Constantinos Zamboglou1, Ilias Sachpazidis2, Khodor Koubar2, Vanessa Drendel3, Rolf Wiehle2, Simon Kirste4, Michael Mix5, Florian Schiller5, Panayiotis Mavroidis6, Philipp T Meyer5, Martin Werner2, Anca L Grosu4, Dimos Baltas2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Germany. Electronic address: constantinos.zamboglou@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Division of Medical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Germany. 3. Department of Pathology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Germany. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Germany. 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Freiburg, Germany. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility and to evaluate the tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of IMRT dose painting using 68Ga-HBED-CC PSMA PET/CT for target delineation in prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS AND MATERIALS: 10 patients had PSMA PET/CT scans prior to prostatectomy. GTV-PET was generated on the basis of an intraprostatic SUVmax of 30%. Two IMRT plans were generated for each patient: Plan77 which consisted of whole-prostate IMRT to 77Gy, and Plan95 which consisted of whole-prostate IMRT to 77Gy and a simultaneous integrated boost to the GTV-PET up to 95Gy (35 fractions). The feasibility of these plans was judged by their ability to adhere to the FLAME trial protocol. TCP-histo/-PET were calculated on co-registered histology (GTV-histo) and GTV-PET, respectively. NTCPs for rectum and bladder were calculated. RESULTS: All plans reached prescription doses whilst adhering to dose constraints. In Plan77 and Plan95 mean doses in GTV-histo were 75.8±0.3Gy and 96.9±1Gy, respectively. Average TCP-histo values for Plan77 and Plan95 were 70% (range: 15-97%), and 96% (range: 78-100%, p<0.0001). Average TCP-PET values for Plan77 and Plan95 were 55% (range: 27-82%), and 100% (range: 99-100%, p<0.0001). There was no significant difference between TCP-PET and TCP-histo in Plan95 (p=0.25). There were no significant differences in rectal (p=0.563) and bladder (p=0.3) NTCPs. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT dose painting using PSMA PET/CT was technically feasible and resulted in significantly higher TCPs without higher NTCPs.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility and to evaluate the tumour control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of IMRT dose painting using 68Ga-HBED-CC PSMA PET/CT for target delineation in prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS AND MATERIALS: 10 patients had PSMA PET/CT scans prior to prostatectomy. GTV-PET was generated on the basis of an intraprostatic SUVmax of 30%. Two IMRT plans were generated for each patient: Plan77 which consisted of whole-prostate IMRT to 77Gy, and Plan95 which consisted of whole-prostate IMRT to 77Gy and a simultaneous integrated boost to the GTV-PET up to 95Gy (35 fractions). The feasibility of these plans was judged by their ability to adhere to the FLAME trial protocol. TCP-histo/-PET were calculated on co-registered histology (GTV-histo) and GTV-PET, respectively. NTCPs for rectum and bladder were calculated. RESULTS: All plans reached prescription doses whilst adhering to dose constraints. In Plan77 and Plan95 mean doses in GTV-histo were 75.8±0.3Gy and 96.9±1Gy, respectively. Average TCP-histo values for Plan77 and Plan95 were 70% (range: 15-97%), and 96% (range: 78-100%, p<0.0001). Average TCP-PET values for Plan77 and Plan95 were 55% (range: 27-82%), and 100% (range: 99-100%, p<0.0001). There was no significant difference between TCP-PET and TCP-histo in Plan95 (p=0.25). There were no significant differences in rectal (p=0.563) and bladder (p=0.3) NTCPs. CONCLUSIONS: IMRT dose painting using PSMA PET/CT was technically feasible and resulted in significantly higher TCPs without higher NTCPs.
Authors: Frédéric Bois; Camille Noirot; Sébastien Dietemann; Ismini C Mainta; Thomas Zilli; Valentina Garibotto; Martin A Walter Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-12-15
Authors: Constantinos Zamboglou; Christina Marie Klein; Benedikt Thomann; Thomas Franz Fassbender; Hans C Rischke; Simon Kirste; Karl Henne; Natalja Volegova-Neher; Michael Bock; Mathias Langer; Philipp T Meyer; Dimos Baltas; Anca L Grosu Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Tilman Bostel; Ilias Sachpazidis; Mona Splinter; Nina Bougatf; Tobias Fechter; Constantinos Zamboglou; Oliver Jäkel; Peter E Huber; Dimos Baltas; Jürgen Debus; Nils H Nicolay Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Constantin Lapa; Ursula Nestle; Nathalie L Albert; Christian Baues; Ambros Beer; Andreas Buck; Volker Budach; Rebecca Bütof; Stephanie E Combs; Thorsten Derlin; Matthias Eiber; Wolfgang P Fendler; Christian Furth; Cihan Gani; Eleni Gkika; Anca-L Grosu; Christoph Henkenberens; Harun Ilhan; Steffen Löck; Simone Marnitz-Schulze; Matthias Miederer; Michael Mix; Nils H Nicolay; Maximilian Niyazi; Christoph Pöttgen; Claus M Rödel; Imke Schatka; Sarah M Schwarzenboeck; Andrei S Todica; Wolfgang Weber; Simone Wegen; Thomas Wiegel; Constantinos Zamboglou; Daniel Zips; Klaus Zöphel; Sebastian Zschaeck; Daniela Thorwarth; Esther G C Troost Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Dejan Kostyszyn; Tobias Fechter; Nico Bartl; Anca L Grosu; Christian Gratzke; August Sigle; Michael Mix; Juri Ruf; Thomas F Fassbender; Selina Kiefer; Alisa S Bettermann; Nils H Nicolay; Simon Spohn; Maria U Kramer; Peter Bronsert; Hongqian Guo; Xuefeng Qiu; Feng Wang; Christoph Henkenberens; Rudolf A Werner; Dimos Baltas; Philipp T Meyer; Thorsten Derlin; Mengxia Chen; Constantinos Zamboglou Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Constantinos Zamboglou; Benedikt Thomann; Khodor Koubar; Peter Bronsert; Tobias Krauss; Hans C Rischke; Ilias Sachpazidis; Vanessa Drendel; Nasr Salman; Kathrin Reichel; Cordula A Jilg; Martin Werner; Philipp T Meyer; Michael Bock; Dimos Baltas; Anca L Grosu Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-05-02 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Sebastian Zschaeck; Fabian Lohaus; Marcus Beck; Gregor Habl; Stephanie Kroeze; Constantinos Zamboglou; Stefan Alexander Koerber; Jürgen Debus; Tobias Hölscher; Peter Wust; Ute Ganswindt; Alexander D J Baur; Klaus Zöphel; Nikola Cihoric; Matthias Guckenberger; Stephanie E Combs; Anca Ligia Grosu; Pirus Ghadjar; Claus Belka Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-05-11 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Mona Splinter; Tilman Bostel; Ilias Sachpazidis; Tobias Fechter; Constantinos Zamboglou; Oliver Jäkel; Peter E Huber; Jürgen Debus; Dimos Baltas; Nils H Nicolay Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 6.244