Renee Korol

Vertebral Compression Fracture (VCF) After Spine Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT): Analysis of Predictive Factors

PURPOSE Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are increasingly observed after spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). The aim of this study was to determine the risk of VCF after spine SBRT and identify clinical and dosimetric factors predictive for VCF. The analysis incorporated the recently described Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) criteria. METHODS AND MATERIALS The primary endpoint of this study was the development of a de novo VCF (ie, new endplate fracture or collapse deformity) or fracture progression based on an existing fracture at the site of treatment after SBRT. We retrospectively scored 167 spinal segments in 90 patients treated with spine SBRT according to each of the 6 SINS criteria. We also evaluated the presence of paraspinal extension, prior radiation, various dosimetric parameters including dose per fraction (≥20 Gy vs <20 Gy), age, and histology. RESULTS The median follow-up was 7.4 months. We identified 19 fractures (11%): 12 de novo fractures (63%) and 7 cases of fracture progression (37%). The mean time to fracture after SBRT was 3.3 months (range, 0.5-21.6 months). The 1-year fracture-free probability was 87.3%. Multivariate analysis confirmed that alignment (P=.0003), lytic lesions (P=.007), lung (P=.03) and hepatocellular (P<.0001) primary histologies, and dose per fraction of 20 Gy or greater (P=.004) were significant predictors of VCF. CONCLUSIONS The presence of kyphotic/scoliotic deformity and the presence of lytic tumor were the only predictive factors of VCF based on the original 6 SINS criteria. We also report that patients with lung and hepatocellular tumors and treatment with SBRT of 20 Gy or greater in a single fraction are at a higher risk of VCF.

Spine Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Utilizing Cone-Beam CT Image-Guidance With a Robotic Couch: Intrafraction Motion Analysis Accounting for all Six Degrees of Freedom

PURPOSE To evaluate the residual setup error and intrafraction motion following kilovoltage cone-beam CT (CBCT) image guidance, for immobilized spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) patients, with positioning corrected for in all six degrees of freedom. METHODS AND MATERIALS Analysis is based on 42 consecutive patients (48 thoracic and/or lumbar metastases) treated with a total of 106 fractions and 307 image registrations. Following initial setup, a CBCT was acquired for patient alignment and a pretreatment CBCT taken to verify shifts and determine the residual setup error, followed by a midtreatment and posttreatment CBCT image. For 13 single-fraction SBRT patients, two midtreatment CBCT images were obtained. Initially, a 1.5-mm and 1° tolerance was used to reposition the patient following couch shifts which was subsequently reduced to 1 mm and 1° degree after the first 10 patients. RESULTS Small positioning errors after the initial CBCT setup were observed, with 90% occurring within 1 mm and 97% within 1°. In analyzing the impact of the time interval for verification imaging (10 ± 3 min) and subsequent image acquisitions (17 ± 4 min), the residual setup error was not significantly different (p > 0.05). A significant difference (p = 0.04) in the average three-dimensional intrafraction positional deviations favoring a more strict tolerance in translation (1 mm vs. 1.5 mm) was observed. The absolute intrafraction motion averaged over all patients and all directions along x, y, and z axis (± SD) were 0.7 ± 0.5 mm and 0.5 ± 0.4 mm for the 1.5 mm and 1 mm tolerance, respectively. Based on a 1-mm and 1° correction threshold, the target was localized to within 1.2 mm and 0.9° with 95% confidence. CONCLUSION Near-rigid body immobilization, intrafraction CBCT imaging approximately every 15-20 min, and strict repositioning thresholds in six degrees of freedom yields minimal intrafraction motion allowing for safe spine SBRT delivery.

Spine stereotactic body radiotherapy for renal cell cancer spinal metastases: analysis of outcomes and risk of vertebral compression fracture

OBJECT The aim of this study was to evaluate local control (LC) and the risk of vertebral compression fracture (VCF) after stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with renal cell cancer spinal metastases. METHODS Prospectively collected data on 71 spinal segments treated with SBRT in 37 patients were reviewed. The median follow-up was 12.3 months (range 1.2-55.4 months). The LC rate was assessed based on each spinal segment treated and overall survival (OS) according to each patient treated. Sixty of 71 segments (85%) were radiation naive, 11 of 71 (15%) were previously irradiated, and 10 of 71 (14%) were treated with postoperative SBRT. The median SBRT total dose and number of fractions were 24 Gy and 2, respectively. The VCF analysis also included evaluation of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score criteria. RESULTS The 1-year OS and LC rates were 64% and 83%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified oligometastatic disease (13 of 37 patients) as a positive prognostic factor (p = 0.018) for OS. Of 61 non-postoperative spinal segments treated, 10 (16%) developed VCFs; 3 of 10 were de novo VCFs and 7 of 10 occurred as progression of an existing VCF. The 1-year VCF-free probability rate was 82%. Multivariate analysis identified single-fraction SBRT and baseline VCF as significant predictors of SBRT-induced VCF (p = 0.028 and p = 0.012, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Spine SBRT yields high rates of local tumor control in patients with renal cell cancer. Baseline VCF and 18-24 Gy delivered in a single fraction were predictive of further collapse. Patients with oligometastatic disease may benefit most from such aggressive local therapy, given the prolonged survival observed.

Pain Flare Is a Common Adverse Event in Steroid-Naïve Patients After Spine Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: A Prospective Clinical Trial

PURPOSE To determine the incidence of pain flare after spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in steroid-naïve patients and identify predictive factors. METHODS AND MATERIALS Forty-one patients were treated with spine SBRT between February 2010 and April 2012. All patients had their pain assessed at baseline, during, and for 10 days after SBRT using the Brief Pain Inventory. All pain medications were recorded daily and narcotics converted to an oral morphine equivalent dose. Pain flare was defined as a 2-point increase in worst pain score as compared with baseline with no decrease in analgesic intake, a 25% increase in analgesic intake as compared with baseline with no decrease in worst pain score, or if corticosteroids were initiated at any point during or after SBRT because of pain. RESULTS The median age and Karnofsky performance status were 57.5 years (range, 27-80 years) and 80 (range, 50-100), respectively. Eighteen patients were treated with 20-24 Gy in a single fraction, whereas 23 patients were treated with 24-35 Gy in 2-5 fractions. Pain flare was observed in 68.3% of patients (28 of 41), most commonly on day 1 after SBRT (29%, 8 of 28). Multivariate analysis identified a higher Karnofsky performance status (P=.02) and cervical (P=.049) or lumbar (P=.02) locations as significant predictors of pain flare. In those rescued with dexamethasone, a significant decrease in pain scores over time was subsequently observed (P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS Pain flare is a common adverse event after spine SBRT and occurs most commonly the day after treatment completion. Patients should be appropriately consented for this adverse event.

Three-dimensional image-based planning for cervix brachytherapy with bilateral hip prostheses: a solution using MVCT with helical tomotherapy.

PURPOSE We present a method of three-dimensional image-based planning for cervix high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for patients with bilateral metal hip prostheses using megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) imaging. METHODS AND MATERIALS Two patients with bilateral metal hip prostheses were treated with our standard HDR brachytherapy fractionation and critical structure tolerance limits for cervical cancer. MVCT imaging was used for treatment planning because of artifacts present in kilovoltage computed tomography (kVCT), which did not allow visualization of the organs of interest. RESULTS The MVCT images provided adequate contrast to allow the contouring of organs at risk and the digitization of HDR applicators. HDR brachytherapy treatment planning was successfully accomplished based on MVCT images for 2 patients with bilateral metal hip prostheses. CONCLUSIONS Using MVCT imaging eliminated streak artifacts, which improved the image quality for treatment planning. MVCT offers an option for three-dimensional planning for cervix brachytherapy in patients with bilateral hip prostheses.

Poster — Thur Eve — 16: 4DCT simulation with synchronized contrast injection of liver SBRT patients

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has recently emerged as a valid option for treating liver metastases. SBRT delivers highly conformai dose over a small number of fractions. As such it is particularly sensitive to the accuracy of target volume delineation by the radiation oncologist. However, contouring liver metastases remains challenging for the following reasons. First, the liver usually undergoes significant motion due to respiration. Second, liver metastases are often nearly indistinguishable from the surrounding tissue when using computed tomography (CT) for imaging making it difficult to identify and delineate them. Both problems can be overcome by using four dimensional CT (4DCT) synchronized with intravenous contrast injection. We describe a novel CT simulation process which involves two 4DCT scans. The first scan captures the tumor and immediately surrounding tissue which in turn reduces the 4DCT scan time so that it can be optimally timed with intravenous contrast injection. The second 4DCT scan covers a larger volume and is used as the primary CT dataset for dose calculation, as well as patient setup verification on the treatment unit. The combination of two 4DCT scans, short and long, allows visualization of the liver metastases over all phases of breathing cycle while simultaneously acquiring long enough 4DCT dataset suitable for planning and patient setup verification.

Once-weekly versus every-other-day stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with prostate cancer (PATRIOT): A phase 2 randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) regimens differ in time, dose, and fractionation. We completed a multicentre, randomized phase II study to investigate the impact of overall treatment time on quality of life (QOL). MATERIAL AND METHODS Men with low and intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to 40 Gy in 5 fractions delivered once per week (QW) vs. every other day (EOD). QOL was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite. The primary endpoint was the proportion with a minimum clinically important change (MCIC) in bowel QOL during the acute (≤12 week) period, and analysis was by intention-to-treat. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01423474. RESULTS 152 men from 3 centres were randomized with median follow-up of 47 months. Patients treated QW had superior acute bowel QOL with 47/69 (68%) reporting a MCIC compared to 63/70 (90%) treated EOD (p = 0.002). Fewer patients treated QW reported moderate-severe problems with bowel QOL during the acute period compared with EOD (14/70 [20%] vs. 40/70 [57%], p < 0.001). Acute urinary QOL was also better in the QW arm, with 52/67 (78%) vs 65/69 (94%) experiencing a MCIC (p = 0.006). There were no significant differences in late urinary or bowel QOL at 2 years or last follow-up. CONCLUSION Prostate SBRT delivered QW improved acute bowel and urinary QOL compared to EOD. Patients should be counselled regarding the potential for reduced short-term toxicity and improved QOL with QW prostate SBRT.

Implementation of a volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment planning solution for kidney and adrenal stereotactic body radiation therapy

To develop a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment planning solution in the treatment of primary renal cell carcinoma and oligometastatic adrenal lesions with stereotactic body radiation therapy. Single-arc VMAT plans (n = 5) were compared with clinically delivered step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with planning target volume coverage normalized between techniques. Target volume conformity, organ-at-risk (OAR) dose, treatment time, and monitor units were compared. A VMAT planning solution, created from a combination of arc settings and optimization constraints, auto-generated treatment plans in a single optimization. The treatment planning solution was evaluated on 15 consecutive patients receiving kidney and adrenal stereotactic body radiation therapy. Treatment time was reduced from 13.0 ± 2.6 to 4.0 ± 0.9 minutes for IMRT and VMAT, respectively. The VMAT planning solution generated treatment plans with increased target homogeneity, improved 95% conformity index, and a reduced maximum point dose to nearby OARs but with increased intermediate dose to distant OARs. The conformity of the 95% isodose improved from 1.32 ± 0.39 to 1.12 ± 0.05 for IMRT and VMAT treatment plans, respectively. Evaluation of the planning solution showed clinically acceptable dose distributions for 13 of 15 cases with tight conformity of the prescription isodose to the planning target volume of 1.07 ± 0.04, delivering minimal dose to OARs. The introduction of a stereotactic body radiation therapy VMAT treatment planning solution improves the efficiency of planning and delivery time, producing treatment plans of comparable or superior quality to IMRT in the case of primary renal cell carcinoma and oligometastatic adrenal lesions.

Evaluation of kidney motion and target localization in abdominal SBRT patients

The purpose of this study was to evaluate bilateral kidney and target translational/rotational intrafraction motion during stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment delivery of primary renal cell carcinoma and oligometastatic adrenal lesions for patients immobilized in the Elekta BodyFIX system. Bilateral kidney motion was assessed at midplane for 30 patients immobilized in a full-body dual-vacuum-cushion system with two patients immobilized via abdominal compression. Intrafraction motion was assessed for 15 patients using kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography (kV-CBCT) datasets (n=151) correlated to the planning CT. Patient positioning was corrected for translational and rotational misalignments using a robotic couch in six degrees of freedom if setup errors exceeded 1 mm and 1°. Absolute bilateral kidney motion between inhale and exhale 4D CT imaging phases for left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions was 1.51±1.00mm,8.10±4.33mm, and 3.08±2.11mm, respectively. Residual setup error determined across CBCT type (pretreatment, intrafraction, and post-treatment) for x (LR), y (SI), and z (AP) translations was 0.63±0.74mm,1.08±1.38mm, and 0.70±1.00mm; while for x (pitch), y (roll), and z (yaw) rotations was 0.24±0.39°,0.19±0.34°, and 0.26±0.43°, respectively. Targets were localized to within 2.1 mm and 0.8° 95% of the time. The frequency of misalignments in the y direction was significant (p<0.05) when compared to the x and z directions with no significant difference in translations between IMRT and VMAT. This technique is robust using BodyFIX for patient immobilization and reproducible localization of kidney and adrenal targets and daily CBCT image guidance for correction of positional errors to maintain treatment accuracy. PACS number(s): 87.55.-x, 87.56.-v, 87.56.Da.The purpose of this study was to evaluate bilateral kidney and target translational/rotational intrafraction motion during stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment delivery of primary renal cell carcinoma and oligometastatic adrenal lesions for patients immobilized in the Elekta BodyFIX system. Bilateral kidney motion was assessed at midplane for 30 patients immobilized in a full‐body dual‐vacuum‐cushion system with two patients immobilized via abdominal compression. Intrafraction motion was assessed for 15 patients using kilovoltage cone‐beam computed tomography (kV‐CBCT) datasets (n=151) correlated to the planning CT. Patient positioning was corrected for translational and rotational misalignments using a robotic couch in six degrees of freedom if setup errors exceeded 1 mm and 1°. Absolute bilateral kidney motion between inhale and exhale 4D CT imaging phases for left–right (LR), superior–inferior (SI), and anterior–posterior (AP) directions was 1.51±1.00mm,8.10±4.33mm, and 3.08±2.11mm, respectively. Residual setup error determined across CBCT type (pretreatment, intrafraction, and post‐treatment) for x (LR), y (SI), and z (AP) translations was 0.63±0.74mm,1.08±1.38mm, and 0.70±1.00mm; while for x (pitch), y (roll), and z (yaw) rotations was 0.24±0.39°,0.19±0.34°, and 0.26±0.43°, respectively. Targets were localized to within 2.1 mm and 0.8° 95% of the time. The frequency of misalignments in the y direction was significant (p<0.05) when compared to the x and z directions with no significant difference in translations between IMRT and VMAT. This technique is robust using BodyFIX for patient immobilization and reproducible localization of kidney and adrenal targets and daily CBCT image guidance for correction of positional errors to maintain treatment accuracy. PACS number(s): 87.55.‐x, 87.56.‐v, 87.56.Da

Positional Accuracy of Treating Multiple Versus Single Vertebral Metastases With Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

The aim of this study is to determine whether stereotactic body radiotherapy for multiple vertebral metastases treated with a single isocenter results in greater intrafraction errors than stereotactic body radiotherapy for single vertebral metastases and to determine whether the currently used spinal cord planning organ at risk volume and planning target volume margins are appropriate. Intrafraction errors were assessed for 65 stereotactic body radiotherapy treatments for vertebral metastases. Cone beam computed tomography images were acquired before, during, and after treatment for each fraction. Residual translational and rotational errors in patient positioning were recorded and planning organ at risk volume and planning target volume margins were calculated in each direction using this information. The mean translational residual errors were smaller for single (0.4 (0.4) mm) than for multiple vertebral metastases (0.5 (0.7) mm; P = .0019). The mean rotational residual errors were similar for single (0.3° (0.3°) and multiple vertebral metastases (0.3° (0.3°); P = .862). The maximum calculated planning organ at risk volume margin in any direction was 0.83 mm for single and 1.22 for multiple vertebral metastases. The maximum calculated planning target volume margin in any direction was 1.4 mm for single and 1.9 mm for multiple vertebral metastases. Intrafraction errors were small for both single and multiple vertebral metastases, indicating that our strategy for patient immobilization and repositioning is robust. Calculated planning organ at risk volume and planning target volume margins were smaller than our clinically employed margins, indicating that our clinical margins are appropriate.