organs at risk. As NTCPs for pediatric organs are not well understood, clinics generally base radiation response on adult data. However, there is evidence that radiation response strongly depends on the age and even sex of a patient. Furthermore, questions surround the influence of individual intrinsic radiosensitivity (α/β ratio) on pediatric NTCP. While the clinical pediatric NTCP data is scarce, radiobiological modeling and sensitivity analyses can be used to investigate the NTCP trends and its dependence on individual modeling parameters. The purpose of this study was to perform sensitivity analyses of NTCP models to ascertain the dependence of radiosensitivity, sex, and age of a child and predict cranial side-effects following intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). METHODS Previously, six sex-matched pediatric cranial datasets (5, 9, and 13 years old) were planned in Varian Eclipse treatment planning system (13.7). Up to 108 scanning beam IMPT plans and 108 IMRT plans were retrospectively optimized for a range of simulated target volumes and locations. In this work, dose-volume histograms were extracted and imported into BioSuite Software for radiobiological modeling. Relative-Seriality and Lyman-Kutcher-Burman models were used to calculate NTCP values for toxicity endpoints, where TD50, (based on reported adult clinical data) was varied to simulate sex dependence of NTCP. Plausible parameter ranges, based on published literature for adults, were used in modeling. In addition to sensitivity analyses, a 20% difference in TD50 was used to represent the radiosensitivity between the sexes (with females considered more radiosensitive) for ease of data comparison as a function of parameters such as α/β ratio. RESULTS IMPT plans resulted in lower NTCP compared to IMRT across all models (p < 0.0001). For medulloblastoma treatment, the risk of brainstem necrosis (> 10%) and cochlea tinnitus (> 20%) among females could potentially be underestimated considering a lower TD50 value for females. Sensitivity analyses show that the difference in NTCP between sexes was significant (p < 0.0001). Similarly, both brainstem necrosis and cochlea tinnitus NTCP varied significantly (p < 0.0001) across tested α/β as a function of TD50 values (assumption being that TD50 values are 20% lower in females). If the true α/β of these pediatric tissues is higher than expected (α/β ∼ 3), the risk of tinnitus for IMRT can significantly increase (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION Due to the scarcity of pediatric NTCP data available, sensitivity analyses were performed using plausible ranges based on published adult data. In the clinical scenario where, if female pediatric patients were 20% more radiosensitive (lower TD50 value), they could be up to twice as likely to experience side-effects of brainstem necrosis and cochlea tinnitus compared to males, highlighting the need for considering the sex in NTCP models. Based on our sensitivity analyses, age and sex of a pediatric patient could significantly affect the resultant NTCP from cranial radiotherapy, especially at higher α/β values.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mikaela Dell'Oro
- Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Puthenparampil Wilson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.,UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Michala Short
- Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Chia-Ho Hua
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Thomas E Merchant
- Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Eva Bezak
- Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.,Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Dell'Oro M, Short M, Wilson P, Bezak E. Normal tissue tolerance amongst paediatric brain tumour patients- current evidence in proton radiotherapy. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2021; 164:103415. [PMID: 34242771 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103415] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2020] [Revised: 04/28/2021] [Accepted: 07/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton radiotherapy (PT) is used increasingly for paediatric brain cancer patients. However, as demonstrated here, the knowledge on normal tissue dose constraints, to minimize side-effects, for this cohort is limited. METHODS A search strategy was systematically conducted on MEDLINE® database. 65 papers were evaluated ranging from 2013 to 2021. RESULTS Large variations in normal tissue tolerance and toxicity reporting across PT studies makes estimation of normal tissue dose constraints difficult, with the potential for significant late effects to go unmeasured. Mean dose delivered to the pituitary gland varies from 20 to 30 Gy across literature. Similarly, the hypothalamic dose delivery ranges from 20 to 54.6 Gy for paediatric patients. CONCLUSION There is a significant lack of radiobiological data for paediatric brain cancer patients undergoing proton therapy, often using data from x-ray radiotherapy and adult populations. The way forward is through standardisation of reporting in order to validate relevant dose constraints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mikaela Dell'Oro
- Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia; Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.
| | - Michala Short
- Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
| | - Puthenparampil Wilson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia; UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
| | - Eva Bezak
- Cancer Research Institute, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia; Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Dutz A, Lühr A, Troost EGC, Agolli L, Bütof R, Valentini C, Baumann M, Vermeren X, Geismar D, Timmermann B, Krause M, Löck S. Identification of patient benefit from proton beam therapy in brain tumour patients based on dosimetric and NTCP analyses. Radiother Oncol 2021; 160:69-77. [PMID: 33872640 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2020] [Revised: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The limited availability of proton beam therapy (PBT) requires individual treatment selection strategies, such as the model-based approach. In this study, we assessed the dosimetric benefit of PBT compared to photon therapy (XRT), analysed the corresponding changes in normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) on a variety of available models, and illustrated model-based patient selection in an in-silico study for patients with brain tumours. METHODS For 92 patients treated at two PBT centres, volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment plans were retrospectively created for comparison with the clinically applied PBT plans. Several dosimetric parameters for the brain excluding tumour and margins, cerebellum, brain stem, frontal and temporal lobes, hippocampi, cochleae, chiasm, optic nerves, lacrimal glands, lenses, pituitary gland, and skin were compared between both modalities using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. NTCP differences (ΔNTCP) were calculated for 11 models predicting brain necrosis, delayed recall, temporal lobe injury, hearing loss, tinnitus, blindness, ocular toxicity, cataract, endocrine dysfunction, alopecia, and erythema. A patient was assumed to be selected for PBT if ΔNTCP exceeded a threshold of 10 percentage points for at least one of the side-effects. RESULTS PBT substantially reduced the dose in almost all investigated OARs, especially in the low and intermediate dose ranges and for contralateral organs. In general, NTCP predictions were significantly lower for PBT compared to XRT, in particular in ipsilateral organs. Considering ΔNTCP of all models, 80 patients (87.0%) would have been selected for PBT in this in-silico study, mainly due to predictions of a model on delayed recall (51 patients). CONCLUSION In this study, substantial dose reductions for PBT were observed, mainly in contralateral organs. However, due to the sigmoidal dose response, NTCP was particularly reduced in ipsilateral organs. This underlines that physical dose-volume parameters alone may not be sufficient to describe the clinical relevance between different treatment techniques and highlights potential benefits of NTCP models. Further NTCP models for different modern treatment techniques are mandatory and existing models have to be externally validated in order to implement the model-based approach in clinical practice for cranial radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Almut Dutz
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Medical Physics and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Physics, TU Dortmund University, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
| | - Linda Agolli
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Rebecca Bütof
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
| | - Chiara Valentini
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Michael Baumann
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Xavier Vermeren
- West German Proton Therapy Center Essen (WPE), University Hospital Essen, Germany
| | - Dirk Geismar
- West German Proton Therapy Center Essen (WPE), University Hospital Essen, Germany; Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, Germany
| | - Beate Timmermann
- West German Proton Therapy Center Essen (WPE), University Hospital Essen, Germany; Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, Germany; West German Cancer Center (WTZ), University Hospital Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Essen, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|