32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Brain-Sparing Methods for IMRT of Head and Neck Cancer

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Radical radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) may deliver significant doses to brain structures. There is evidence that this may cause a decline in neurocognitive function (NCF). Radiation dose to the medial temporal lobes, and particularly to the hippocampi, seems to be critical in determining NCF outcomes. We evaluated the feasibility of two alternative intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques to generate hippocampus- and brain-sparing HNC treatment plans to preserve NCF.

          Methods and Materials

          A planning study was undertaken for ten patients with HNC whose planning target volume (PTV) included the nasopharynx. Patients had been previously treated using standard (chemo)-IMRT techniques. Bilateral hippocampi were delineated according to the RTOG atlas, on T1w MRI co-registered to the RT planning CT. Hippocampus-sparing plans (HSRT), and whole-brain/hippocampus-sparing fixed-field non-coplanar IMRT (BSRT) plans, were generated. DVHs and dose difference maps were used to compare plans. NTCP calculations for NCF impairment, based on hippocampal dosimetry, were performed for all plans.

          Results

          Significant reductions in hippocampal doses relative to standard plans were achieved in eight of ten cases for both HSRT and BSRT. EQD2 D40% to bilateral hippocampi was significantly reduced from a mean of 23.5 Gy (range 14.5–35.0) in the standard plans to a mean of 8.6 Gy (4.2–24.7) for HSRT (p = 0.001) and a mean of 9.0 Gy (4.3–17.3) for BSRT (p < 0.001). Both HSRT and BSRT resulted in a significant reduction in doses to the whole brain, brain stem, and cerebellum.

          Conclusion

          We demonstrate that IMRT plans for HNC involving the nasopharynx can be successfully optimised to significantly reduce dose to the bilateral hippocampi and whole brain. The magnitude of the achievable dose reductions results in significant reductions in the probability of radiation-induced NCF decline. These results could readily be translated into a future clinical trial.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Parotid-sparing intensity modulated versus conventional radiotherapy in head and neck cancer (PARSPORT): a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial

          Summary Background Xerostomia is the most common late side-effect of radiotherapy to the head and neck. Compared with conventional radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can reduce irradiation of the parotid glands. We assessed the hypothesis that parotid-sparing IMRT reduces the incidence of severe xerostomia. Methods We undertook a randomised controlled trial between Jan 21, 2003, and Dec 7, 2007, that compared conventional radiotherapy (control) with parotid-sparing IMRT. We randomly assigned patients with histologically confirmed pharyngeal squamous-cell carcinoma (T1–4, N0–3, M0) at six UK radiotherapy centres between the two radiotherapy techniques (1:1 ratio). A dose of 60 or 65 Gy was prescribed in 30 daily fractions given Monday to Friday. Treatment was not masked. Randomisation was by computer-generated permuted blocks and was stratified by centre and tumour site. Our primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with grade 2 or worse xerostomia at 12 months, as assessed by the Late Effects of Normal Tissue (LENT SOMA) scale. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, with all patients who had assessments included. Long-term follow-up of patients is ongoing. This study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial register, number ISRCTN48243537. Findings 47 patients were assigned to each treatment arm. Median follow-up was 44·0 months (IQR 30·0–59·7). Six patients from each group died before 12 months and seven patients from the conventional radiotherapy and two from the IMRT group were not assessed at 12 months. At 12 months xerostomia side-effects were reported in 73 of 82 alive patients; grade 2 or worse xerostomia at 12 months was significantly lower in the IMRT group than in the conventional radiotherapy group (25 [74%; 95% CI 56–87] of 34 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs 15 [38%; 23–55] of 39 given IMRT, p=0·0027). The only recorded acute adverse event of grade 2 or worse that differed significantly between the treatment groups was fatigue, which was more prevalent in the IMRT group (18 [41%; 99% CI 23–61] of 44 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs 35 [74%; 55–89] of 47 given IMRT, p=0·0015). At 24 months, grade 2 or worse xerostomia was significantly less common with IMRT than with conventional radiotherapy (20 [83%; 95% CI 63–95] of 24 patients given conventional radiotherapy vs nine [29%; 14–48] of 31 given IMRT; p<0·0001). At 12 and 24 months, significant benefits were seen in recovery of saliva secretion with IMRT compared with conventional radiotherapy, as were clinically significant improvements in dry-mouth-specific and global quality of life scores. At 24 months, no significant differences were seen between randomised groups in non-xerostomia late toxicities, locoregional control, or overall survival. Interpretation Sparing the parotid glands with IMRT significantly reduces the incidence of xerostomia and leads to recovery of saliva secretion and improvements in associated quality of life, and thus strongly supports a role for IMRT in squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Funding Cancer Research UK (CRUK/03/005).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. Technical note.

            I Paddick (2000)
            A conformity index is a measure of how well the volume of a radiosurgical dose distribution conforms to the size and shape of a target volume. Because the success of radiosurgery is related to the extremely conformal irradiation of the target, an accurate method for describing this parameter is important. Existing conformity ratios and indices used in radiosurgery are reviewed and criticized. It will be demonstrated that previously proposed measurements of conformity can, under certain conditions, give false perfect scores. A new conformity index is derived that gives an objective score of conformity for a treatment plan and gives no false scores. An analysis of five different treatment plans is made using both the existing scoring methods and the new conformity index.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Radiation-induced brain injury: A review

              Approximately 100,000 primary and metastatic brain tumor patients/year in the US survive long enough (>6 months) to experience radiation-induced brain injury. Prior to 1970, the human brain was thought to be highly radioresistant; the acute CNS syndrome occurs after single doses >30 Gy; white matter necrosis occurs at fractionated doses >60 Gy. Although white matter necrosis is uncommon with modern techniques, functional deficits, including progressive impairments in memory, attention, and executive function have become important, because they have profound effects on quality of life. Preclinical studies have provided valuable insights into the pathogenesis of radiation-induced cognitive impairment. Given its central role in memory and neurogenesis, the majority of these studies have focused on the hippocampus. Irradiating pediatric and young adult rodent brains leads to several hippocampal changes including neuroinflammation and a marked reduction in neurogenesis. These data have been interpreted to suggest that shielding the hippocampus will prevent clinical radiation-induced cognitive impairment. However, this interpretation may be overly simplistic. Studies using older rodents, that more closely match the adult human brain tumor population, indicate that, unlike pediatric and young adult rats, older rats fail to show a radiation-induced decrease in neurogenesis or a loss of mature neurons. Nevertheless, older rats still exhibit cognitive impairment. This occurs in the absence of demyelination and/or white matter necrosis similar to what is observed clinically, suggesting that more subtle molecular, cellular and/or microanatomic modifications are involved in this radiation-induced brain injury. Given that radiation-induced cognitive impairment likely reflects damage to both hippocampal- and non-hippocampal-dependent domains, there is a critical need to investigate the microanatomic and functional effects of radiation in various brain regions as well as their integration at clinically relevant doses and schedules. Recently developed techniques in neuroscience and neuroimaging provide not only an opportunity to accomplish this, but they also offer the opportunity to identify new biomarkers and new targets for interventions to prevent or ameliorate these late effects.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                17 March 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 3
                : e0120141
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Joint Department of Physics, Institute of Cancer Research and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ]The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
                [3 ]The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
                University of California Davis, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: AD LW DMQ VH SB CN KH KN. Performed the experiments: AD LW. Analyzed the data: AD LW DMQ. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: AD LW DMQ JD SG VH. Wrote the paper: AD LW DMQ JD SG VH SB CN KH KN.

                Article
                PONE-D-14-30950
                10.1371/journal.pone.0120141
                4364536
                25781636
                65469b2d-c894-4b6c-bfb9-c3050f8b05d3
                Copyright @ 2015

                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

                History
                : 18 July 2014
                : 19 January 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 2, Pages: 13
                Funding
                This work was undertaken in The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust which received a proportion of its funding from the NHS Executive; the views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS Executive. This work was supported by Cancer Research UK Programme Grants C46/A10588 and C7224/A13407. The authors also acknowledge the support of the National Institute for Health Research Royal Marsden and Institute of Cancer Research Biomedical Research Centre. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article