alexa Target Volume Heterogeneity Index, a Potentially Valuable Metric in IMRT Prostate Cancer Treatment Planning | OMICS International
ISSN: 2155-9619
Journal of Nuclear Medicine & Radiation Therapy
Like us on:
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Target Volume Heterogeneity Index, a Potentially Valuable Metric in IMRT Prostate Cancer Treatment Planning

Michael M. Dominello1*, Isaac Kaufman2, Erin McSpadden2, Michael Snyder3, Mark Zaki2, Jordan Maier2, Peter Paximadis2 and Steven Miller2

1Department of Radiation Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, USA

2Department of Radiation Oncology, Wayne State University, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center, Detroit, MI, USA

3Department of Radiation Physics, Wayne State University, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center, Detroit, MI, USA

*Corresponding Author:
Michael M. Dominello
DO, Department of Radiation Oncology
Wayne State, niversity School of Medicine
Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Center, 4100 John R
Mailcode GE00RO Detroit, MI 48201, USA
Tel: 313 576-9622
Fax: 313 576-9625
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: July 29, 2014; Accepted date: September 30, 2014; Published date: October 07, 2014

Citation: Dominello MM, Kaufman I, McSpadden E, McSpadden M, Zaki M, et al. (2014) Target Volume Heterogeneity Index, a Potentially Valuable Metric in IMRT Prostate Cancer Treatment Planning. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 5:192. doi: 10.4172/2155-9619.1000192

Copyright: © 2014 Dominello MM, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Nuclear Medicine & Radiation Therapy

Abstract

Abstract
Purpose/Objectives: Heterogeneity index (HI) has been described in the literature as a tool for evaluating dose gradients within a planning target volume (PTV). HI may be expressed as D1/D95 where D1 and D95 equal the dose encompassing 1% and 95% of the target volume. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of target volume dose heterogeneity on dose received by local organs at risk in the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancer.
Materials/Methods: Treatment plans were reviewed for 157 patients with low or intermediate risk prostate cancer treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy between 6/2007 and 2/2012. Patients treated in the post-operative setting or receiving pelvic nodal irradiation were excluded. Patients were treated with either standard intensity modulation (IMRT) using 7 or 8 fields or 2-arc volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). All patients had daily image-guidance. PTV HI (D1/D95) and dose-volume histogram (DVH) data at 8 dose levels for rectum and bladder were recorded. Patients were categorized into two groups (low HI or high HI) with respect to median index score. A two-tailed t-test was used to test for differences in dose received by rectum and bladder for the two groups.

Results: For the 157 plans evaluated, mean PTV volume was 164cc and mean prescription dose was 7833cGy. Median HI was 1.04 (range 1.0-1.08). Low HI (≤1.04) was found to correlate with significantly lower rectal V50 (p=0.02), V55 (p=0.01), V60 (p=0.01), V65 (p=0.01), and V70 (p=0.01). There was no significant correlation with dose received by bladder at any dose level. HI was similar for patients treated with standard IMRT and VMAT (p=0.85).
Conclusions: Target volume HI ≤1.04 is associated with more favorable rectal doses at clinically relevant dose-levels. We believe HI may serve as a valuable metric in prostate cancer treatment planning. Further work is needed to correlate these dosimetric findings with clinical outcomes.

Keywords

Heterogeneity; Prostate; Toxicity; Rectum

Introduction

Background

Dose-escalated radiation therapy has been widely adopted in the treatment of prostate cancer [1,2]. Following definitive radiation therapy, biochemical progression free survival (bPFS) for low risk prostate cancer is less than 17% at 10 years [1] and cancer specific survival at 8 years approaches 99% [2]. Given the excellent prognosis and expected survival rates following treatment of prostate cancer with radiation therapy, an emphasis should continue to be placed on techniques to limit dose to adjacent organs and to decrease acute and late toxicity.

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has allowed for advancement of the field in this direction. Zelefski et al, for example, observed significantly decreased acute and late rectal toxicity with IMRT as compared with 3-D conformal historical controls while aintaining comparable bPFS [3]. In another study comparing these two modalities, risk of grade 2 rectal bleeding was reduced from 10% to 2% with the use of IMRT [4]. Beyond the implementation of IMRT in the treatment of prostate cancer, several studies have explored optimal beam angle selection and inverse planning prioritization in order to decrease dose to organs at risk including bladder, rectum, femoral heads, and penile bulb [5,6].

Using inverse planning algorithms, priorities are often assigned to these organs at risk in order to minimize incidental dose. Because of the proximity of the rectum to the prostate and this organ’s relative radiosensitivity, dose constraints to this organ must be respected. The importance of rectal dose constraints has been clinically validated. Important dose-constraints that have previously been explored include rectal volume receiving at least 30 Gray less than 80% (V30Gy< 80%), V40Gy <65%, V50Gy <55%, V60Gy <40%, V65Gy <30%, V70Gy <15%, and V75Gy <3% [7].

Heterogeneity index (HI) has been described in the literature as a tool for evaluating dose gradients within a planning target volume (PTV) in other treatment sites [8,9]. HI may be expressed as D1/D95 where D1 and D95 equal the dose encompassing 1% and 95% of the target volume [9]. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of target volume dose heterogeneity on dose received by local organs at risk in the treatment of low and intermediate risk prostate cancer (Figure 1). We hypothesize that with decreasing target dose heterogeneity, lower doses to bladder and rectum will be observed.

Methods

Following Institutional Review Board approval, patient charts, including consultation notes, treatment planning records, and completion summaries were reviewed for 157 patients with low or intermediate risk prostate cancer treated from June 2007 through February 2012 at our institution. All patients were treated with dose-escalated radiation therapy (7740-7920cGy). Patients treated in the post-operative setting, with high-risk disease, or receiving pelvic nodal irradiation were excluded from this analysis given significant variability for these patients’ target volumes.

Clinical target volume (CTV) had been defined as the prostate gland only for patients with low risk disease and prostate plus proximal seminal vesicles (generally the proximal 1 cm) for patients with intermediate risk disease. Planning target volume (PTV) margin ranged from 0.8 to 1.0 cm in all directions except posteriorly where margin was limited to 0.5 cm, though these margins could be individually tailored. Patients were treated with either 7 or 8-field IMRT or 2-arc VMAT (359.8 degree arcs). All treatment planning was performed using Eclipse treatment planning software version 8.6 or 8.9 and plans were subsequently exported to Mosaic version 2.3. All patients had daily image-guidance with ultrasound, orthogonal films plus fiducial markers, or cone-beam computed tomography. Most patients were treated by a single radiation oncologist (JM) regardless of treatment facility.

DVH data including PTV volume, PTV heterogeneity index (D1/D95), rectal and bladder V10Gy, V30Gy, V50Gy, V55Gy, V60Gy, V65Gy, V70Gy, and V75Gy were recorded for each plan. Patients were categorized into two groups (low HI or high HI) with respect to median index score. A two-tailed t-test was used to test for differences in dose received by rectum and bladder for the two groups.

Results

Patient characteristics

For the 157 plans evaluated, mean PTV volume was 164cc and mean prescription dose was 7833cGy. Patients in the two groups were similar in age, T stage, Gleason score, pretreatment PSA, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk level (Table 1).

  Low HI Number (%) High HI Number (%) P
Age     0.656
<70 Years 48(65) 51(61)  
70 Years or older 26(35) 32(39)  
T Stage     1.000
1a-2a 73(99) 81(98)  
2b 1(1) 2(2)  
Gleason Score     0.829
Score <7 22(30) 26(31)  
Score=7 52(70) 57(69)  
PSA     0.605
<10 63(85) 73(88)  
10-20 11(15) 10(12)  
NCCN Risk     0.718
Low risk 27(36) 28(34)  
Intermediate risk 47(64) 55(66)  
Modality     0.63
RA 18(24) 23(28)  
IMRT 56(76) 60(72)  
Mean PTV Volume 160cc 168cc 0.304

Table 1: Patient Characteristics, Baseline patient characteristics; HI=Heterogeneity Index; NCCN= National Comprehensive Cancer Network; RA=Rapid Arc Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy; IMRT= Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy; PTV= Planning Target Volume

Dosimetric Findings

Median HI was 1.04 (range 1.0–1.08). Low HI (≤1.04) correlated with significantly lower average rectal V50Gy (p=0.02), V55Gy (p=0.01), V60Gy (p=0.01), V65Gy (p=0.01), and V70Gy (p=0.01). Differences in rectal V10 Gy (p=0.33), V30Gy (p=0.18), and V75Gy (p=0.08) failed to reach statistical significance. There was no significant correlation with dose received by bladder at any dose level; bladder V10 Gy (p=0.86), V30Gy (p=0.58), V50Gy (p=0.37), V55Gy (p=0.38), V60Gy (p=0.40), V65Gy (p=0.45), V70Gy (p=0.52), and V75Gy (p=0.79). (Table 2). Additionally, HI was similar for patients treated with standard IMRT and VMAT (p=0.85).

  Rectal V10 Gy V30 V50 V55 V60 V65 V70 V75
Low HI 0.7798 0.4117 0.2403 0.2111 0.1839 0.157 0.1284 0.0938
Standard Error 0.01138 0.0141 0.00947 0.00826 0.00722 0.0062 0.00522 0.00469
High HI 0.7976 0.4411 0.2752 0.2425 0.21215 0.1816 0.149 0.1074
Standard Error 0.0122 0.0165 0.0119 0.0103 0.00893 0.00757 0.00653 0.00603
Dose Reduction 2% 7% 13% 13% 13% 14% 14% 13%
  Bladder V10 Gy V30 V50 V55 V60 V65 V70 V75
Low HI 0.8005 0.4604 0.2804 0.2524 0.2271 0.2027 0.1772 0.1469
Standard Error 0.0213 0.018 0.0138 0.0129 0.0121 0.0112 0.0102 0.00923
High HI 0.7948 0.4751 0.2985 0.2689 0.2418 0.2151 0.1867 0.1504
Standard Error 0.0237 0.019 0.0147 0.0137 0.0128 0.0117 0.0105 0.00932
Dose Reduction -1% 3% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 2%

Table 2: Rectal and Bladder dose/volume reductions noted as a function of target heterogeneity specifically, rectal V50, V55, V60, V65, V70; HI=Heterogeneity Index, VxGy=Percent of organ volume receiving xGy +/-standarad error.

Discussion

In our series we have found target volume HI ≤1.04 to be associated with more favorable rectal doses at clinically relevant dose-levels without compromising dose to the PTV. There was no statistically significant correlation between decreasing HI and bladder dose (Figures 1 and 2).

nuclear-medicine-Percent-rectal

Figure 1: Percent rectal volume receiving dose (Gray) differences in rectal dose/volumes by group; HI= Heterogeneity Index, VxGy=Percent of organ volume receiving xGy or more

nuclear-medicine-Percent-bladder

Figure 2: Percent bladder volume receiving dose (Gray) differences in rectal dose/volumes by group; HI= Heterogeneity Index, VxGy=Percent of organ volume receiving xGy or more

To our knowledge, this is among the first dosimetric studies investigating a possible correlation of HI with dose to organs at risk in prostate cancer. Of perhaps most importance, decreased dose to rectum has been shown to translate to improved patient reported quality of life as a function of gastrointestinal dysfunction in the treatment of prostate cancer [10]. For example, in the study by Nguyen et al, patients with anterior rectal wall V60 >54%, reported an average bowel symptom score of 10.6, compared with a lower average score of 5.4 for patients with V60 < 54% (p = 0.04) [10].

This hypothesis-generating study suggests that further investigation into HI as a plan assessment tool may be warranted. Given these findings, we feel that target volume heterogeneity recommendations may be provided in future clinical trials evaluating radiation techniques in the management of prostate cancer.

Further avenues for study include implementation of specific target HI parameters while inverse planning to determine if HI is not only a metric for plan evaluation but may also serve as a planning tool for generating superior plans with decreased dose to rectum.

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Recommended Conferences

Article Usage

  • Total views: 11767
  • [From(publication date):
    November-2014 - Dec 16, 2017]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 8004
  • PDF downloads : 3763
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri & Aquaculture Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

 
© 2008- 2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version