Abstract
Background Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) yields similar rates of recurrence and cosmetic outcomes as compared to whole breast radiation therapy (RT) when patients and treatment techniques are appropriately selected. APBI combined with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a promising technique for precisely delivering high levels of radiation while avoiding uninvolved breast tissue. Here we investigate the feasibility of automatically generating high quality APBI plans in the Ethos adaptive workspace with a specific emphasis on sparing the heart.
Methods Nine patients (10 target volumes) were utilized to iteratively tune an Ethos APBI planning template for automatic plan generation. Twenty patients previously treated on a TrueBeam Edge accelerator were then automatically replanned using this template without manual intervention or reoptimization. The unbiased validation cohort Ethos plans were benchmarked via adherence to planning objectives, a comparison of DVH and quality indices against the clinical Edge plans, and qualitative reviews by two board-certified radiation oncologists.
Results 85% (17/20) of automated validation cohort plans met all planning objectives; three plans did not achieve the contralateral lung V150cGy objective, but all other objectives were achieved. Compared to the Eclipse generated plans, the proposed Ethos template generated plans with greater evaluation planning target volume (PTV_Eval) V100% coverage (p = 0.01), significantly decreased heart V1500cGy (p < 0.001), and increased contralateral breast V500cGy, skin D0.01cc, and RTOG conformity index (p = 0.03, p = 0.03, and p = 0.01, respectively). However, only the reduction in heart dose was significant after correcting for multiple testing. Physicist-selected plans were deemed clinically acceptable without modification for 75% and 90% of plans by physicians A and B, respectively. Physicians A and B scored at least one automatically generated plan as clinically acceptable for 100% and 95% of planning intents, respectively.
Conclusions Standard left- and right-sided planning templates automatically generated APBI plans of comparable quality to manually generated plans treated on a stereotactic linear accelerator, with a significant reduction in heart dose compared to Eclipse generated plans. The methods presented in this work elucidate an approach for generating automated, cardiac-sparing APBI treatment plans for daily adaptive RT with high efficiency.
Competing Interest Statement
Richard Popples institution, University of Alabama at Birmingham, has product evaluation agreements and research grants with Varian Medical Systems. He has a patent licensed by UAB Research Foundation to Varian Medical Systems. He has received honoraria for presentations on behalf of Varian Medical Systems. He has received a stipend to speak at Sun Nuclear meetings. Varian Medical Systems provides equipment to UAB as a part of a product evaluation agreement. Drexel Boggs has received speaker honoraria and research support from Novocure. Dennis Stanley received honoraria from Varian medical systems to present on their behalf and is an educational consultant (speaker) for Varian Medical Systems; He received support through a clinical trial sponsored by Varian Medical Systems. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Funding Statement
Drexel Boggs received research support from Varian, including for this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB-1207033005 of University of Alabama at Birmingham gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
