Dose distribution and tumor control probability in out-of-field lymph node stations in intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) vs 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) of non-small-cell lung cancer: an in silico analysis

Optimum delineation of skin structure for dose calculation with the linear Boltzmann transport equation algorithm in radiotherapy treatment planning

This study investigated the effectiveness of placing skin-ring structures to enhance the precision of skin dose calculations in patients who had undergone head and neck volumetric modulated arc therapy using the Acuros XB algorithm. The skin-ring structures in question were positioned 2 mm below the skin surface (skin A) and 1 mm above and below the skin surface (skin B) within the treatment-planning system. These structures were then tested on both acrylic cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms and compared with the Gafchromic EBT3 film (EBT3). The results revealed that the maximum dose differences between skins A and B for the cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms were approximately 12% and 2%, respectively. In patients 1 and 2, the dose differences between skins A and B were 9.2% and 8.2%, respectively. Ultimately, demonstrated that the skin-dose calculation accuracy of skin B was within 2% and did not impact the deep organs.

High-risk patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy to the peripheral primary combined with conventionally fractionated volumetric arc therapy to the mediastinal lymph nodes

Introduction

A very narrow therapeutic window exists when delivering curative chemoradiotherapy for inoperable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly when large distances exist between areas of gross disease in the thorax. In the present study, we hypothesize that a novel technique of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to the primary tumor in combination with volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) to the mediastinal lymph nodes (MLN) is a suitable approach for high-risk patients with large volume geographically distant locally advanced NSCLC.

Patients and methods

In this single institutional review, we identified high-risk patients treated between 2014 and 2017 with SBRT to the parenchymal lung primary as well as VMAT to the involved MLN using conventional fractionation. Dosimetrically, comparative plans utilizing VMAT conventionally fractionated delivered to both the primary and MLN were analyzed. Clinically, toxicity (CTCAE version 5.0) and oncologic outcomes were analyzed in detail.

Results

A total of 21 patients were identified, 86% (n=18) of which received chemotherapy as a portion of their treatment. As treatment phase was between 2014 and 2017, none of the patients received consolidation immunotherapy. Target volume (PTV) dose coverage (99 vs. 87%) and CTV volume (307 vs. 441 ml) were significantly improved with SBRT+MLN vs. for VMAT alone (p<0.0001). Moreover, low-dose lung (median V5Gy [%]: 71 vs. 77, p<0.0001), heart (median V5Gy [%]: 41 vs. 49, p<0.0001) and esophagus (median V30Gy [%]: 54 vs. 55, p=0.03) dose exposure were all significantly reduced with SBRT+MLN. In contrast, there was no difference observed in high-dose exposure of lungs, heart, and spinal cord. Following SBRT+MLN treatment, we identified only one case of high-grade pneumonitis. As expected, we observed a higher rate of esophagitis with a total of seven patients experience grade 2+ toxicity. Overall, there were no grade 4+ toxicities identified. After a median 3 years follow up, disease progression was observed in 70% of patients irradiated using SBRT+MLN, but never in the spared 'bridging' tissue between pulmonary SBRT and mediastinal VMAT.

Conclusion

For high risk patients, SBRT+MLN is dosimetrically feasible and can provide an alternative to dose reductions necessitated by otherwise very large target volumes.

Choice of Treatment for Patients With Non-small-cell Lung Cancer >5 cm Between Surgery Alone and Surgery Plus Adjuvant Radiotherapy

Background: According to the lung cancer staging project, T2b (>5–7 cm) and T3 (>7 cm) non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) should be reclassified into T3 and T4 groups. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of surgery alone or surgery plus adjuvant radiation (SART) on survival of node-negative patients with NSCLC >5 cm.

Methods: We identified 4557 N0 patients with NSCLC >5 cm in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2004 to 2014. Overall survival (OS) and cancer–specific survival (CSS) were compared among patients who underwent surgery alone and SART. The proportional hazards model was applied to evaluate multiple prognostic factors.

Results: 1,042 and 525 patients who underwent surgery alone and SART, respectively were enrolled after propensity-score matching. OS and CSS favored surgery alone rather than SART. Multivariate analysis showed that the number of lymph nodes examined more than six was associated with better OS and CSS for NSCLC >5 cm, especially in patients treated with surgery alone. Lobectomy should be recommended as the primary option for NSCLC >5 to 7 cm, whereas its superiority was not significant over sublobectomy for NSCLC >7 cm.

Conclusion: Surgery alone should be recommended as the first choice for patients with NSCLC >5 cm. The number of examined lymph nodes should be more than six in patients with NSCLC >5 cm, especially for those who undergo surgery alone. For patients with NSCLC >7 cm who could not tolerate lobectomy, sublobectomy might be an alternative surgical procedure.

Assessing the out-of-field dose calculation accuracy by eclipse treatment planning system in sliding window IMRT of prostate cancer patients

AIM

The objective of this study was to evaluate out-of-field dose distribution calculation accuracy by the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA), version 13.0.26, in Eclipse TPS, (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, Ca, USA) for sliding window IMRT delivery technique in prostate cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prostate IMRT plans with nine coplanar were calculated with the AAA Eclipse treatment planning system. To assess the accuracy of dose calculation predicted by the Eclipse in normal tissue and OARs located out of radiation field areas, including the rectum, bladder, right and left head of the femur, absolute organ dose value, and dose distribution were measured using the Delta⁴⁺ IMRT phantom.

RESULTS

In the out-of-field areas, underestimation of -0.66% in organs near the field edge to -39.63% in organs far from the field edge (2.5 and 7.3 cm respectively) occurred in the TPS calculations. The percentage of dose deviation for the femoral heads was 95.7 on average while for the organ closer to the target (rectum) it was 79.81.

CONCLUSIONS

AAA dosimetry algorithm (used in Eclipse TPS) showed poor dose calculation in areas beyond the treatment fields border where underestimation varies with the distance from the field edges. A significant underestimation was found for the AAA algorithm in the sliding window IMRT technique (P-value > 0.05).

Comparison of Involved Field Radiotherapy versus Elective Nodal Irradiation in Stage IIIB/C Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma Patients Treated with Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy: A Propensity Score Matching Study

BACKGROUND

We retrospectively compared the incidence of isolated elective nodal failure (IENF) and toxicity rates and survival outcomes after elective nodal irradiation (ENI) versus involved-field RT (IFRT) by employing the propensity score matching (PSM) methodology in stage IIIB/C inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (C-CRT).

METHODS

Our PSM examination included 1048 stage IIIB/C NSCLC patients treated with C-CRT from January 2007 to December 2016: a total dose of 66 Gy (2 Gy/fraction) radiotherapy and 1-3 cycles of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy concurrently. The primary and secondary endpoints were the IENF and toxicity rates and survival outcomes after ENI versus IFRT, respectively. Propensity scores were calculated for each group to adjust for confounding variables and facilitate well-balanced comparability by creating 1 : 1 matched study groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 26.4 months for the whole study accomplice. The PSM analysis unveiled 1 : 1 matched 646 patients for the ENI (N = 323) and IFRT (N = 323) cohorts. Intergroup comparisons discovered that the 5-year isolated ENF incidence rates (3.4% versus 4.3%; P=0.52) and median overall survival (25.2 versus 24.6 months; P=0.69), locoregional progression-free survival (15.3 versus 15.1 months; P=0.52), and progression-free survival (11.7 versus 11.2 months; P=0.57) durations were similar between the ENI and IFRT cohorts, separately. However, acute grade 3-4 leukopenia (P=0.0012), grade 3 nausea-vomiting (P=0.006), esophagitis (P=0.003), pneumonitis (P=0.002), late grade 3-4 esophageal toxicity (P=0.038), and the need for hospitalization (P < 0.001) were all significantly higher in the ENI than in the IFRT group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Results of the present large-scale PSM cohort established the absence of meaningful IENF or survival differences between the IFRT and ENI cohorts and, consequently, counseled the IFRT as the elected RT technique for such patients since ENI increased the toxicity rates.

Reirradiation for locoregionally recurrent non-small cell lung cancer

Locoregional failure in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains high, and the management for recurrent disease in the setting of prior radiotherapy is difficult. Retreatment options such as surgery or systemic therapy are typically limited or frequently result in suboptimal outcomes. Reirradiation (reRT) of thoracic malignancies may be an optimal strategy for providing definitive local control and offering a new chance of cure. Yet, retreatment with radiation therapy can be challenging for fear of excessive toxicities and the inability to safely deliver definitive (≥60 Gy) doses of reRT. However, with recent improvements in radiation delivery techniques and image-guidance, dose-escalation with reRT is possible and outcomes are encouraging. Here, we present a review of various radiation techniques, clinical outcomes and associated toxicities in patients with locoregionally recurrent NSCLC treated primarily with reRT.

Reducing dose to the lungs through loosing target dose homogeneity requirement for radiotherapy of non small cell lung cancer

It is important to minimize lung dose during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, an approach was proposed to reduce lung dose by relaxing the constraint of target dose homogeneity during treatment planning of IMRT. Ten NSCLC patients with lung tumor on the right side were selected. The total dose for planning target volume (PTV) was 60 Gy (2 Gy/fraction). For each patient, two IMRT plans with six beams were created in Pinnacle treatment planning system. The dose homogeneity of target was controlled by constraints on the maximum and uniform doses of target volume. One IMRT plan was made with homogeneous target dose (the resulting target dose was within 95%-107% of the prescribed dose), while another IMRT plan was made with inhomogeneous target dose (the resulting target dose was more than 95% of the prescribed dose). During plan optimization, the dose of cord and heart in two types of IMRT plans were kept nearly the same. The doses of lungs, PTV and organs at risk (OARs) between two types of IMRT plans were compared and analyzed quantitatively. For all patients, the lung dose was decreased in the IMRT plans with inhomogeneous target dose. On average, the mean dose, V5, V20, and V30 of lung were reduced by 1.4 Gy, 4.8%, 3.7%, and 1.7%, respectively, and the dose to normal tissue was also reduced. These reductions in DVH values were all statistically significant (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two IMRT plans on V25, V30, V40, V50 and mean dose for heart. The maximum doses of cords in two type IMRT plans were nearly the same. IMRT plans with inhomogeneous target dose could protect lungs better and may be considered as a choice for treating NSCLC.

A phase I study of nedaplatin, pemetrexed and thoracic intensity-modulated radiotherapy for inoperable stage III lung adenocarcinoma

Background

Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation is the standard treatment for unresectable stage III Lung adenocarcinoma. However, no optimal concurrent chemotherapeutic regimen has been described. This study aimed to assess concurrent pemetrexed, nedaplatin and thoracic intensity-modulated radiotherapy followed by consolidation pemetrexed/nedaplatin for unresectable Stage IIIA/B lung adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Patients with unresectable stage III lung adenocarcinoma received thoracic intensity-modulated radiotherapy at 60–64 Gy in 30–32 fractions, concurrently with two cycles of 500 mg/m² pemetrexed, with nedaplatin doses escalating from 60 mg/m² (level 1) to 70 mg/m² (level 2) and 80 mg/m² (level 3). Consolidation consisted of three pemetrexed/nedaplatin (500 mg/m², 60 mg/m²) cycles every 3 weeks after concurrent therapy. The primary objective of the safety was to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD). The secondary endpoints included response rate, PFS and OS.

Results

Fifteen patients were enrolled, including 3, 6 and 6 individuals in the first, second, and third dose levels, respectively. Three cases of dose-limiting toxicities (grade 3 hepatitis, pneumonitis, and grade 4 thrombocytopenia), including one and two patients at levels 2 and 3, respectively, were observed and resulted in discontinued/delayed treatment. Response rates were 86.7 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], 64.2–97.8 %) and 64.3 % (95 % CI, 38.3–85.4 %) at chemoradiation and treatment completions, respectively. Median OS was 30.0 months (95 % CI, 16.4–43.6 months); 2-year OS was 44.0 % (95 % CI, 18.7–69.2 %). Median PFS was 12.0 months (95 % CI, 6.9–17.0 months), and the 2-year PFS 27.0 % (95 % CI, 4.7–49.3 %).

Conclusions

Full dose 500 mg/m² of pemetrexed and nedaplatin 70 mg/m² could be used safely with thoracic intensity-modulated radiotherapy for inoperable stage III lung adenocarcinoma. Further evaluation of stage III lung adenocarcinoma management is warranted.

Trial registration

This study was retrospectively registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-OPN-16008316, April 2016).