Considerations for study design in the DAHANCA 35 trial of protons versus photons for head and neck cancer

Proton radiotherapy offers a dosimetric advantage compared to photon therapy in sparing normal tissue, but the clinical evidence for toxicity reductions in the treatment of head and neck cancer is limited. The Danish Head and Neck Cancer Group (DAHANCA) has initiated the DAHANCA 35 randomised trial to clarify the value of proton therapy (NCT04607694). The DAHANCA 35 trial is performed in an enriched population of patients selected by an anticipated benefit of proton therapy to reduce the risk of late dysphagia or xerostomia based on normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) modelling. We present our considerations on the trial design and a test of the selection procedure conducted before initiating the randomised study.

Dose and robustness comparison of nominal, daily and accumulated doses for photon and proton treatment of sinonasal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The aim was to evaluate and compare the dosimetric effect and robustness towards day-to-day anatomical and setup variations in the delivered dose for photon and proton treatments of sinonasal cancer (SNC) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Photon (VMAT) and proton (IMPT) plans were optimized retrospectively for 24 SNC patients. Synthetic CTs (synCT) were obtained by deforming the planning CT (pCT) to the anatomy of every daily cone-beam CT. Both VMAT and IMPT plans were recalculated on the synCTs. The recalculated daily dose was accumulated over the whole treatment on the pCT. Target coverage and dose to organs and risk (OARs) were evaluated for all patients for the nominal, daily and accumulated dose distribution.

RESULTS

In general, dose to OARs farther away from the target, including brain, chiasm and contralateral optic nerve, was lower for proton plans than photon plans. Whereas, OARs in proximity of the target received a lower dose for photon plans. For proton plans, the target coverage (volume of CTV receiving 95% of prescribed dose), V95%, fell below 99% for 9/24 patients in one or more fractions. For photon plans, 4/24 patients had one or more fractions where V95% fell below 99%. For accumulated doses, V95% was below 99% only in two cases, but above 98% for all patients.

CONCLUSION

Photon and proton treatment have different strengths regarding OAR sparing. The robustness was high for both treatment modalities. Patient selection for either proton or photon radiation therapy of SNC patients should be based on a case-by-case comparison.

A comparison of two methods for segmentation of functional volumes in radiotherapy planning of lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND

In radiotherapy (RT) of lung cancer, dose to functional lung (FL) volumes segmented with two different methods (perfusion SPECT (Q-SPECT) and 4D-CT (4D) ventilation (V)) have been shown to correlate with the incidence of radiation pneumonitis (RP). This study aims to compare the FL volumes identified by both methods.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty lung cancer patients had a 4D and Q-SPECT prior to treatment. Seventeen of these patients also had a ventilation SPECT (V-SPECT). FL sub-volumes were segmented automatically, using cut-off values. The volumes were compared in terms of overlap fraction (OF) relative to the minimal volume, and intersection fraction (IF) of the FL volume relative to the total lung volume (V_Lung).

RESULTS

Cut-off values suggested in literature for Q-SPECT and 4D-V resulted in volumes differing in size by a median 18% [6%;31%], and a median OF and IF of 0.48 [0.23;0.70] and 0.09 [0.02;0.25], respectively. Segmenting volumes of comparable size of about 1/3 of V_Lung (FL-m(1/3), m = method) resulted in a median OF and IF of 0.43 [0.23;0.58] and 0.12 [0.06;0.19], respectively. Twenty-five patients (83%) had a reasonable overlap between FL-Q(1/3) and FL-4D-V(1/3) volumes, with OF values above 0.33. IF increased significantly (p = .036) compared to using fixed cut-off values. Similarly, volumes of comparable size of about 1/3 V_Lung were produced for V-SPECT, and FL-Q(1/3), FL-V(1/3), and FL-4D-V(1/3) were compared. The overlaps and intersections of FL-V(1/3) with FL-Q(1/3) volumes were significantly (p<.001) larger than the corresponding overlaps and intersections of FL-Q(1/3) with FL-4D(1/3) and FL-V(1/3) with FL-4D(1/3).

CONCLUSION

The Q-SPECT and 4D-V methods do not segment entirely the same FL volumes. A reasonable overlap of the volumes along with the findings of other studies that both correlate to RP incidence, suggests that a combination of both volumes, e.g. using the IF, may be useful in RT treatment planning.

Air variability in maxillary sinus during radiotherapy for sinonasal carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

The aim was to characterise patterns and predictability of aeration changes in the ipsilateral maxillary sinus during intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for sinonasal cancer (SNC), and in a sample evaluate the dosimetric effects of aeration changes for both photon and proton therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included patients treated with IMRT for SNC in a single institution in 2009-2017. The volume of air in the ipsilateral maxillary sinus was recorded in 1578 daily cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) from 53 patients. Patterns of changing air volumes were categorised as 'stable', increasing', 'decreasing', or 'erratic'. For the prediction analysis, categorisation was performed based both on the entire treatment course and the first five fractions (F1-5). Photon and proton therapy plans were generated for four patients, the one from each category with the largest aeration variation. Synthetic CT images were generated for each CBCT and all plans were recalculated on the daily synthetic CTs.

RESULTS

The absolute volume of air varied considerably during the treatment course, ranging from 0 to 25.9 cm3. Changes within a single participant varied in the range of 0-18.7 cm3. In the categorisation of patterns, most patients had increasing aeration of the sinus. Generally, patterns of aeration could not be predicted from F1-5. Patients categorised as increasing in F1-5 had the best prediction, with 78% predicted correctly as increasing for the entire treatment course. The numeric correlation coefficients for target coverage and air volume were low for 3/4 scenarios (photons 0.03-0.23, protons 0.26-0.48). No straightforward correlation between the dosimetric effect and the volume changes could be detected in the sample test of four patients for neither photon nor proton therapy.

CONCLUSION

The variation of aeration was large and unpredictable. No clear dosimetric consequences of the aeration variation were evident for neither IMRT nor proton therapy for the patients investigated.

Late toxicity in the brain after radiotherapy for sinonasal cancer: Neurocognitive functioning, MRI of the brain and quality of life

•

Compared with matched normative data, impaired cognitive function was substantial.

•

Several correlations between radiation dose and cognitive impairment were present.

•

Radiation-induced white matter hyperintensities were present in 2/27 participants.

•

One participant displayed radiation-induced necrosis in the temporal lobe.

•

The domains affecting quality of life the most were fatigue and quality of sleep.

Purpose

The aim of the study was to evaluate neurocognitive late effects, structural alterations and associations between cognitive impairment and radiation doses as well as cerebral tissue damage after radiotherapy for sinonasal cancer. Furthermore, the aim was to report quality of life (QoL) and self-reported cognitive capacity.

Materials and methods

Recurrence-free patients previously treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy with a curative intent were eligible for the study. Study examinations comprised comprehensive neurocognitive testing, MRI of the brain, and self-reported outcomes.

Results

A total of 27 patients were included. Median age was 67 years (range 47–83). The majority of test outcomes were below normative values in any degree, and 37% of the participants had clinically significant neurocognitive impairment when compared with normative data. Correlations between absorbed doses to specific substructures of the brain and neurocognitive outcomes were present for Wechsler’s Adult Intelligence Scale-digit span and Controlled Oral Word Association Test-S. Structural MRI revealed macroscopic abnormalities in three patients; infarction (n = 1), diffuse white matter intensities (n = 2) and necrosis (n = 1). In the analysis of atrophy of cerebral tissue, no correlations were present with neither radiation dose to cerebral substructures nor neurocognitive impairment. The global QoL of the cohort was 75. The most affected outcomes were ‘fatigue’, ‘insomnia’, and ‘drowsiness’. A total of 59% of participants reported significantly impaired quality of sleep. Self-reported cognitive function revealed that ‘memory’ was the most affected cognitive domain. For the domains of ‘memory’ and ‘language’, self-reported functioning was associated with objectively measured neurocognitive outcomes.

Conclusion

Cerebral toxicity after radiotherapy for sinonasal cancer was substantial. Clinically significant cognitive impairment was present in more than one third of the participants, and several dose–response associations were present. Furthermore, the presence of macroscopic radiation sequelae indicated considerable impact of radiotherapy on brain tissue.

Proton therapy and the European Particle Therapy Network: The past, present and future

Proton therapy is delivered to selected cancer patients presenting with rare tumours, for which a dose escalation paradigm and/or a reduced dose-bath to the organs at risk is pursued. It is a costly treatment with an additional cost factor of 2–3 when compared to photon radiotherapy. Notwithstanding the 180′000 patients treated with protons, scars robust clinical evidence is available to justify the administration of this treatment modality. The European Particle Therapy Network (EPTN) was created in 2015 to answer the critical European needs for cooperation among protons and carbon ions centres in the framework of clinical research networks. EPTN with other European groups will launch a number of prospective clinical trials that could be practice changing if positive. Alternative way to generate clinical data could be provided by alternative methodologies, such as the Dutch model-based approach, or could be provided by European infrastructure projects.

NTCP model validation method for DAHANCA patient selection of protons versus photons in head and neck cancer radiotherapy

Introduction: Prediction models using logistic regression may perform poorly in external patient cohorts. However, there is a need to standardize and validate models for clinical use. The purpose of this project was to describe a method for validation of external NTCP models used for patient selection in the randomized trial of protons versus photons in head and neck cancer radiotherapy, DAHANCA 35. Material and methods: Organs at risk of 588 patients treated primarily with IMRT in the randomized controlled DAHANCA19 trial were retrospectively contoured according to recent international recommendations. Dose metrics were extracted using MatLab and all clinical parameters were retrieved from the DAHANCA database. The model proposed by Christianen et al. to predict physician-rated dysphagia was validated through the closed testing, where change of the model intercept, slope and individual beta's were tested for significant prediction improvements. Results: Six months prevalence of dysphagia in the validation cohort was 33%. The closed testing procedure for physician-rated dysphagia showed that the Christianen et al. model needed an intercept refitting for the best match for the Danish patients. The intercept update increased the risk of dysphagia for the validation cohort by 7.9 ± 2.5% point. For the raw model performance, the Brier score (mean squared residual) was 0.467, which improved significantly with a new intercept to 0.415. Conclusions: The previously published Dutch dysphagia model needed an intercept update to match the Danish patient cohort. The implementation of a closed testing procedure on the current validation cohort allows quick and efficient validation of external NTCP models for patient selection in the future.

The HERO Project: Inspire Awareness, Strengthen Radiotherapy, Deliver Equitable Access

Half of all cancer patients in Europe should receive radiotherapy (RT) during the treatment of their disease. But there is a remaining gap in RT provision, leading to suboptimal access. Additionally, healthcare budgets are tight, and economic evaluations are key to support decision making. The HERO project (Health Economics in Radiation Oncology) is developing a knowledge base for health economic evaluation of RT at the European level. It aims to provide solid data to engage with decision makers; it empowers the RT community to advocate for better resource planning and ultimately better care for patients, closing the gap in RT access. The project assessed the availability of RT in Europe, in terms of equipment, staffing and guidelines. Then, it investigated the need for RT in Europe. Applying available EU data to the CCORE group (Collaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and Evaluation) decision trees of evidence-based indications, the RT optimal utilization proportion, existing gap and growing needs have been calculated. Finally, knowing the cost of treatment is needed for budget planning and reimbursement settings, HERO developed a cost accounting model, applying a time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) methodology. The model gives insight on the national cost of RT: per treatment, on average and for various tumor types and techniques, on the resources required based on national patterns of care. Regarding availability of human and capital resources, there are big discrepancies in Europe, with sixfold variations across European countries for some of the resources. Looking at the need, while on average 51% of all cancer patients should receive RT, we miss out 30% of these. The need is further expected to increase with an average of 16% by 2025. Lastly, the HERO costing model is accessible online. Preliminary results are available for a fictitious country (Europalia), whose RT scenario is based on standard European practices: to serve a hypothetical cancer patient cohort of 100,000, the model computes an annual RT budget of 173,192,960€, an average RT treatment cost of 3518€ and, for common cancer types, an average breast and prostate treatment cost of respectively 3785 and 6092€. Currently, the model is used in Belgium, to help defining resource recommendations, and other countries are setting up task forces for the implementation of the tool nationally. HERO allows to advocate for RT and negotiate with decision makers, who need data on availability, needs and costs, when planning RT resources within their country. In addition, knowledge of the RT cost will promote and further ease cost-effectiveness analyses as well as the development of value-based health care oncology programs. Overall, the HERO project creates a movement of awareness within the cancer community, encourages national RT data collection and supports the promotion of optimal access to care with the ultimate aim of better outcome for the cancer patient.