Comparison of Online-Onboard Adaptive Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy or Volumetric-Modulated Arc Radiotherapy With Image-Guided Radiotherapy for Patients With Gynecologic Tumors in Dependence on Fractionation and the Planning Target Volume Margin.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 03 2023
01 03 2023
Historique:
entrez:
22
3
2023
pubmed:
23
3
2023
medline:
25
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced cervical carcinomas or recurrences after surgery undergoing radiochemotherapy whose tumor is unsuited for a brachytherapy boost need high-dose percutaneous radiotherapy with small margins to compensate for clinical target volume deformations and set-up errors. Cone-beam computed tomography-based online adaptive radiotherapy (ART) has the potential to reduce planning target volume (PTV) margins below 5 mm for these tumors. To compare online ART technologies with image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for gynecologic tumors. This comparative effectiveness study comprised all 7 consecutive patients with gynecologic tumors who were treated with ART with artificial intelligence segmentation from January to May 2022 at the West German Cancer Center. All adapted treatment plans were reviewed for the new scenario of organs at risk and target volume. Dose distributions of adapted and scheduled plans optimized on the initial planning computed tomography scan were compared. Online ART for gynecologic tumors. Target dose coverage with ART compared with IGRT for PTV margins of 5 mm or less in terms of the generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) without increasing the gEUD for the organs at risk (bladder and rectum). The first 10 treatment series among 7 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.7 [16.5] years) with gynecologic tumors from a prospective observational trial performed with ART were compared with IGRT. For a clinical PTV margin of 5 mm, IGRT was associated with a median gEUD decrease in the interfractional clinical target volume of -1.5% (90% CI, -31.8% to 2.9%) for all fractions in comparison with the planned dose distribution. Online ART was associated with a decrease of -0.02% (90% CI, -3.2% to 1.5%), which was less than the decrease with IGRT (P < .001). This was not associated with an increase in the gEUD for the bladder or rectum. For a PTV margin of 0 mm, the median gEUD deviation with IGRT was -13.1% (90% CI, -47.9% to 1.6%) compared with 0.1% (90% CI, -2.3% to 6.6%) with ART (P < .001). The benefit associated with ART was larger for a PTV margin of 0 mm than of 5 mm (P = .004) due to spreading of the cold spot at the clinical target volume margin from fraction to fraction with a median SD of 2.4 cm (90% CI, 1.9-3.4 cm) for all patients. This study suggests that ART is associated with an improvement in the percentage deviation of gEUD for the interfractional clinical target volume compared with IGRT. As the gain of ART depends on fractionation and PTV margin, a strategy is proposed here to switch from IGRT to ART, if the delivered gEUD distribution becomes unfavorable in comparison with the expected distribution during the course of treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36947038
pii: 2802738
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.4066
pmc: PMC10034575
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e234066Références
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1044-52
pubmed: 19793072
Pathol Oncol Res. 2021 Mar 24;27:608446
pubmed: 34257570
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021 Sep;31(9):1278-1286
pubmed: 33632703
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Aug;23(8):e13702
pubmed: 35801266
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020 Mar 1;106(3):464-471
pubmed: 31697990
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Nov 20;37(33):3124-3131
pubmed: 31449470
Radiat Oncol. 2010 Oct 15;5:94
pubmed: 20950469
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
Front Oncol. 2022 May 18;12:854349
pubmed: 35664789
Radiother Oncol. 2021 Jul;160:273-284
pubmed: 34019918
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2019 Sep 1;49(9):856-861
pubmed: 31112278
Radiother Oncol. 2021 Jun;159:146-154
pubmed: 33775715
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2020 Dec 18;17:1-7
pubmed: 33898770
Tumori. 2005 Jul-Aug;91(4):295-301
pubmed: 16277092
Lancet Oncol. 2021 Apr;22(4):538-547
pubmed: 33794207
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021 Jan;22(1):226-241
pubmed: 33377614
Ann Oncol. 1999 Jul;10(7):803-7
pubmed: 10470427
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Jun;16(3):310-315
pubmed: 27402633
Strahlenther Onkol. 2021 Jun;197(6):474-486
pubmed: 32970164