PURPOSE:To compare the dosimetric results of an in-silico study among intensity-modulated photon (IMRT) and robustly optimized intensity-modulated proton (IMPT) treatment techniques using a dose-escalated simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) approach in locally recurrent or advanced pancreatic cancer patients.MATERIAL AND METHODS:For each of 15 locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients, a volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), a Tomotherapy (TOMO), and an IMPT treatment plan was optimized on free-breathing treatment planning computed tomography (CT) images. For the photon treatment plans, doses of 66 Gy and 51 Gy, both as SIB in 30 fractions, were prescribed to the gross tumor volume (GTV) and to the planning target volume (PTV), respectively. For the proton plans, a dose prescription of 66 Gy(RBE) to the GTV and of 51 Gy(RBE) to the clinical target volume (CTV) was planned. For each SIB-treatment plan, doses to the targets and OARs were evaluated and statistically compared.RESULTS:All treatment techniques reached the prescribed doses to the GTV and CTV or PTV. The stomach and the bowel, in particular the duodenum and the small bowel, were found to be frequently exposed to doses exceeding 50 Gy, irrespective of the treatment technique. For doses below 50 Gy, the IMPT technique was statistically significant superior to both IMRT techniques regarding decreasing dose to the OARs, e.g. volume of the bowel receiving 15 Gy (V 15Gy) was reduced for IMPT compared to VMAT (p = 0.003) and TOMO (p < 0.001).CONCLUSION:With all photon and proton techniques investigated, the radiation dose to gastrointestinal OARs remained critical when treating patients with unresectable locally recurrent or advanced pancreatic cancer using a dose-escalated SIB approach.

To evaluate treatment outcomes for patients with localized prostate cancer who were treated with dose-escalated primary image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT). We retrospectively analyzed 88 consecutive patients treated using helical tomotherapy with daily megavoltage CTs (MVCT). Patients were prescribed daily doses of 1.8 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) and 2 Gy to the clinical target volume (CTV). Low- and favorable intermediate-risk patients received a minimum total dose of 72 Gy to the PTV and up to 80 Gy to the CTV. Unfavorable intermediate-risk and high-risk patients received a minimum total dose of 75.6 Gy to the PTV and up to 84 Gy to the CTV. We assessed freedom from biochemical relapse (FFBF), 5‑year biochemical recurrence-free survival (5-bRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (5-dMFS), and cancer-specific survival (5-CSS) as well as acute and late genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Among our cohort, 11.4% were low-risk, 50% intermediate-risk, and 38.6% high-risk patients according to the D’Amico criteria. Median follow-up was 66 months (range 8–83 months). FFBF was 100%, 97.7%, and 90.7%; 5‑bRFS was 100%, 92.8%, and 70.4%; 5‑dMFS was 100%, 92.7%, and 70.4%; and 5‑CSS was 100%, 97.4%, and 89.8% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients, respectively. Grades 2 and 3 toxicity occurred at the following rates: acute GU toxicity 39.8% and 1.1%, acute GI toxicity 12.5% and 0%, late GU toxicity 19.3% and 4.5%, and late GI toxicity 4.5% and 1.1% of patients, respectively. No toxicity >grade 3 was observed. Risk-adapted dose-escalated IGRT with helical tomotherapy of up to 84 Gy is a feasible and well-tolerable treatment scheme with promising oncological results.

Postoperative adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) in T3 and R1 prostate cancer as well as salvage radiation therapy (SRT) in case of postoperative biochemical failure (BF) are established treatments. Dose-intensified postoperative radiation therapy (RT) schemes have shown superior biochemical control accompanied by increased toxicity rates. In our study we evaluate a novel risk adapted dose-intensified postoperative RT scheme.

By the use of PSMA positron emission tomography (PET) detection of prostate cancer lesions with a high sensitivity and specificity combined with a favorable lesion to background contrast is feasible. Therefore, PSMA-PET is increasingly used for planning of radiotherapy treatment; however, any data on intermediate-term outcome is missing so far.

Current constraints aim to minimize the risk of radiation myelitis by the use of restrictive maximal spinal cord doses, commonly 50 Gy. However, several studies suggested that a dose–volume effect could exist. Based on these observations, we evaluated patients receiving potentially excessive doses to the spinal cord within minimal volumes.

To compare simultaneous integrated boost plans for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), helical tomotherapy (HT), and RapidArc therapy (RA) for patients with head and neck cancer.

AIM:The aim of the present study was to compare simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) plans using volumetric modulated arc therapy (RapidArc®; RA) or tomotherapy (TT) for bilateral (BL) and unilateral (UL) treatment in head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients.MATERIAL AND METHODS:Seventeen computed tomography scans (CTs) of 16 patients with SIB were replanned using TT and RA. We defined three groups: All, UL and BL, compared the dose distributions, homogeneity, conformity to planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk (OAR) and healthy tissue (HT) sparing. We evaluated a therapeutic-width index (TWI) based on PTV coverage and parotid gland (PG) sparing.RESULTS:PTV coverage for RA and TT was equivalent for all groups. UL irradiation resulted in similar doses to the HT for both techniques but TT achieved better sparing of spinal cord, larynx and contralateral PGs. TT provided better homogeneity. RA gave better conformity.CONCLUSION:Both methods achieved clinically acceptable results for UL and BL treatment, RA with better dose conformity to elective PTV, TT with better OAR sparing and homogeneity.

To compare highly sophisticated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) delivered by either helical tomotherapy (HT), RapidArc (RA), IMRT with protons (IMPT) in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

To compare MRI-guided brachytherapy (BT) and two different dose prescriptions for robotic radiosurgery (RRS) in locally advanced cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND:Establishing Total Body Irradiation (TBI) using Helical Tomotherapy (HT) to gain better control over dose distribution and homogeneity and to individually spare organs at risk. Because of their limited body length the technique seems especially eligible in juvenile patients.PATIENTS AND METHODS:The cohort consisted of 10 patients, 6 female and 4 male, aged 4 - 22 y with acute lymphoblastic- (ALL) or acute myeloic leukemia (AML). All patients presented with high risk disease features. Body length in treatment position ranged from 110-180 cm. Two Gy single dose was applied BID to a total dose of 12 Gy. Dose volume constraint for the PTV was 95% dose coverage for 95% of the volume. The lungs were spared to a mean dose of [less than or equal to] 10 Gy. Patients were positioned in a vac-loc bag in supine position with a 3-point head mask.RESULTS:Average D95 to the PTV was 11.7 Gy corresponding to a mean coverage of the PTV of 97.5%. Dmean for the lungs was 9.14 Gy. Grade 3-4 side effects were not observed.CONCLUSIONS:TBI using HT is feasible and well tolerated. A benefit could be demonstrated with regard to dose distribution and homogeneity and the selective dose-reduction to organs at risk.

Purpose: To evaluate intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in patients with cervical cancer in terms of coverage, conformity, and dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters correlated with recommendations from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided brachytherapy.Methods and Materials: Eleven patients with histologically proven cervical cancer underwent primary chemoradiation for the pelvic lymph nodes, the uterus, the cervix, and the parametric region, with a symmetric margin of 1 cm. The prescription was for 50.4Gy, with 1.8 Gy per fraction. The prescribed dose to the parametria was 2.12 Gy up to 59.36 Gy in 28 fractions as a simultaneous boost. For several reasons, the patients were unable to undergo brachytherapy. As an alternative, IMPT was planned with 5 fractions of 6 Gy to the cervix, including the macroscopic tumor with an MRI-guided target definition, with an isotropic margin of 5 mm for planning target volume (PTV) definition. Groupe-Europeen de Curietherapie and European society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO) criteria were used for DVH evaluation. Reference comparison plans were optimized for volumetric modulated rapid arc (VMAT) therapy with the RapidArc (RA).Results: The dose to the high-risk volume was calculated with alpha/beta = 10 with 89.6 Gy. For IMPT, the clinical target volume showed a mean dose of 38.2 +/- 5.0 Gy (35.0 +/- 1.8 Gy for RA). The D-98% was 31.9 +/- 2.6 Gy (RA: 30.8 +/- 1.0 Gy). With regard to the organs at risk, the 2Gy Equivalent Dose (EQD2) (alpha/beta = 3) to 2 cm(3) of the rectal wall, sigmoid wall, and bladder wall was 62.2 +/- 6.4 Gy, 57.8 +/- 6.1 Gy, and 80.6 +/- 8.7 Gy (for RA: 75.3 +/- 6.1 Gy, 66.9 +/- 6.9 Gy, and 89.0 +/- 7.2 Gy, respectively). For the IMPT boost plans in combination with external beam radiation therapy, all DVH parameters correlated with <5% risk for grades 2 to 4 late gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity.Conclusion: In patients who are not eligible for brachytherapy, IMPT as a boost technique additionally to external beam radiation therapy provides good target coverage and conformity and superior DVH parameters, compared with recommendations to MRI-guided brachytherapy. For selected patients, IMPT might be a valid alternative to brachytherapy and also superior to reference VMAT plans. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc.

To analyze setup deviations using daily megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) and to evaluate three MVCT frequency reducing protocols for gynecologic cancer patients treated with helical tomotherapy.

To evaluate the technique, dosimetry, dose-volume-histograms (DVHs) and acute toxicity for CyberKnife® boost irradiation instead of intra-cervical brachytherapy in patients with cervical cancer.

PURPOSE:To demonstrate the feasibility and safety of the simultaneous integrated boost technique for dose escalation in combination with helical tomotherapy in patients with cervical cancer.METHODS AND MATERIALS:Forty patients (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage IB1 pN1-IVA) underwent primary chemoradiation with helical tomotherapy. Before therapy, 29/40 patients underwent laparoscopic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. In 21%, 31%, and 3% of the patients, pelvic, pelvic and para-aortic, and skip metastases in the para-aortic region could be confirmed. All patients underwent radiation with 1.8-50.4 Gy to the tumor region and the pelvic (para-aortic) lymph node region (planning target volume-A), and a simultaneous boost with 2.12-59.36 Gy to the boost region (planning target volume-B). The boost region was defined using titan clips during laparoscopic staging. In all other patients, standardized borders for the planning target volume-B were defined. High-dose-rate brachytherapy was performed in 39/40 patients. The mean biologic effective dose to the macroscopic tumor ranged from 87.5 to 97.5 Gy. Chemotherapy consisted of weekly cisplatin 40 mg/m(2). Dose-volume histograms and acute gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and hematologic toxicity were evaluated.RESULTS:The mean treatment time was 45 days. The mean doses to the small bowel, rectum, and bladder were 28.5 ± 6.1 Gy, 47.9 ± 3.8 Gy, and 48 ± 3 Gy, respectively. Hematologic toxicity Grade 3 occurred in 20% of patients, diarrhea Grade 2 in 5%, and diarrhea Grade 3 in 2.5%. There was no Grade 3 genitourinary toxicity. All patients underwent curettage 3 months after chemoradiation, which confirmed complete pathologic response in 38/40 patients.CONCLUSIONS:The concept of simultaneous integrated boost for dose escalation in patients with cervical cancer is feasible, with a low rate of acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity. Whether dose escalation can be translated into improved outcome will be assessed after a longer follow-up time.

Purpose: To compare intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) delivered by helical tomotherapy (HT) with conventional IMRT for primary chemoradiation in cervical cancer patients.Methods and Materials: Twenty cervical cancer patients undergoing primary chemoradiation received radiation with HT; 10 patients underwent pelvic irradiation (PEL) and 10 extended-field irradiation (EXT). For treatment planning, the simultaneously integrated boost (SIB) concept was applied. Tumor, pelvic, with or without para-aortic lymph nodes were defined as planning target volume A (PTV-A) with a prescribed dose of 1.8/50.4 Gy (28 fractions). The SIB dose for the parametrium (PTV-B), was 2.12/59.36 Gy. The lower target constraints were 95% of the prescribed dose in 95% of the target volume, and the upper dose constraint was 107%. The irradiated small-bowel volumes were kept as low as possible. For every HT plan, a conventional IMRT plan was calculated and compared with regard to dose volume histogram, conformity index and conformity number, and homogeneity index.Results: Both techniques allowed excellent target volume coverage and sufficient SB sparing. Conformity index and conformity number results for both PTV-A and PTV-B, homogeneity index for PTV-B, and SB sparing for V45, V50, Dmax, and D1% were significantly better with HT. SB sparing was significantly better for conventional IMRT at low doses (V10).Conclusions: Both HT and conventional IMRT provide optimal treatment of cervical cancer patients. The HT technique was significantly favored with regard to target conformity, homogeneity, and SB sparing. Randomized trials are needed to assess the oncological outcome, toxicity, and clinical relevance of these differences. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc.

Purpose: To validate an unspoiled gradient-recalled echo pulse sequence with dual echo acquisition as a means to increase temperature sensitivity while monitoring intradiscal laser ablation therapy.Materials and Methods: Phantom experiments as well as in vitro thermal ablation simulations were performed in an open 1.0T magnetic resonance (MR) scanner. Three methods of noninvasive MR-thermometry based on the signal void decrease caused by T1-relaxation time increase (T1), the temperature-dependent proton resonance frequency (PRF) shift, and a combination of both methods with complex differences (CD) were compared. Temperature accuracy and reliability of temperature distribution were the main assessment criteria.Results: The optimum temperature sensitivity was found using CD in phantom experiments. During in vitro experiments the PRF showed the smallest margin of error (T1: +/- 1.64 degrees C, PRF: +/- 1.23 degrees C, CD: +/- 1.29 degrees C) and the best qualitative evaluation of temperature.Conclusion: Intradiscal temperature monitoring with an unspoiled dual-echo sequence is most accurate with PRF-thermometry in combination with the long echo time. Magnitude images with an initial short echo time permit high image detail of the heat-induced lesion.

To evaluate the acute toxicity of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique for dose escalation with helical tomotherapy(HT) in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate different methods of magnetic resonance thermometry (MRTh) for the monitoring of intradiscal laser ablation therapy in an open 1.0 Tesla magnetic resonance (MR) scanner.Material and methods: MRTh methods based on the two endogenous MR temperature indicators of spin-lattice relaxation time T1 and water proton resonance frequency (PRF) shift were optimised and compared in vitro. For the latter, we measured the effective spin-spin relaxation times T2* in intervertebral discs of volunteers. Then we compared four gradient echo-based imaging techniques to monitor laser ablations in human disc specimens. Criteria of assessment were outline of anatomic detail, immunity against needle artefacts, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and accuracy of the calculated temperature.Results: T2* decreased in an inverse and almost linear manner with the patients’ age (r = 0.9) from 70 to 30 ms (mean of 49 ms). The optimum image quality (anatomic details, needle artefacts, SNR) and temperature accuracy (±1.09°C for T1-based and ±1.11°C for PRF-based MRTh) was achieved with a non-spoiled gradient-echo sequence with an echo time of TE = 10 ms.Conclusion: Combination of anatomic and thermometric non-invasive monitoring of laser ablations in the lumbar spine is feasible. The temperature accuracy of the investigated T1- and PRF-based MRTh methods in vitro is high enough and promises to be reliable in vivo as well.

Regional hyperthermia is a non-invasive technique in which cancer tissue is exposed to moderately high temperatures of approximately 43-45 degrees C. The clinical delivery of hyperthermia requires control of the temperatures applied. This is typically done using catheters with temperature probes, which is an interventional procedure. Additionally, a catheter allows temperature monitoring only at discrete positions. These limitations can be overcome by magnetic resonance (MR) thermometry, which allows non-invasive mapping of the entire treatment area during hyperthermia application.Various temperature-sensitive MRI parameters exist and can be exploited for MR temperature mapping. The most popular parameters are proton resonance frequency shift (PRFS) (Delta phi corresponding to a frequency shift of 0.011 ppm, i.e. 0.7 Hz per degrees C at 1.5 Tesla), diffusion coefficient D (Delta D/D = 2-3% per degrees C), longitudinal relaxation time T(1) (Delta T(1)/T(1) approximate to 1% per degrees C), and equilibrium magnetisation M(0) (Delta M(0)/M(0) = 3% per degrees C). Additionally, MRI temperature mapping based on temperature-sensitive contrast media is applied. The different techniques of MRI thermometry were developed to serve different purposes.The PRFS method is the most sensitive proton imaging technique. A sensitivity of +/- 0.5 degrees C is possible in vivo but use of PRFS imaging remains challenging because of a high sensitivity to susceptibility effects, especially when field homogeneity is poor, e. g. on interventional MR scanners or because of distortions caused by an inserted applicator. Diffusion-based MR temperature mapping has an excellent correlation with actual temperatures in tissues. Correct MR temperature measurement without rescaling is achieved using the T(1) method, if the scaling factor is known. MR temperature imaging methods using exogenous temperature indicators are chemical shift and 3D phase sensitive imaging. TmDOTMA(-) appears to be the most promising lanthanide complex because it showed a temperature imaging accuracy of <0.3 degrees C.