Cargando…

Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study

BACKGROUND: Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer has led to a reduction in radiotherapy doses to normal tissues, like the salivary glands, while maintaining high rates of local control. Oral mucosal and skin toxicity is still a major source of treatment—related morbidity,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anderson, Cheryl, MacDonald, R Lee, Wilke, Derek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10402661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37139991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14000
_version_ 1785084891349647360
author Anderson, Cheryl
MacDonald, R Lee
Wilke, Derek
author_facet Anderson, Cheryl
MacDonald, R Lee
Wilke, Derek
author_sort Anderson, Cheryl
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer has led to a reduction in radiotherapy doses to normal tissues, like the salivary glands, while maintaining high rates of local control. Oral mucosal and skin toxicity is still a major source of treatment—related morbidity, occurring in most patients. PURPOSE: We conducted a dosimetric feasibility study with the goal of creating a methodology that could theoretically reduce the dose of radiation to skin and oral mucosa, while maintaining comparable avoidance of other organs at risk, and planning target volume (PTV) coverage. METHODS: The clinical plans of patients treated previously were replanned using coplanar VMAT arcs on a TrueBeam STx using the photon optimizer (PO) version 15.6 and the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm. Comparisons were made between three methodologies: “Conventional,” “Skin Sparing” and a skin/mucosa avoiding (“SMART”) technique, with dose metrics being compared using analysis of variance, with a Bonferroni correction to account for multiple pairwise comparisons. The maximum grade of mucositis and radiation dermatitis during treatment was correlated to different dose‐volume metrics to predict what could be clinically meaningful. RESULTS: Sixteen patients met the study criteria and were replanned using the skin sparing and SMART techniques. Maximum doses to the skin sparing structure were reduced from 64.2 Gy to 56.6 and 55.9 Gy, in the skin sparing and SMART plans (p < 0.0001), and mean doses reduced from 26.7 Gy to 20.0 and 20.2 Gy, respectively (p < 0.0001). Maximum doses to the oral cavity structure were not reduced by either technique, however mean dose to the oral cavity structure was reduced from 39.03 Gy to 33.5 Gy by the SMART technique (p < 0.0001). There was a slight reduction in PTV_High coverage by the V95% in the SMART plans (99.52% vs. 98.79%, p = 0.0073), and a similar slight reduction in PTV_Low coverage by the V95% by both the skin sparing and SMART plans (99.74% vs. 97.89% vs. 97.42%, p < 0.0001). Maximum doses to organs at risk were not statistically different between techniques. Dose to oral cavity and maximum grade experienced during radiotherapy correlated. The Spearman correlation coefficient for dose to 20%, 50%, and 80% of the volume of oral cavity was 0.5 (p = 0.048), 0.64 (p = 0.007), and 0.62 (p = 0.010), respectively. Skin toxicity grade was only found to be correlated with the D20% of the skin sparing structure (Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.58, p = 0.0177). CONCLUSION: The SMART technique appears to be able to reduce maximum and mean skin dose, as well as mean oral cavity doses, while only slightly reducing PTV coverage, with acceptable OAR doses. We feel the improvements warrant investigation in a clinical trial.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10402661
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104026612023-08-05 Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study Anderson, Cheryl MacDonald, R Lee Wilke, Derek J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics BACKGROUND: Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer has led to a reduction in radiotherapy doses to normal tissues, like the salivary glands, while maintaining high rates of local control. Oral mucosal and skin toxicity is still a major source of treatment—related morbidity, occurring in most patients. PURPOSE: We conducted a dosimetric feasibility study with the goal of creating a methodology that could theoretically reduce the dose of radiation to skin and oral mucosa, while maintaining comparable avoidance of other organs at risk, and planning target volume (PTV) coverage. METHODS: The clinical plans of patients treated previously were replanned using coplanar VMAT arcs on a TrueBeam STx using the photon optimizer (PO) version 15.6 and the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm. Comparisons were made between three methodologies: “Conventional,” “Skin Sparing” and a skin/mucosa avoiding (“SMART”) technique, with dose metrics being compared using analysis of variance, with a Bonferroni correction to account for multiple pairwise comparisons. The maximum grade of mucositis and radiation dermatitis during treatment was correlated to different dose‐volume metrics to predict what could be clinically meaningful. RESULTS: Sixteen patients met the study criteria and were replanned using the skin sparing and SMART techniques. Maximum doses to the skin sparing structure were reduced from 64.2 Gy to 56.6 and 55.9 Gy, in the skin sparing and SMART plans (p < 0.0001), and mean doses reduced from 26.7 Gy to 20.0 and 20.2 Gy, respectively (p < 0.0001). Maximum doses to the oral cavity structure were not reduced by either technique, however mean dose to the oral cavity structure was reduced from 39.03 Gy to 33.5 Gy by the SMART technique (p < 0.0001). There was a slight reduction in PTV_High coverage by the V95% in the SMART plans (99.52% vs. 98.79%, p = 0.0073), and a similar slight reduction in PTV_Low coverage by the V95% by both the skin sparing and SMART plans (99.74% vs. 97.89% vs. 97.42%, p < 0.0001). Maximum doses to organs at risk were not statistically different between techniques. Dose to oral cavity and maximum grade experienced during radiotherapy correlated. The Spearman correlation coefficient for dose to 20%, 50%, and 80% of the volume of oral cavity was 0.5 (p = 0.048), 0.64 (p = 0.007), and 0.62 (p = 0.010), respectively. Skin toxicity grade was only found to be correlated with the D20% of the skin sparing structure (Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.58, p = 0.0177). CONCLUSION: The SMART technique appears to be able to reduce maximum and mean skin dose, as well as mean oral cavity doses, while only slightly reducing PTV coverage, with acceptable OAR doses. We feel the improvements warrant investigation in a clinical trial. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10402661/ /pubmed/37139991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14000 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Anderson, Cheryl
MacDonald, R Lee
Wilke, Derek
Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study
title Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study
title_full Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study
title_fullStr Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study
title_full_unstemmed Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study
title_short Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study
title_sort skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (smart) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (vmat) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: dosimetric feasibility study
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10402661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37139991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14000
work_keys_str_mv AT andersoncheryl skinmucosaavoidanceradiotherapysmartversusconventionalvolumetricarcbasedradiotherapyvmatforthetreatmentofheadandneckcancerdosimetricfeasibilitystudy
AT macdonaldrlee skinmucosaavoidanceradiotherapysmartversusconventionalvolumetricarcbasedradiotherapyvmatforthetreatmentofheadandneckcancerdosimetricfeasibilitystudy
AT wilkederek skinmucosaavoidanceradiotherapysmartversusconventionalvolumetricarcbasedradiotherapyvmatforthetreatmentofheadandneckcancerdosimetricfeasibilitystudy