Anthony E. Lujan

Intensity-modulated whole pelvic radiotherapy in women with gynecologic malignancies.

PURPOSE To describe our initial clinical experience with intensity-modulated whole pelvic radiotherapy (IM-WPRT) in women with gynecologic malignancies. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between February 2000 and August 2001, 40 gynecology patients underwent IM-WPRT. After fabrication of customized immobilization, all patients underwent contrast-enhanced CT, and a clinical target volume was contoured consisting of the upper vagina, parametria, uterus (if present), and presacral and pelvic lymph node regions. The clinical target volume was expanded by 1 cm to create a planning target volume (PTV). Using commercially available software, 7- or 9-field, 6-MV, coplanar IM-WPRT plans were generated for all patients. The worst acute gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity during treatment was scored on a 4-point scale: 0, none; 1, mild, no medications required; 2, moderate, medications required; and 3, severe, treatment breaks or cessation, hospitalization. As a comparison, acute toxicities in 35 previously treated conventional WPRT patients were analyzed. No significant differences were noted in the clinicopathologic and treatment factors between the two groups. RESULTS IM-WPRT plans provided excellent PTV coverage, with considerable sparing of the surrounding normal tissues. On average, 98.1% of the PTV received the prescription dose. The average percentage of the PTV receiving 110% and 115% of the prescription dose was 9.8% and 0.2%, respectively. IM-WPRT was well tolerated, with no patient developing Grade 3 toxicity. Grade 2 acute gastrointestinal toxicity was less common in the IM-WPRT group (60 vs. 91%, p = 0.002) than in the conventional WPRT group. Moreover, the percentage of IM-WPRT and WPRT patients requiring no or only infrequent antidiarrheal medications was 75% and 34%, respectively (p = 0.001). Although less Grade 2 genitourinary toxicity was seen in the IM-WPRT group (10% vs. 20%), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.22). CONCLUSION IM-WPRT is a promising approach in gynecology patients. IMRT planning resulted in excellent PTV coverage, with considerable sparing of normal tissues. Treatment was well tolerated and associated with less acute gastrointestinal sequelae than conventional WPRT. Longer follow-up and more patients are needed, however, to evaluate the full merits of this novel approach.

Impact of intensity-modulated radiotherapy on acute hematologic toxicity in women with gynecologic malignancies

PURPOSE To evaluate the impact of intensity-modulated whole pelvic radiotherapy (IM-WPRT) on acute hematologic toxicity (HT) in gynecology patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS Between February 2000 and June 2001, 36 patients (24 cervix, 12 uterus) received IM-WPRT. The target consisted of the upper vagina, parametria, uterus, and presacral and pelvic lymph nodes. Using commercially available software, seven or nine coplanar IM-WPRT plans were generated. The planning goals were to irradiate the target while minimizing the dose to the small bowel, bladder, and rectum. Pelvic bone marrow (BM) was not a constraint in the planning process. The variables analyzed included white blood count (WBC), absolute neutrophil count (ANC), platelets, and hemoglobin (Hgb) obtained before and weekly during RT. As a comparison, the HT in 88 patients (44 cervix, 44 uterus) treated to the same target volume and total dose (45 Gy) with conventional four-field WPRT was analyzed. In addition, the medullary spaces within the pelvic bones in 10 women were contoured and the average dose-volume histograms representing the pelvic BM were compared between the two groups. RESULTS IM-WPRT patients had a lower median age (p = 0.008), higher percentage of squamous histologic features (p = 0.04), and were more likely to receive chemotherapy (CTX) (p = 0.02) than were the WPRT patients. No differences were seen in the baseline WBC, ANC, platelet, or Hgb levels between the two groups. Grade 2 or greater WBC, ANC, and Hgb toxicity was seen in 19.4%, 9.1%, and 8.6% of the IM-WPRT patients, respectively. Comparable rates were seen in the WPRT patients (WBC 21.6%, p = 0.79; ANC 8.3%, p = 0.91; Hgb 9.2%, p = 0.94). No Grade 2 or greater platelet toxicity was seen in either group. Significant HT was infrequent in women treated with RT alone and was comparable in the two groups. In contrast, WPRT + CTX patients experienced more Grade 2 or greater WBC toxicity (60% vs. 31.2%, p = 0.08) and developed lower median WBC (2.8 vs. 3.6 microg/dL, p = 0.05) and ANC (1874 vs. 2669, p = 0.04) nadirs than did IM-WPRT + CTX patients. Moreover, CTX was held more often in the WPRT group secondary to HT (40% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.06). Although Grade 2 or greater ANC (23.5% vs. 15.3%) and Hgb (35.2% vs. 15.2%) toxicity were lower in the IM-WPRT + CTX group, these differences did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.58 and p = 0.22, respectively). The comparison of pelvic BM dose-volume histograms revealed that IM-WPRT planning resulted in significantly less BM volume being irradiated compared with WPRT planning, particularly within the iliac crests. CONCLUSION IM-WPRT has a favorable impact on the risk of acute HT in gynecology patients, particularly in those receiving CTX. Future work is needed to optimize BM sparing in these patients to reduce the risk of significant HT further.

Intensity-modulated radiotherapy as a means of reducing dose to bone marrow in gynecologic patients receiving whole pelvic radiotherapy

PURPOSE To evaluate intensity-modulated whole pelvis radiotherapy (IM-WPRT) (with bone marrow [BM] as a planning constraint) as a means to reduce the volume of pelvic BM irradiated. METHODS AND MATERIALS Ten women with cervical or endometrial cancer previously treated using IM-WPRT were selected for this analysis. Using the treatment planning CT scan, the clinical target volume was defined to encompass the gross tumor, parametrial tissues, uterus (if present), and regional lymph nodes. The clinical target volume was expanded by a 1-cm margin to form the planning target volume (PTV). The bladder, rectum, small bowel, and pelvic BM were delineated in each patient. Three plans were created for each patient: a standard four-field WPRT plan, an IM-WPRT treatment plan designed to conform the dose to the PTV while minimizing dose to the normal tissues (excluding BM), and a BM-sparing (BMS) IM-WPRT plan that included the BM as an additional treatment planning constraint. Dose-volume histograms for the PTV, small bowel, and BM were compared for each patient. RESULTS For each of the 10 patients, BMS IM-WPRT treatment plans demonstrated a significant reduction of the volume of BM receiving >40% (18 Gy) of the prescription dose (45 Gy) compared with both IM-WPRT and four-field treatment. On average, BMS IM-WPRT resulted in only 60% of the BM volume irradiated to >50% of the dose compared with 87.4% (p <0.001) of the BM volume in a four-field plan and 75.7% (p < 0.003) of the volume in an IM-WPRT plan. Furthermore, the BMS IM-WPRT plans resulted in significant sparing of all other normal tissues that was comparable to the original IM-WPRT. In all 10 cases, the BMS IM-WPRT treatment plan did not result in any significant differences in the PTV and small bowel dose-volume histograms compared with the IM-WPRT treatment plans. CONCLUSION BMS IM-WPRT significantly reduces the volume of pelvic BM irradiated compared with conventional WPRT. In addition, BMS IM-WPRT did not compromise the improvements previously seen in IM-WPRT treatment plans that did not consider BM. Clinical studies are necessary to assess the significance of BMS IM-WPRT in reducing hematologic toxicity.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy in gynecologic malignancies

Radiation therapy occupies an important role in the treatment of gynecologic malignancies. Unfortunately, traditional approaches result in the irradiation of large volumes of normal tissues exposing patients to many toxicities and precluding dose escalation in select patients. A novel approach to the planning and delivery of radiation therapy, known as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), has been introduced. Unlike conventional approaches, IMRT conforms the prescription dose to the shape of the target in three dimensions, thus sparing the surrounding normal tissues. Multiple studies have demonstrated the clear superiority of IMRT planning in these patients in terms of normal tissue sparing. Promising clinical results have also been published, suggesting that IMRT reduces the incidence of acute and chronic toxicity in these women. Ongoing studies are focusing on tumor control and patient outcome. Although further work is needed, these results suggest that IMRT may represent a major advancement in the planning and delivery of radiation therapy in patients with gynecologic malignancies.

Comparison of dose calculated by an intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning system and an independent monitor unit verification program

A comparison of isocenter dose calculated by a commercial intensity modulated radiation therapy treatment planning system and independent monitor unit verification calculation (MUVC) software was made. The percent disparity between the treatment plan and MUVC doses were calculated for 507 treatments (head and neck, prostate, abdomen, female pelvis, rectum and anus, and miscellaneous) from 303 patients. The MUVC calculated dose was, on average, 1.4% higher than the treatment planning dose, with a 1.2% standard deviation. The distribution of the disparities appeared to be Gaussian in shape with some variation by treatment site. Based on our analysis, disparities outside the range of ±3% about the mean value should be checked and resolved prior to treatment delivery. PACS number(s): 87.53.–j, 87.66.–a