PURPOSE: The development of automated "inverse planning," utilizing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) raises the question of whether this new technique can provide a practical and efficient means of dose escalation in conformal treatment of cancer of the prostate. The purpose of this feasibility study was to determine a single set of inverse-planning parameters that can be used for a variety of different prostate patient geometries to automatically generate escalated dose (> or = 81 Gy) IMRT plans that satisfy normal tissue constraints for rectal and bladder walls. METHODS: We studied a subset of the 46 patients who were previously treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) to a total dose of 81 Gy using a 3D conformal approach. Six patients were selected for our study and replanned using an analytical inverse-planning algorithm (referred to as OPT3D) applied to 8 intensity modulated, co-axial radiation beams. A set of more than a dozen inverse planning parameters were adjusted by trial and error until the resulting dose distributions satisfied the critical organ dose-volume constraints imposed by our study rules (D30 < or = 75.6 Gy and D10 < or = 80 Gy for the rectal wall; D15 < or = 80 Gy for the bladder wall) for the sample of patients selected. The OPT3D-generated plans were compared to hand-generated BEV plans using cumulative DVH analysis. RESULTS: A single set of inverse-planning parameters was found that was able to automatically generate IMRT plans meeting all critical organ dose-volume constraints for all but one of the patients in our study. [The exception failed to meet bladder dose constraints for both IMRT and BEV methods, due to extensive overlap between the planning target volume (PTV) and bladder contours]. Based upon analysis of the cumulative dose-volume histogram (DVH) for the prostate PTV, the D95 (DX is defined such that x% of the volume receives a dose > or = DX), averaged over all patients, was approximately 81 Gy. The average D90 and mean dose values were 85 Gy and 93 Gy, respectively. Although a similar D95 was achieved using the BEV-generated plans, the D90 and mean dose values were substantially higher for the inverse planning (OPT3D) method. CONCLUSION: This limited "paper study" shows IMRT with inverse planning to be a promising technique for the treatment of prostate cancer to high doses. We determined a small set of inverse-planning parameter values that was able to automatically design intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for a subset of 6 patients previously treated at MSKCC to 81 Gy using BEV planning techniques. With one minor exception, the resulting plans succeeded in meeting predetermined dose-volume constraints while at the same time allowing an increase in the mean dose and D90 to the prostate PTV. These 8 field plans also resulted in reduced dosage to the femoral heads. This automated technique is efficient in terms of planning effort and, with proper software for computer-controlled MLC, may be appropriate for clinical use. The clinical feasibility of this approach for a larger group of patients is currently under study.
PURPOSE: The development of automated "inverse planning," utilizing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) raises the question of whether this new technique can provide a practical and efficient means of dose escalation in conformal treatment of cancer of the prostate. The purpose of this feasibility study was to determine a single set of inverse-planning parameters that can be used for a variety of different prostate patient geometries to automatically generate escalated dose (> or = 81 Gy) IMRT plans that satisfy normal tissue constraints for rectal and bladder walls. METHODS: We studied a subset of the 46 patients who were previously treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) to a total dose of 81 Gy using a 3D conformal approach. Six patients were selected for our study and replanned using an analytical inverse-planning algorithm (referred to as OPT3D) applied to 8 intensity modulated, co-axial radiation beams. A set of more than a dozen inverse planning parameters were adjusted by trial and error until the resulting dose distributions satisfied the critical organ dose-volume constraints imposed by our study rules (D30 < or = 75.6 Gy and D10 < or = 80 Gy for the rectal wall; D15 < or = 80 Gy for the bladder wall) for the sample of patients selected. The OPT3D-generated plans were compared to hand-generated BEV plans using cumulative DVH analysis. RESULTS: A single set of inverse-planning parameters was found that was able to automatically generate IMRT plans meeting all critical organ dose-volume constraints for all but one of the patients in our study. [The exception failed to meet bladder dose constraints for both IMRT and BEV methods, due to extensive overlap between the planning target volume (PTV) and bladder contours]. Based upon analysis of the cumulative dose-volume histogram (DVH) for the prostate PTV, the D95 (DX is defined such that x% of the volume receives a dose > or = DX), averaged over all patients, was approximately 81 Gy. The average D90 and mean dose values were 85 Gy and 93 Gy, respectively. Although a similar D95 was achieved using the BEV-generated plans, the D90 and mean dose values were substantially higher for the inverse planning (OPT3D) method. CONCLUSION: This limited "paper study" shows IMRT with inverse planning to be a promising technique for the treatment of prostate cancer to high doses. We determined a small set of inverse-planning parameter values that was able to automatically design intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for a subset of 6 patients previously treated at MSKCC to 81 Gy using BEV planning techniques. With one minor exception, the resulting plans succeeded in meeting predetermined dose-volume constraints while at the same time allowing an increase in the mean dose and D90 to the prostate PTV. These 8 field plans also resulted in reduced dosage to the femoral heads. This automated technique is efficient in terms of planning effort and, with proper software for computer-controlled MLC, may be appropriate for clinical use. The clinical feasibility of this approach for a larger group of patients is currently under study.
Authors: Dimitre H Hristov; Belal A Moftah; Colette Charrois; William Parker; Luis Souhami; Ervin B Podgorsak Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.102