Adaptive brachytherapy of cervical cancer, comparison of conventional point A and CT based individual treatment planning

Abstract

Background. Locally advanced cervical cancer is commonly treated with external radiation therapy combined with local brachytherapy. The brachytherapy is traditionally given based on standard dose planning with prescription of dose to point A. Dosimetric aspects when changing from former standard treatment to individualized treatment plans based on computed tomography (CT) images are here investigated. Material and methods. Brachytherapy data from 19 patients with a total of 72 individual treatment fractions were retrospectively reviewed. Standard library plans were analyzed with respect to doses to organs at risk (OARs), and the result was compared to corresponding delivered individualized plans. The theoretical potential of further optimization based on prescription to target volumes was investigated. The treatments were performed with a Fletcher applicator. Results. For standard treatment planning, the tolerance dose limits were exceeded in the bladder, rectum and sigmoid in 26%, 4% and 15% of the plans, respectively. This was observed most often for the smallest target volumes. The individualized planning of the delivered treatment gave the possibility of controlling the dose to critical organs to below certain limits. The dose was still prescribed to point A. An increase in target dose coverage was achieved when additional individual optimization was performed, while still keeping the dose to the OARs below predefined limits. Relatively low average target coverage, especially for the largest volumes was however seen. Conclusion. The individualized delivered treatment plans ensured that doses to OARs were within acceptable limits. This was not the case in 42% of the corresponding standard plans. Further optimized treatment plans were found to give an overall better dose coverage. In lack of MR capacity, it may be favorable to use CT for planning due to possible protection of OARs. The CT based target volumes were, however, not equivalent to the volumes described in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based recommendations. Prescription and assessment of dose, when introducing such target volumes, should be evaluated and preferably compared to well known treatment regimens.

Acknowledgements

The technical support from Thorbjørn Tveit and Eva Susanne Oddvik, St. Olavs Hospital is greatly acknowledged. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.