Quantitative Evaluation of the Benefit of Fiducial Image-Guidance for Prostate Cancer Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Using Daily Dose Volume Histogram Analysis
Free accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2014
Quantitative Evaluation of the Benefit of Fiducial Image-Guidance for Prostate Cancer Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Using Daily Dose Volume Histogram Analysis
To quantitatively evaluate the extent to which fiducial-based image-guidance improves dose coverage of the target volume and sparing of critical organs for prostate cancer patients treated with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and determination of planning margins by original approach of detailed daily dose volume histogram (DVH) and patient's position correction analysis. Sixty-two patients divided in two groups (clinical target volume (CTV) → planning target volume (PTV) margin 10 and 7 mm) were treated with IMRT using implanted fiducial markers. Each patient's treatment fraction was recalculated as it would have been treated without fiducial-guided positioning. For both plans (IGRT and non-IGRT), equivalent uniform doses (EUD), maximal and minimal doses for target volumes, normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), maximum and mean doses for organs at risk and the whole DVH differences were assessed. In the group with 10 mm margins, the only significant difference was worse rectal NTCP by 4.5%, but the CTV dose coverage remained at the same level. Recalculated plans with 7 mm margin could not achieve the prescribed target volume coverage, and the EUD decreased by 3.7 and 0.6 Gy for PTV and CTV, respectively. Desired CTV → PTV margin for non-IGRT plans should be no lower than 12 mm to guarantee 95% instances when delivered dose to CTV maintain as planned, for IGRT plans decrease this requirement to 2 mm. Prostate IMRT strategies involving margin reduction below 7 mm require image-guidance to maintain the planned dose coverage. Using fiducial-based image-guidance and large margins seems to be superfluous.
KubanD. A.TuckerS. L.DongL.StarkschallG.HuangE. H.CheungM. R.LeeA. K.PollackA.Long-term results of the M. D. Anderson randomized dose-escalation trial for prostate cancer. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys70, 67–74 (2008). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.054.
2.
ZietmanA. L.DeSilvioM. L.SlatterJ. D.RossiC. J.MillerD. W.AdamsJ. A.ShipleyW. U.Comparison of conventional-dose vs high-dose conformal radiation therapy in clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA294, 1233–1239 (2005). DOI: 10.1001/jama.294.10.1233.
3.
ByrneT. A.Review of prostate motion with considerations for the treatment of prostate cancer. Med Dosim30, 155–161 (2005). DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2005.03.005.
4.
LangenK. M.JonesD. T. L.Organ motion and its management. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys50, 265–278 (2001). DOI: 10.1016/S0360–3016(01)01453-5.
5.
PeetersS. T. H.HeemsbergenW. D.KoperP. C. M.van PuttenW. L. J.SlotA.DielwartM. F. H.BonfrerJ. M. G.IncrocciL.LebesqueJ. V.Dose-response in radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: Results of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy. Journal of Clinical Oncology24, 1990–1996 (2006). DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.2530.
6.
FiorinoC.ValdagniR.RancatiT.SanguinetiG.Dose-volume effect for normal tissues in external radiotherapy: Pelvis. Radiotherapy and Oncology93, 153–167 (2009). DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2009.08.004.
7.
TausskyD.SchneiderU.RoussonV.PesciaR.Patient-reported toxicity correlated to dose-volume histograms of the rectum in radiotherapy of the prostate. American Journal of Clinical Oncology26, 144–149 (2003).
8.
PawlowskiJ. M.YangE. S.MalcolmA. W.CoffeyC. W.DingG. X.Reduction of dose delivered to organs at risk in prostate cancer patients via image-guided radiation therapy. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys76, 924–934 (2010). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.06.068.
9.
PollackA.ZagarsG. K.StarkschallG.AntolakJ. A.LeeJ. J.HuangE.von EschenbachA. C.KubanD. A.RosenI.Prostate cancer radiation dose response: Results of the M. D. Anderson phase III randomized trial. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys53, 1097–1105 (2002). DOI: 10.1016/S0360–3016(02)02829-8.
10.
ZelefskyM. J.YamadaY.FuksZ.ZhangZ.HuntM.CahlonO.ParkJ.ShippyA.Long-term results of conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Impact of dose escalation on biochemical tumor control and distant metastases-free survival outcomes. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys71, 1028–1033 (2008). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.11.066.
11.
KasaovaL.SirakI.JansaJ.PaluskaP.PeteraJ.Daily prostate volume and position monitoring using implanted gold markers and on-board imaging during radiotherapy. Acta Medica54, 149–152 (2011).
12.
Van HerkM.Errors and margins in radiotherapy. Seminars in Radiation Oncology14, 52–64 (2004). DOI: 10.1053/j.semradonc.2003.10.003.
13.
WuQ.MohanR.NiemierkoA.Schmidt-UllrichR.Optimization of intensity-modulated radiotherapy plans based on the equivalent uniform dose. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys52, 224–235 (2002). DOI: 10.1016/S0360–3016(01)02585-8.
14.
BurmanC.KutcherG. J.EmamiB.GoiteinM.Fitting of normal tissue tolerance data to an analytic function. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys21, 123–135 (1991). DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(91)90172-Z.
15.
D'AgostinoR. B.BelangerA.D'AgostinoR. B.Jr. A suggestion for using powerful and informative tests of normality. The American Statistician44, 316–321 (1990). DOI: 10.1080/00031305.1990.10475751.
16.
StroomJ. C.HeijmenB. J. M.Geometrical uncertainties, radiotherapy planning margins, and the ICRU-62 report. Radiotherapy and Oncology64, 75–83 (2002). DOI: 10.1186/1748–717X-2–44, DOI: 10.1016/S0167–8140(02)00140-8.
17.
BarneyB. M.LeeR. J.HandrahanD.WelshK. T.CookJ. T.SauseW. T.Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for prostate cancer comparing kV imaging of fiducial markers with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys80, 301–305 (2011). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.007.
18.
SkarsgardD.CadmanP.El-GayedA.PearceyR.TaiP.PervezN.WuJ.Planning target volume margins for prostate radiotherapy using daily electronic portal imaging and implanted fiducial markers. Radiation Oncology5, 52–63 (2010).
19.
BeltranC.HermanM. G.DavisB. J.Planning target margin calculations for prostate radiotherapy based on intrafraction and interfraction motion using four localization methods. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys70, 289–295 (2008). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.08.040.
20.
TudorG. S. J.RimmerY. L.NguyenT. B.CowenM. A.ThomasS. J.Consideration of the likely benefit from implementation of prostate image-guided radiotherapy using current margin sizes: A radiobiological analysis. British Journal of Radiology85, 1263–1271 (2012). DOI: 10.1259/bjr/27924223.
21.
MilesE. F.NelsonJ. W.AlkaissiA. K.DasS.CloughR. W.AnscherM. S.OlesonJ. R.Equivalent uniform dose, D90 and V100 correlation with biochemical control after low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy for clinically low-risk prostate cancer. Brachytherapy7, 206–211 (2008). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.04.052.
22.
MoiseenkoV.LiuM.KristensenS.GelowitzG.BertheletE.Effect of bladder filling on doses to prostate and organs at risk: A treatment planning study. J Appl Clin Med Phys8, 55–68 (2007).
23.
HarsoliaA.VargasC.YanD.BrabbinsD.LockmanD.LiangJ.GustavsonG.ViciniF.MartinezA.KestinL. L.Predictors for chronic urinary toxicity after the treatment of prostate cancer with adaptive three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy: Dose-volume analysis of phase II dose-escalation study. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys69, 1100–1109 (2007). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.04.076.
24.
CheungM. R.TuckerS. L.DongL.de CrevoisierR.LeeA. K.FrankS.KudchadkerR. J.ThamesH.MohanR.KubanD.Investigation of bladder dose and volume factors influencing late urinary toxicity after external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys67, 1059–1065 (2007). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.042.
25.
PedersonA. W.FricanoJ.CorreaD.PelizzariC. A.LiauwS. L.Late toxicity after intensity-modulated radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: An exploration of dose-volume histogram parameters to limit genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys82, 235–241 (2012). DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.09.058.
26.
FiorinoC.CozzariniC.VavassoriV.SanguinetiG.BianchiC.CattaneoG. M.FoppianoF.MagliA.PiazzollaA.Relationships between DVHs and late rectal bleeding after radiotherapy for prostate cancer: Analysis of a large group of patients pooled from three institutions. Radiotherapy and Oncology64, 1–12 (2002). DOI: 10.1016/S0167–8140(02)00147-0.
27.
HuangE. H.PollackA.LevyL.StarkschallG.DongL.RosenI.KubanD. A.Late rectal toxicity: Dose volume effect of rectal toxicity of conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys54, 1314–1321 (2002). DOI: 10.1016/S0360–3016(02)03742-2.
28.
PaluskaP.HanusJ.SefrovaJ.RouskovaL.GreplJ.JansaJ.KasaovaL.HodekM.ZouharM.VosmikM.PeteraJ.Utilization of cone-beam CT for offline evaluation of target volume coverage during prostate image guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment. Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy3, 134–140 (2012). DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2012.03.003.
