Adaptive radiotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a retrospective audit of two bladder filling protocols.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Radiation Oncology Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1186/s13014-024-02484-9
Diana Nohemi Briceño Guel, Nicola Laverick, Linda MacLaren, Nicholas MacLeod, Martin Glegg, Gillian Lamb, Peter Houston, Ross Carruthers, Laura Grocutt, Ronan M Valentine
{"title":"Adaptive radiotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a retrospective audit of two bladder filling protocols.","authors":"Diana Nohemi Briceño Guel, Nicola Laverick, Linda MacLaren, Nicholas MacLeod, Martin Glegg, Gillian Lamb, Peter Houston, Ross Carruthers, Laura Grocutt, Ronan M Valentine","doi":"10.1186/s13014-024-02484-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radical radiotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is challenging due to large variations in bladder shape, size and volume during treatment, with drinking protocols often employed to mitigate geometric uncertainties. Utilising adaptive radiotherapy together with CBCT imaging to select a treatment plan that best fits the bladder target and reduce normal tissue irradiation is an attractive option to compensate for anatomical changes. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare a bladder empty (BE) protocol to a bladder filling (BF) protocol with regards to variations in target volumes, plan of the day (PoD) selection and plan dosimetry throughout treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty patients were included in the study; twenty were treated with a BE protocol and twenty with a BF protocol to a total prescribed dose of 55 Gy in 20 fractions. Small, medium and large bladder plans were generated using three different CTV to PTV margins. Bladder (CTV) volumes were delineated on planning CTs and online pre-treatment CBCTs. Differences in CTV volumes throughout treatment, plan selection, PTV volumes and resulting dose metrics were compared for both protocols.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean bladder volume differed significantly on both the planning CTs and online pre-treatment CBCTs between the protocols (p < 0.05). Significant differences in bladder volumes were observed between the planning CT and pre-treatment CBCTs for BF (p < 0.05) but not for BE (p = 0.11). Both protocols saw a significant decrease in bladder volume between first and final treatment fractions (p < 0.05). Medium plans were preferentially selected for BE whilst when using the BF protocol the small plan was chosen most frequently. With no significant change to PTV coverage between the protocols, the volume of body receiving 25.0-45.8 Gy was found to be significantly smaller for BE patients (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This work provides evidence in favour of a BE protocol compared to a BF protocol for radical radiotherapy for MIBC. The smaller treatment volumes observed in the BE protocol led to reduced OAR and total body doses and were also observed to be more consistent throughout the treatment course. These results highlight improvements in dosimetry for patients who undergo a BE protocol for MIBC.</p>","PeriodicalId":49639,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264890/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-024-02484-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Radical radiotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is challenging due to large variations in bladder shape, size and volume during treatment, with drinking protocols often employed to mitigate geometric uncertainties. Utilising adaptive radiotherapy together with CBCT imaging to select a treatment plan that best fits the bladder target and reduce normal tissue irradiation is an attractive option to compensate for anatomical changes. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare a bladder empty (BE) protocol to a bladder filling (BF) protocol with regards to variations in target volumes, plan of the day (PoD) selection and plan dosimetry throughout treatment.

Methods: Forty patients were included in the study; twenty were treated with a BE protocol and twenty with a BF protocol to a total prescribed dose of 55 Gy in 20 fractions. Small, medium and large bladder plans were generated using three different CTV to PTV margins. Bladder (CTV) volumes were delineated on planning CTs and online pre-treatment CBCTs. Differences in CTV volumes throughout treatment, plan selection, PTV volumes and resulting dose metrics were compared for both protocols.

Results: Mean bladder volume differed significantly on both the planning CTs and online pre-treatment CBCTs between the protocols (p < 0.05). Significant differences in bladder volumes were observed between the planning CT and pre-treatment CBCTs for BF (p < 0.05) but not for BE (p = 0.11). Both protocols saw a significant decrease in bladder volume between first and final treatment fractions (p < 0.05). Medium plans were preferentially selected for BE whilst when using the BF protocol the small plan was chosen most frequently. With no significant change to PTV coverage between the protocols, the volume of body receiving 25.0-45.8 Gy was found to be significantly smaller for BE patients (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: This work provides evidence in favour of a BE protocol compared to a BF protocol for radical radiotherapy for MIBC. The smaller treatment volumes observed in the BE protocol led to reduced OAR and total body doses and were also observed to be more consistent throughout the treatment course. These results highlight improvements in dosimetry for patients who undergo a BE protocol for MIBC.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肌肉浸润性膀胱癌的适应性放疗:对两种膀胱充盈方案的回顾性审核。
背景:肌层浸润性膀胱癌(MIBC)的放射治疗具有挑战性,因为在治疗过程中膀胱的形状、大小和体积会发生很大变化,通常会采用饮水方案来减轻几何不确定性。利用自适应放疗和 CBCT 成像来选择最适合膀胱靶点的治疗方案,并减少正常组织的照射,是补偿解剖学变化的一种有吸引力的选择。这项回顾性研究旨在比较膀胱排空(BE)方案和膀胱充盈(BF)方案在靶体积、每日计划(PoD)选择和整个治疗过程中的计划剂量测定方面的差异:研究共纳入了 40 名患者,其中 20 人采用膀胱空虚方案治疗,20 人采用膀胱充盈方案治疗,规定总剂量为 55 Gy,分 20 次进行。使用三种不同的 CTV 至 PTV 边界生成小、中、大膀胱计划。膀胱(CTV)体积由计划 CT 和在线治疗前 CBCT 划分。比较了两种方案在整个治疗过程中 CTV 体积的差异、方案选择、PTV 体积和由此产生的剂量指标:结果:两种方案在计划 CT 和在线治疗前 CBCT 上的平均膀胱容积均有显著差异(p 结论:两种方案的平均膀胱容积均有显著差异(p):这项研究提供的证据表明,在MIBC根治性放疗中,BE方案优于BF方案。在BE方案中观察到的较小治疗量导致了OAR和全身剂量的减少,而且在整个治疗过程中观察到的剂量更加一致。这些结果凸显了采用BE方案治疗MIBC的患者在剂量测定方面的改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Radiation Oncology
Radiation Oncology ONCOLOGY-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.80%
发文量
181
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Radiation Oncology encompasses all aspects of research that impacts on the treatment of cancer using radiation. It publishes findings in molecular and cellular radiation biology, radiation physics, radiation technology, and clinical oncology.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors with thoracic radiotherapy for patients with oncogene-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Dynamics of cell-free tumor DNA correlate with early MRI response during chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer. 3D-printed brachytherapy in patients with cervical cancer: improving efficacy and safety outcomes. Stereotactic radiotherapy for patients with bone metastases: a selected group with low rate of radiation treatment during the last month of life? Tissue microarray analyses of the essential DNA repair factors ATM, DNA-PKcs and Ku80 in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1