SMART ablation of lymphatic oligometastases in the pelvis and abdomen: Clinical and dosimetry outcomes

The Future of MR-Guided Radiation Therapy

Magnetic resonance image guided radiation therapy (MRIgRT) is a relatively new technology that has already shown outcomes benefits but that has not yet reached its clinical potential. The improved soft-tissue contrast provided with MR, coupled with the immediacy of image acquisition with respect to the treatment, enables expansion of on-table adaptive protocols, currently at a cost of increased treatment complexity, use of human resources, and longer treatment slot times, which translate to decreased throughput. Many approaches are being investigated to meet these challenges, including the development of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to accelerate and automate much of the workflow and improved technology that parallelizes workflow tasks, as well as improvements in image acquisition speed and quality. This article summarizes limitations of current available integrated MRIgRT systems and gives an outlook about scientific developments to further expand the use of MRIgRT.

Optimising the MR-Linac as a standard treatment modality

The magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MR-Linac) offers a new treatment paradigm, providing improved visualisation of targets and organs at risk while allowing for daily adaptation of treatment plans in real time. Online MR-guided adaptive treatment has reduced treatment uncertainties; however, the additional treatment time and resource requirements may be a concern. We present our experience of integrating an MR-Linac into a busy department and provide recommendations for improved clinical and resource efficiency. Furthermore, we discuss potential future technological innovations that can further optimise clinical productivity in a busy department.

Leaf-individual calibration for a double stack multileaf collimator in photon radiotherapy

Background and Purpose

In online adaptive stereotactic body radiotherapy treatments, linear accelerator delivery accuracy is essential. Recently introduced double stack multileaf collimators (MLCs) have new facets in their calibration. We established a radiation-based leaf-individual calibration (LIMCA) method for double stack MLCs.

Materials and Methods

MLC leaf positions were evaluated from four cardinal angles with test patterns at measurement positions throughout the radiation field on EBT3 radiochromic film for each single stack. The accuracy of the method and repeatability of the results were assessed. The effect of MLC positioning errors was characterized for a measured output factor curve and a clinical patient plan.

Results

All positions in the motor step - position calibration file were optimized in the established LIMCA method. The resulting double stack mean accuracy for all angles was 0.2 ± 0.1 mm for X1 (left bank) and 0.2 ± 0.2 mm for X2 (right bank). The accuracy of the leaf position evaluation was 0.2 mm (95% confidence level). The MLC calibration remained stable over four months. Small MLC leaf position errors (e.g. 1.2 mm field size reduction) resulted in important dose errors (-5.8 %) for small quadratic fields of 0.83 × 0.83 cm2. Single stack position accuracy was essential for highly modulated treatment plans.

Conclusions

LIMCA is a new double stack MLC calibration method that increases treatment accuracy from four angles and for all moving leaves.

Comparison of different dose accumulation strategies to estimate organ doses after stereotactic magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Re-irradiation is frequently performed in the era of precision oncology, but previous doses to organs-at-risk (OAR) must be assessed to avoid cumulative overdoses. Stereotactic magnetic resonance-guided online adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) enables highly precise ablation of tumors close to OAR. However, OAR doses may change considerably during adaptive treatment, which complicates potential re-irradiation. We aimed to compare the baseline plan with different dose accumulation techniques to inform re-irradiation.

PATIENTS & METHODS

We analyzed 18 patients who received SMART to lung or liver tumors inside prospective databases. Cumulative doses were calculated inside the planning target volumes (PTV) and OAR for the adapted plans and theoretical non-adapted plans via (1) cumulative dose volume histograms (DVH sum plan) and (2) deformable image registration (DIR)-based dose accumulation to planning images (DIR sum plan). We compared cumulative dose parameters between the baseline plan, DVH sum plan and DIR sum plan using equivalent doses in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2).

RESULTS

Individual patients presented relevant increases of near-maximum doses inside the proximal bronchial tree, spinal cord, heart and gastrointestinal OAR when comparing adaptive treatment to the baseline plans. The spinal cord near-maximum doses were significantly increased in the liver patients (D2% median: baseline 6.1 Gy, DIR sum 8.1 Gy, DVH sum 8.4 Gy, p = 0.04; D0.1 cm³ median: baseline 6.1 Gy, DIR sum 8.1 Gy, DVH sum 8.5 Gy, p = 0.04). Three OAR overdoses occurred during adaptive treatment (DIR sum: 1, DVH sum: 2), and four more intense OAR overdoses would have occurred during non-adaptive treatment (DIR sum: 4, DVH sum: 3). Adaptive treatment maintained similar PTV coverages to the baseline plans, while non-adaptive treatment yielded significantly worse PTV coverages in the lung (D95% median: baseline 86.4 Gy, DIR sum 82.4 Gy, DVH sum 82.2 Gy, p = 0.006) and liver patients (D95% median: baseline 87.4 Gy, DIR sum 82.1 Gy, DVH sum 81.1 Gy, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

OAR doses can increase during SMART, so that re-irradiation should be planned based on dose accumulations of the adapted plans instead of the baseline plan. Cumulative dose volume histograms represent a simple and conservative dose accumulation strategy.

To fly or not to fly: Stereotactic MR-guided adaptive radiotherapy effectively treats ultracentral lung tumors with favorable long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic radiotherapy of ultracentral lung tumors (ULT) is challenging as it may cause overdoses to sensitive mediastinal organs with severe complications. We aimed to describe long-term outcomes after stereotactic magnetic resonance (MR)-guided online adaptive radiotherapy (SMART) as an innovative treatment of ULT.

PATIENTS & METHODS

We analyzed 36 patients that received SMART to 40 tumors between 02/2020 - 08/2021 inside prospective databases. ULT were defined by planning target volume (PTV) overlap with the proximal bronchial tree or esophagus. We calculated Kaplan Meier estimates for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and competing risk estimates for the incidence of tumor progression and treatment-related toxicities. ULT patients (N = 16) were compared to non-ULT patients (N = 20).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between ULT and non-ULT, but ULT were larger (median PTV: ULT 54.7 cm³, non-ULT 19.2 cm³). Median follow-up was 23.6 months. ULT and non-ULT showed a similar OS (2-years: ULT 67%, non-ULT 60%, p = 0.7) and PFS (2-years: ULT 37%, non-ULT 34%, p = 0.73). Progressions occurred mainly at distant sites (2-year incidence of distant progression: ULT 63%, non-ULT 61%, p = 0.77), while local tumor control was favorable (2-year incidence of local progression: ULT 7%, non-ULT 0%, p = 0.22). Treatment of ULT led to significantly more toxicities ≥ grade (G) 2 (ULT: 9 (56%), non-ULT: 1 (5%), p = 0.002). Most toxicities were moderate (G2). Two ULT patients developed high-grade toxicities: 1) esophagitis G3 and bronchial bleeding G4 after VEGF treatment, 2) bronchial bleeding G3. Estimated incidence of high-grade toxicities was 19% (3-48%) in ULT, and no treatment-related death occurred.

CONCLUSION

Our small series supports SMART as potentially effective treatment of ULT. SMART with careful fractionation could reduce severe complications, but treatment of ULT remains a high-risk procedure and needs careful benefit-risk-assessment.

Intra-fraction motion of pelvic oligometastases and feasibility of PTV margin reduction using MRI guided adaptive radiotherapy

Purpose

This study assesses the impact of intra-fraction motion and PTV margin size on target coverage for patients undergoing radiation treatment of pelvic oligometastases. Dosimetric sparing of the bowel as a function of the PTV margin is also evaluated.

Materials and methods

Seven patients with pelvic oligometastases previously treated on our MR-linac (35 Gy in 5 fractions) were included in this study. Retrospective adaptive plans were created for each fraction on the daily MRI datasets using PTV margins of 5 mm, 3 mm, and 2 mm. Dosimetric constraint violations and GTV coverage were measured as a function of PTV margin size. The impact of intra-fraction motion on GTV coverage was assessed by tracking the GTV position on the cine MR images acquired during treatment delivery and creating an intra-fraction dose distribution for each IMRT beam. The intra-fraction dose was accumulated for each fraction to determine the total dose delivered to the target for each PTV size.

Results

All OAR constraints were achieved in 85.7%, 94.3%, and 100.0% of fractions when using 5 mm, 3 mm, and 2 mm PTV margins while scaling to 95% PTV coverage. Compared to plans with a 5 mm PTV margin, there was a 27.4 ± 12.3% (4.0 ± 2.2 Gy) and an 18.5 ± 7.3% (2.7 ± 1.4 Gy) reduction in the bowel D_0.5cc dose for 2 mm and 3 mm PTV margins, respectively. The target dose (GTV V_{35 Gy}) was on average 100.0 ± 0.1% (99.6 - 100%), 99.6 ± 1.0% (97.2 - 100%), and 99.0 ± 1.4% (95.0 - 100%), among all fractions for the 5 mm, 3 mm, and 2 mm PTV margins on the adaptive plans when accounting for intra-fraction motion, respectively.

Conclusion

A 2 mm PTV margin achieved a minimum of 95% GTV coverage while reducing the dose to the bowel for all patients.

[What do we need to deliver "online" adapted radiotherapy treatment plans?]

During the joint SFRO/SFPM session of the 2019 congress, a state of the art of adaptive radiotherapy announced a strong impact in our clinical practice, in particular with the availability of treatment devices coupled to an MRI system. Three years later, it seems relevant to take stock of adaptive radiotherapy in practice, and especially the "online" strategy because it is indeed more and more accessible with recent hardware and software developments, such as coupled accelerators to a three-dimensional imaging device and algorithms based on artificial intelligence. However, the deployment of this promising strategy is complex because it contracts the usual time scale and upsets the usual organizations. So what do we need to deliver adapted treatment plans with an "online" strategy?

In Silico Trial of Computed Tomography-Guided Stereotactic Adaptive Radiotherapy (CT-STAR) for the Treatment of Abdominal Oligometastases

PURPOSE

We conducted a prospective, in silico clinical imaging study (NCTXXXX) to evaluate the feasibility of cone-beam computed tomography-guided stereotactic adaptive radiotherapy (CT-STAR) for the treatment of abdominal oligometastases. We hypothesized that CT-STAR produces improved dosimetry compared to non-adapted CT-stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

METHODS/MATERIALS

Eight patients receiving SBRT for abdominal oligometastatic disease received five additional kV cone beam CTs (CBCTs) on the ETHOS system. These additional CBCTs were used for imaging during an emulator treatment session. Initial plans were created based on their simulation (P_I) and emulated adaptive plans (P_A) were based on anatomy-of-the-day. The prescription was 50 Gy/5 fractions. Organ-at-risk (OAR) constraints were prioritized over planning target volume coverage under a strict isotoxicity approach. The P_I was applied to the patient's anatomy-of-the-day and compared to the re-optimized P_A using dose volume histogram metrics, with selection of the superior plan. Feasibility was defined as completion of the adaptive workflow and compliance with strict OAR constraints in ≥80% of fractions. Fractions were performed under time pressures by a physician and physicist to mimic the adaptive process.

RESULTS

CT-STAR was feasible, with successful workflow completion in 38/40 (95%) fractions. P_I application to daily anatomy created OAR constraint violations in 30/40 (75%) fractions. There were 8 stomach, 18 duodenum, 16 small bowel, and 11 large bowel P_I OAR constraint violations. In contrast, OAR violations occurred in 2/40 (5%) P_A (both small bowel violations, both improved from the P_I). CT-STAR also improved GTV V100 and D95 coverage in 25/40 (63%) and 20/40 (50%) fractions, respectively. 0/40 (0%) fractions were deemed non-feasible due to poor image quality and/or inability to delineate structures. Adaptation time per fraction was a median of 22.59 minutes (10.97-47.23).

CONCLUSIONS

CT-STAR resolved OAR hard constraint violations and/or improved target coverage in silico when compared to non-adapted CT-guided SBRT for the ablation of abdominal oligometastatic disease. While limitations of this study include its small sample size and in silico design, the consistently high quality CBCT images captured and comparable timing metrics to prior adaptive studies suggest that CT- STAR is a viable treatment paradigm for the ablation of abdominal oligometastatic disease. Clinical trials are in development to further evaluate CT-STAR in the clinic.