J.E. Scaife

Exploiting biological and physical determinants of radiotherapy toxicity to individualize treatment

The recent advances in radiation delivery can improve tumour control probability (TCP) and reduce treatment-related toxicity. The use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in particular can reduce normal tissue toxicity, an objective in its own right, and can allow safe dose escalation in selected cases. Ideally, IMRT should be combined with image guidance to verify the position of the target, since patients, target and organs at risk can move day to day. Daily image guidance scans can be used to identify the position of normal tissue structures and potentially to compute the daily delivered dose. Fundamentally, it is still the tolerance of the normal tissues that limits radiotherapy (RT) dose and therefore tumour control. However, the dose–response relationships for both tumour and normal tissues are relatively steep, meaning that small dose differences can translate into clinically relevant improvements. Differences exist between individuals in the severity of toxicity experienced for a given dose of RT. Some of this difference may be the result of differences between the planned dose and the accumulated dose (DA). However, some may be owing to intrinsic differences in radiosensitivity of the normal tissues between individuals. This field has been developing rapidly, with the demonstration of definite associations between genetic polymorphisms and variation in toxicity recently described. It might be possible to identify more resistant patients who would be suitable for dose escalation, as well as more sensitive patients for whom toxicity could be reduced or avoided. Daily differences in delivered dose have been investigated within the VoxTox research programme, using the rectum as an example organ at risk. In patients with prostate cancer receiving curative RT, considerable daily variation in rectal position and dose can be demonstrated, although the median position matches the planning scan well. Overall, in 10 patients, the mean difference between planned and accumulated rectal equivalent uniform doses was −2.7 Gy (5%), and a dose reduction was seen in 7 of the 10 cases. If dose escalation was performed to take rectal dose back to the planned level, this should increase the mean TCP (as biochemical progression-free survival) by 5%. Combining radiogenomics with individual estimates of DA might identify almost half of patients undergoing radical RT who might benefit from either dose escalation, suggesting improved tumour cure or reduced toxicity or both.

Accumulated dose to the rectum, measured using dose–volume histograms and dose-surface maps, is different from planned dose in all patients treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer

Objective: We sought to calculate accumulated dose (DA) to the rectum in patients treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer. We were particularly interested in whether dose–surface maps (DSMs) provide additional information to dose–volume histograms (DVHs). Methods: Manual rectal contours were obtained for kilovoltage and daily megavoltage CT scans for 10 participants from the VoxTox study (380 scans). Daily delivered dose recalculation was performed using a ray-tracing algorithm. Delivered DVHs were summated to create accumulated DVHs. The rectum was considered as a cylinder, cut and unfolded to produce daily delivered DSMs; these were summated to produce accumulated DSMs. Results: Accumulated dose-volumes were different from planned in all participants. For one participant, all DA levels were higher and all volumes were larger than planned. For four participants, all DA levels were lower and all volumes were smaller than planned. For each of these four participants, ≥1% of pixels on the accumulated DSM received ≥5 Gy more than had been planned. Conclusion: Differences between accumulated and planned dose-volumes were seen in all participants. DSMs were able to identify differences between DA and planned dose that could not be appreciated from the DVHs. Further work is needed to extract the dose data embedded in the DSMs. These will be correlated with toxicity as part of the VoxTox Programme. Advances in knowledge: DSMs are able to identify differences between DA and planned dose that cannot be appreciated from DVHs alone and should be incorporated into future studies investigating links between DA and toxicity.

Random variation in rectal position during radiotherapy for prostate cancer is two to three times greater than that predicted from prostate motion

Objective: Radiotherapy for prostate cancer does not explicitly take into account daily variation in the position of the rectum. It is important to accurately assess accumulated dose (DA) to the rectum in order to understand the relationship between dose and toxicity. The primary objective of this work was to quantify systematic (Σ) and random (σ) variation in the position of the rectum during a course of prostate radiotherapy. Methods: The rectum was manually outlined on the kilo-voltage planning scan and 37 daily mega-voltage image guidance scans for 10 participants recruited to the VoxTox study. The femoral heads were used to produce a fixed point to which all rectal contours were referenced. Results: Σ [standard deviation (SD) of means] between planning and treatment was 4.2 mm in the anteroposterior (AP) direction and 1.3 mm left–right (LR). σ (root mean square of SDs) was 5.2 mm AP and 2.7 mm LR. Superior–inferior variation was less than one slice above and below the planning position. Conclusion: Our results for Σ are in line with published data for prostate motion. σ, however, was approximately twice as great as that seen for prostate motion. This suggests that DA may differ from planned dose in some patients treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Advances in knowledge: This work is the first to use daily imaging to quantify Σ and σ of the rectum in prostate cancer. σ was found to be greater than published data, providing strong rationale for further investigation of individual DA.

Recalculation of dose for each fraction of treatment on TomoTherapy.

Objective: The VoxTox study, linking delivered dose to toxicity requires recalculation of typically 20–37 fractions per patient, for nearly 2000 patients. This requires a non-interactive interface permitting batch calculation with multiple computers. Methods: Data are extracted from the TomoTherapy® archive and processed using the computational task-management system GANGA. Doses are calculated for each fraction of radiotherapy using the daily megavoltage (MV) CT images. The calculated dose cube is saved as a digital imaging and communications in medicine RTDOSE object, which can then be read by utilities that calculate dose–volume histograms or dose surface maps. The rectum is delineated on daily MV images using an implementation of the Chan–Vese algorithm. Results: On a cluster of up to 117 central processing units, dose cubes for all fractions of 151 patients took 12 days to calculate. Outlining the rectum on all slices and fractions on 151 patients took 7 h. We also present results of the Hounsfield unit (HU) calibration of TomoTherapy MV images, measured over an 8-year period, showing that the HU calibration has become less variable over time, with no large changes observed after 2011. Conclusion: We have developed a system for automatic dose recalculation of TomoTherapy dose distributions. This does not tie up the clinically needed planning system but can be run on a cluster of independent machines, enabling recalculation of delivered dose without user intervention. Advances in knowledge: The use of a task management system for automation of dose calculation and outlining enables work to be scaled up to the level required for large studies.

Prophylactic radiotherapy against heterotopic ossification following internal fixation of acetabular fractures: a comparative estimate of risk

OBJECTIVE Radiotherapy (RT) is effective in preventing heterotopic ossification (HO) around acetabular fractures requiring surgical reconstruction. We audited outcomes and estimated risks from RT prophylaxis, and alternatives of indometacin or no prophylaxis. METHODS 34 patients underwent reconstruction of acetabular fractures through a posterior approach, followed by a 8-Gy single fraction. The mean age was 44 years. The mean time from surgery to RT was 1.1 days. The major RT risk is radiation-induced fatal cancer. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) method was used to estimate risk, and compared with a method (Trott and Kemprad) specifically for estimating RT risk for benign disease. These were compared with risks associated with indometacin and no prophylaxis. RESULTS 28 patients (82%) developed no HO; 6 developed Brooker Class I; and none developed Class II-IV HO. The ICRP method suggests a risk of fatal cancer in the range of 1 in 1000 to 1 in 10,000; the Trott and Kemprad method suggests 1 in 3000. For younger patients, this may rise to 1 in 2000; and for elderly patients, it may fall to 1 in 6000. The risk of death from gastric bleeding or perforation from indometacin is 1 in 180 to 1 in 900 in older patients. Without prophylaxis risk of death from reoperation to remove HO is 1 in 4000 to 1 in 30,000. CONCLUSION These results are encouraging, consistent with much larger series and endorse our multidisciplinary management. Risk estimates can be used in discussion with patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE The risk from RT prophylaxis is small, it is safer than indometacin and substantially overlaps with the range for no prophylaxis.

Delivered dose can be a better predictor of rectal toxicity than planned dose in prostate radiotherapy

Background and purpose For the first time, delivered dose to the rectum has been calculated and accumulated throughout the course of prostate radiotherapy using megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) image guidance scans. Dosimetric parameters were linked with toxicity to test the hypothesis that delivered dose is a stronger predictor of toxicity than planned dose. Material and methods Dose–surface maps (DSMs) of the rectal wall were automatically generated from daily MVCT scans for 109 patients within the VoxTox research programme. Accumulated-DSMs, representing total delivered dose, and planned-DSMs, from planning CT data, were parametrised using Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD) and ‘DSM dose-width’, the lateral dimension of an ellipse fitted to a discrete isodose cluster. Associations with 6 toxicity endpoints were assessed using receiver operator characteristic curve analysis. Results For rectal bleeding, the area under the curve (AUC) was greater for accumulated dose than planned dose for DSM dose-widths up to 70 Gy. Accumulated 65 Gy DSM dose-width produced the strongest spatial correlation (AUC 0.664), while accumulated EUD generated the largest AUC overall (0.682). For proctitis, accumulated EUD was the only reportable predictor (AUC 0.673). Accumulated EUD was systematically lower than planned EUD. Conclusions Dosimetric parameters extracted from accumulated DSMs have demonstrated stronger correlations with rectal bleeding and proctitis, than planned DSMs.

Image guidance protocols: balancing imaging parameters against scan time

OBJECTIVE Optimisation of imaging protocols is essential to maximise the use of image-guided radiotherapy. This article evaluates the time for daily online imaging with TomoTherapy® (Accuray®, Sunnyvale, CA), separating mechanical scan acquisition from radiographer-led image matching, to estimate the time required for a clinical research study (VoxTox). METHODS Over 5 years, 18 533 treatments were recorded for 3 tumour sites of interest (prostate, head and neck and central nervous system). Data were collected for scan length, number of CT slices, slice thickness, scan acquisition time and image matching time. RESULTS The proportion of coarse thickness scans increased over time, with a move of making coarse scans as the default. There was a strong correlation between scan time and scan length. Scan acquisition requires 40 s of processing time. For coarse scans, each additional centimetre requires 8 s for acquisition. Image matching takes approximately 1.5 times as long, so each additional centimetre needs 20 s extra in total. Modest changes to the imaging protocol have minimal impact over the course of the day. CONCLUSION This work quantified the effect of changes to clinical protocols required for research. The results have been found to be reassuring in the busy National Institutes of Health department. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE This novel method of data collection and analysis provides evidence of the minimal impact of research on clinical turnover. Whilst the data relate specifically to TomoTherapy, some aspects may apply to other platforms in the future.

Applying physical science techniques and CERN technology to an unsolved problem in radiation treatment for cancer: the multidisciplinary ‘VoxTox’ research programme

The VoxTox research programme has applied expertise from the physical sciences to the problem of radiotherapy toxicity, bringing together expertise from engineering, mathematics, high energy physics (including the Large Hadron Collider), medical physics and radiation oncology. In our initial cohort of 109 men treated with curative radiotherapy for prostate cancer, daily image guidance computed tomography (CT) scans have been used to calculate delivered dose to the rectum, as distinct from planned dose, using an automated approach. Clinical toxicity data have been collected, allowing us to address the hypothesis that delivered dose provides a better predictor of toxicity than planned dose.

EP-1894: Evaluation of a novel method for automatic segmentation of rectum on daily MVCT prostate images

ESTRO 35 2016 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Conclusion: Our proposed 3D automatic contouring method achieves an accuracy of >0.8 and sensitivity of >0.7, which is comparable to the performance of manual contours clinically. We are currently working on a fully automated setup (parameters selection) of the method which is learned from a set of 3700 manually contoured treatment scans.

Prophylactic Radiotherapy against Heterotopic Ossification around Acetabular Fractures requiring Surgical Reconstruction

Madam d We are delighted to see publication of the Royal College of Radiologists’ report on the use of radiotherapy in benign diseases [1]; it will certainly be helpful in advising patients and clinicians [2]. Evidence suggests that radiotherapy is used less for benign disease in the UK than in some other countries [3] and we agree with Taylor et al. [2] that radiotherapy has a bigger role to play. The use of radiotherapy to prevent heterotopic ossification after elective hip arthroplasty in high risk situations is well described in the literature [1,3]. For several years we have been using radiotherapy to prevent heterotopic ossification around acute acetabular fractures requiring surgical reconstruction [4]. As road traffic accidents are the most common cause, this has become more frequent since the hospital became a major trauma centre. The risk of severe heterotopic ossification (Brooker class III and IV) is 12% in patients receiving no prophylaxis [5]. In 34 patients managed with our multidisciplinary approach delivering a single fraction of 8 Gy the day after reconstruction, we have no cases where severe heterotopic ossification developed [4]. We know of no other UK centre using radiotherapy in this way, although one reported using radiotherapy for heterotopic ossification prophylaxis after repair of elbow fractures [4]. We estimated the risks of death from malignancy secondary to radiotherapy, death from complications of indometacin prophylaxis (which is probably less effective than radiotherapy) and death at surgery to resect severe heterotopic ossification developing without prophylaxis [4]. The estimated risks of radiotherapy are similar to those from reoperation to remove heterotopic ossification, and patients avoid the morbidity of heterotopic ossification; indometacin death risk is much higher. Naturally, the timing of such events is very different [4].