Cargando…

1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation

PURPOSE: To compare treatment plans of two different rectal boost strategies: up-front versus adaptive boost at the 1.5 T MR-Linac. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) underwent standard neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy with 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. T2-weighted MRI prior and af...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bonomo, Pierluigi, Lo Russo, Monica, Nachbar, Marcel, Boeke, Simon, Gatidis, Sergios, Zips, Daniel, Thorwarth, Daniela, Gani, Cihan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7732969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33336086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2020.11.016
_version_ 1783622188673269760
author Bonomo, Pierluigi
Lo Russo, Monica
Nachbar, Marcel
Boeke, Simon
Gatidis, Sergios
Zips, Daniel
Thorwarth, Daniela
Gani, Cihan
author_facet Bonomo, Pierluigi
Lo Russo, Monica
Nachbar, Marcel
Boeke, Simon
Gatidis, Sergios
Zips, Daniel
Thorwarth, Daniela
Gani, Cihan
author_sort Bonomo, Pierluigi
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare treatment plans of two different rectal boost strategies: up-front versus adaptive boost at the 1.5 T MR-Linac. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) underwent standard neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy with 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. T2-weighted MRI prior and after the treatment session were acquired to contour gross tumor volumes (GTVs) and organs at risk (OARs). The datasets were used to simulate four different boost strategies (all with 15 Gy/5 fractions in addition to 50.4 Gy): up-front boost (5 daily fractions in the first week of treatment) and an adaptive boost (one boost fraction per week). Both strategies were planned using standard and reduced PTV margins. Intra-fraction motion was assessed by pre- and post-treatment MRI-based contours. RESULTS: Five patients were included and a total of 44 MRI sets were evaluated. The median PTV volumes of the adaptive boost were significantly smaller than for the up-front boost (81.4 cm(3) vs 44.4 cm(3) for PTV with standard margins; 31.2 cm(3) vs 15 cm(3) for PTV with reduced margins; p = 0.031). With reduced margins the rectum was significantly better spared with an adaptive boost rather than with an up-front boost: V60Gy and V65Gy were 41.2% and 24.8% compared with 59% and 29.9%, respectively (p = 0.031). Median GTV intra-fractional motion was 2 mm (range 0–8 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that the adaptive boost strategy exploiting tumor-shrinkage and reduced margin might result in better sparing of rectum and anal canal. Individual margin assessment, motion management and real-time adaptive radiotherapy appear attractive applications of the 1.5 T MR-Linac for further testing of individualized and safe dose escalation in patients with rectal cancer.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7732969
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77329692020-12-16 1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation Bonomo, Pierluigi Lo Russo, Monica Nachbar, Marcel Boeke, Simon Gatidis, Sergios Zips, Daniel Thorwarth, Daniela Gani, Cihan Clin Transl Radiat Oncol Original Research Article PURPOSE: To compare treatment plans of two different rectal boost strategies: up-front versus adaptive boost at the 1.5 T MR-Linac. METHODS: Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) underwent standard neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy with 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. T2-weighted MRI prior and after the treatment session were acquired to contour gross tumor volumes (GTVs) and organs at risk (OARs). The datasets were used to simulate four different boost strategies (all with 15 Gy/5 fractions in addition to 50.4 Gy): up-front boost (5 daily fractions in the first week of treatment) and an adaptive boost (one boost fraction per week). Both strategies were planned using standard and reduced PTV margins. Intra-fraction motion was assessed by pre- and post-treatment MRI-based contours. RESULTS: Five patients were included and a total of 44 MRI sets were evaluated. The median PTV volumes of the adaptive boost were significantly smaller than for the up-front boost (81.4 cm(3) vs 44.4 cm(3) for PTV with standard margins; 31.2 cm(3) vs 15 cm(3) for PTV with reduced margins; p = 0.031). With reduced margins the rectum was significantly better spared with an adaptive boost rather than with an up-front boost: V60Gy and V65Gy were 41.2% and 24.8% compared with 59% and 29.9%, respectively (p = 0.031). Median GTV intra-fractional motion was 2 mm (range 0–8 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that the adaptive boost strategy exploiting tumor-shrinkage and reduced margin might result in better sparing of rectum and anal canal. Individual margin assessment, motion management and real-time adaptive radiotherapy appear attractive applications of the 1.5 T MR-Linac for further testing of individualized and safe dose escalation in patients with rectal cancer. Elsevier 2020-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7732969/ /pubmed/33336086 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2020.11.016 Text en © 2020 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Bonomo, Pierluigi
Lo Russo, Monica
Nachbar, Marcel
Boeke, Simon
Gatidis, Sergios
Zips, Daniel
Thorwarth, Daniela
Gani, Cihan
1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
title 1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
title_full 1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
title_fullStr 1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
title_full_unstemmed 1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
title_short 1.5 T MR-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
title_sort 1.5 t mr-linac planning study to compare two different strategies of rectal boost irradiation
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7732969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33336086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2020.11.016
work_keys_str_mv AT bonomopierluigi 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT lorussomonica 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT nachbarmarcel 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT boekesimon 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT gatidissergios 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT zipsdaniel 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT thorwarthdaniela 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation
AT ganicihan 15tmrlinacplanningstudytocomparetwodifferentstrategiesofrectalboostirradiation