Automated treatment planning as a dose escalation strategy for stereotactic radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer. Issue 11 (16th October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cilla, Savino; Ianiro, Anna; Romano, Carmela; Deodato, Francesco; Macchia, Gabriella; Viola, Pietro; Buwenge, Milly; Cammelli, Silvia; Pierro, Antonio; Valentini, Vincenzo; Morganti, Alessio G.
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 21:Issue 11(2020)
• Page Start: 48
• Page End: 57
• Publication Date: 2020-10-16
• Subjects: autoplanning -- SBRT -- SIB -- pancreas; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13025
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: To assess the feasibility of automated stereotactic volumetric modulated arc therapy (SBRT‐VMAT) planning using a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) approach as a dose escalation strategy for SBRT in pancreatic cancer. Methods: Twelve patients with pancreatic cancer were retrospectively replanned. Dose prescription was 30 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV) and was escalated up to 50 Gy to the boost target volume (BTV) using a SIB technique in 5 fractions. All plans were generated by Pinnacle 3 Autoplanning using 6MV dual‐arc VMAT technique for flattened (FF) and flattening filter‐free beams (FFF). An overlap volume (OLV) between the PRV duodenum and the PTV was defined to correlate with the ability to boost the BTV. Dosimetric metrics for BTV and PTV coverage, maximal doses for serial OARs, integral dose, conformation numbers, and dose contrast indexes were used to analyze the dosimetric results. Dose accuracy was validated using the PTW Octavius‐4D phantom together with the 1500 2D‐array. Differences between FF and FFF plans were quantified using the Wilcoxon matched‐pair signed rank. Results: Full prescription doses to the 95% of PTV and BTV can be delivered to patients with no OLV. BTV mean dose was >90% of the prescribed doses for all patients at all dose levels. Compared to FF plans, FFF plans showed significant reduced integral doses, larger number of MUs, and reduced beam‐on‐times up to 51% for the highest dose level. Despite plan complexity, pre‐treatment verification reported a gamma pass‐rate greater than the acceptance threshold of 95% for all FF and FFF plans for 3%‐2 mm criteria. Conclusions: The SIB‐SBRT strategy with Autoplanning was dosimetrically feasible. Ablative doses up to 50 Gy in 5 fractions can be delivered to the BTV for almost all patients respecting all the normal tissue constraints. A prospective clinical trial based on SBRT strategy using SIB‐VMAT technique with FFF beams seems to be justified.