Radiotherapy of salivary gland tumours

Primary tumours of the salivary glands account for about 5 to 10% of tumours of the head and neck. These tumours represent a multitude of situations and histologies, where surgery is the mainstay of treatment and radiotherapy is frequently needed for malignant tumours (in case of stage T3-T4, nodal involvement, extraparotid invasion, positive or close resection margins, histological high-grade tumour, lymphovascular or perineural invasion, bone involvement postoperatively, or unresectable tumours). The diagnosis relies on anatomic and functional MRI and ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for the diagnostic of benign or malignant tumors. In addition to patient characteristics, the determination of primary and nodal target volumes depends on tumor extensions and stage, histology and grade. Therefore, radiotherapy of salivary gland tumors requires a certain degree of personalization, which has been codified in the recommendations of the French multidisciplinary network of expertise for rare ENT cancers (Refcor) and may justify a specialised multidisciplinary discussion. Although radiotherapy is usually recommended for malignant tumours only, recurrent pleomorphic adenomas may sometimes require radiotherapy based on multidisciplinary discussion. An update of indications and recommendations for radiotherapy for salivary gland tumours in terms of techniques, doses, target volumes and dose constraints to organs at risk of the French society for radiotherapy and oncology (SFRO) was reported in this article.

Radiotherapy for hypopharynx cancers

We present the update of the recommendations of the French society of oncological radiotherapy on radiotherapy for hypopharynx. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is the gold standard treatment for hypopharynx cancers. Early T1 and T2 tumors could be treated by exclusive radiotherapy or surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy in case of high recurrence risk. For locally advanced tumours requiring total pharyngolaryngectomy (T2 or T3) or with significant lymph nodes involvement, induction chemotherapy followed by exclusive radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy were possible. For T4 tumour, surgery must be proposed. The treatment of lymph nodes is based on initial primary tumour treatment. In non-surgical procedure, for 35 fractions, curative dose is 70Gy (2Gy per fraction) and prophylactic dose are 50 to 56Gy (2Gy per fraction in case of sequential radiotherapy or 1.6Gy in case of integrated simultaneous boost) radiotherapy; for 33 fractions, curative dose is 69.96Gy (2.12Gy per fraction) and prophylactic dose is 52.8Gy (1.6Gy per fraction in integrated simultaneous boost radiotherapy or 54Gy in 1.64Gy per fraction); for 30 fractions, curative dose is 66Gy (2.2Gy per fraction) and prophylactic dose is 54Gy (1.8Gy per fraction in integrated simultaneous boost radiotherapy). Doses over 2Gy per fraction could be done when chemotherapy is not used regarding potential larynx toxicity. Postoperatively, radiotherapy is used in locally advanced cancer with dose levels based on pathologic criteria, 60 to 66Gy for R1 resection and 54 to 60Gy for complete resection in bed tumour; 50 to 66Gy in lymph nodes areas regarding extracapsular spread. Volume delineation were based on guidelines cited in this article.

Implementation of an optimization method for parotid gland sparing during inverse planning for head and neck cancer radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To guide parotid gland (PG) sparing at the dose planning step, a specific model based on overlap between PTV and organ at risk (Moore et al.) was developed and evaluated for VMAT in head-and-neck (H&N) cancer radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and sixty patients treated for locally advanced H&N cancer were included. A model optimization was first performed (20 patients) before a model evaluation (110 patients). Thirty cases were planned with and without the model to quantify the PG dose sparing. The inter-operator variability was evaluated on one case, planned by 12 operators with and without the model. The endpoints were PG mean dose (D_mean), PTV homogeneity and number of monitor units (MU).

RESULTS

The PG D_mean predicted by the model was reached in 89% of cases. Using the model significantly reduced the PG D_mean: -6.1±4.3Gy. Plans with the model showed lower PTV dose homogeneity and more MUs (+10.5% on average). For the inter-operator variability, PG dose volume histograms without the optimized model were significantly different compared to those with the model; the D_mean standard deviation for the ipsilateral PG decreased from 2.2Gy to 1.2Gy. For the contralateral PG, this value decreased from 2.9Gy to 0.8Gy.

CONCLUSION

During the H&N inverse planning, the optimized model guides to the lowest PG achievable mean dose, allowing a significant PG mean dose reduction of -6.1Gy. Integrating this method at the treatment-planning step significantly reduced the inter-patient and inter-operator variabilities.

CyberKnife® M6™: Peripheral dose evaluation for brain treatments

PURPOSE

This study evaluates the peripheral dose (PD) delivered to healthy tissues for brain stereotactic radiotherapy treatments (SRT) performed with a CyberKnife M6™ Robotic Radiosurgery System and proposes a model to estimate PD before treatment.

METHOD

PD was measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters. Measurements were performed to evaluate the influence of distance, collimator type (fixed or Iris™) and aperture size on PD for typical brain treatment plans simulated on an anthropomorphic phantom. A model to estimate PD was defined by fitting functions to these measurements. In vivo measurements were subsequently performed on 30 patients and compared to the model-predicted PD.

RESULTS

PD (in cGy) was about 0.06% of MU at 15cm for a 20mm fixed collimator and 0.04% of MU for the same aperture with Iris™ collimator. In vivo measurements showed an average thyroid dose of 55mGy (σ=18.8mGy). Computed dose for thyroid, breast, umbilicus and gonads showed on average a relative difference of 3.4% with the in vivo dose (σ=12.4%).

CONCLUSION

PD at the thyroid with Iris™ was about a third lower than with a fixed collimator in case of brain SRT. Despite uncertainties (use of anthropomorphic PD to estimate patient specific PD, surface PD to estimate OAR PD) the model allows PD to be estimated without in vivo measurements. This method could be used to optimise PD with different planning strategies.