Head and Neck Margin Reduction With Adaptive Radiation Therapy: Robustness of Treatment Plans Against Anatomy Changes.

Abstract

PURPOSE

We set out to investigate loss of target coverage from anatomy changes in head and neck cancer patients as a function of applied safety margins and to verify a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based adaptive strategy with an average patient anatomy to overcome possible target underdosage.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

For 19 oropharyngeal cancer patients, volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment plans (2 arcs; simultaneous integrated boost, 70 and 54.25 Gy; 35 fractions) were automatically optimized with uniform clinical target volume (CTV)-to-planning target volume margins of 5, 3, and 0 mm. We applied b-spline CBCT-to-computed tomography (CT) deformable registration to allow recalculation of the dose on modified CT scans (planning CT deformed to daily CBCT following online positioning) and dose accumulation in the planning CT scan. Patients with deviations in primary or elective CTV coverage >2 Gy were identified as candidates for adaptive replanning. For these patients, a single adaptive intervention was simulated with an average anatomy from the first 10 fractions.

RESULTS

Margin reduction from 5 mm to 3 mm to 0 mm generally led to an organ-at-risk (OAR) mean dose (Dmean) sparing of approximately 1 Gy/mm. CTV shrinkage was mainly seen in the elective volumes (up to 10%), likely related to weight loss. Despite online repositioning, substantial systematic errors were present (>3 mm) in lymph node CTV, the parotid glands, and the larynx. Nevertheless, the average increase in OAR dose was small: maximum of 1.2 Gy (parotid glands, Dmean) for all applied margins. Loss of CTV coverage >2 Gy was found in 1, 3, and 7 of 73 CTVs, respectively. Adaptive intervention in 0-mm plans substantially improved coverage: in 5 of 7 CTVs (in 6 patients) to <2 Gy of initially planned.

CONCLUSIONS

Volumetric modulated arc therapy head and neck cancer treatment plans with 5-mm margins are robust for anatomy changes and show a modest increase in OAR dose. Margin reduction improves OAR sparing with approximately 1 Gy/mm at the expense of target coverage in a subgroup of patients. Patients at risk of CTV underdosage >2 Gy in 0-mm plans may be identified early in treatment using dose accumulation. A single intervention with an average anatomy derived from CBCT effectively mitigates discrepancies.