Vol 27, No 2 (2022)
Research paper
Published online: 2022-02-08

open access

Page views 4993
Article views/downloads 308
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

A single centre evaluation of the 2019 UK SABR consortium guidelines for primary lung cancer: correlation between Prescription Dose Spillage and inverse Paddick Conformity Index

Simon Gray1, Sofia Kordolaimi2, Rachel Norris1, Dennis Yiannakis1
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2022;27(2):209-214.

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to determine level of agreement between RTOG Conformity Index (RTOG-CI), Paddick Conformity Index (PCI) and Prescription Dose Spillage (PDS) in describing lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) plan conformity; to elucidate any limitations, in practice, of PCI and PDS. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements report 91 (ICRU 91) aimed to reduce inconsistencies in dose prescription and normalisation between centres by specifying SABR reporting rules, and suggested using PCI. UK SABR Consortium 2019 guidelines adopted PDS to measure plan quality, but not the PCI.

Materials and methods: 51 consecutive lung SABR plans received 54 Gy in 3 fractions (54 Gy/3 Fr), 55 Gy/5 Fr or 60 Gy/8 Fr. Plans were developed according to 2016 UK SABR consortium guidelines, which did not specify PCI or PDS; these values were retrospectively calculated. As PCI varies from 0 to an optimum of 1, inverse PCI (invPCI) was used for calculations.

Results: PTV-adjusted PDS tolerances were met in 80.4% of studied plans. A near-perfect positive correlation between invPCI and PDS (R2 = 0.978) was found — stronger than between invPCI and the previously-used RTOG-CI (R2 = 0.915).

Conclusions: The strong invPCI-PDS correlation is likely dependent on adequate PTV coverage, present in our cohort. This supports the UK SABR Consortium’s adoption of PDS provided PTV coverage is ensured. Plan conformity should be confirmed by visual slice-by-slice review.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Chen H, Louie AV, Boldt RG, et al. Quality of Life After Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review. Clin Lung Cancer. 2016; 17(5): e141–e149.
  2. Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiation Therapy (SABR): A Resource, version 6.1 (2019). UK SABR Consortium. https://www.sabr.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/SABRconsortium-guidelines-2019-v6.1.0.pdf. (01/11/2020).
  3. The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Prescribing, Recording and Reporting of Stereotactic Treatments with Small Photon Beams. 2017(Report No. 91).
  4. McCammon R, Schefter TE, Gaspar LE, et al. Observation of a dose-control relationship for lung and liver tumors after stereotactic body radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 73(1): 112–118.
  5. Fowler J, Tomé W, Fenwick J, et al. A challenge to traditional radiation oncology. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004; 60(4): 1241–1256.
  6. Shaw E, Kline R, Gillin M, et al. Radiation therapy oncology group: Radiosurgery quality assurance guidelines. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1993; 27(5): 1231–1239.
  7. Paddick I. A simple scoring ratio to index the conformity of radiosurgical treatment plans. Technical note. J Neurosurg. 2000; 93 Suppl 3: 219–222.
  8. Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiation Therapy (SABR): A Resource, version 5.1 (2016). UK SABR Consortium.
  9. Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Photon-Beam Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). J ICRU. 2010; 10(1): 1–3.
  10. Hurkmans CW, Cuijpers JP, Lagerwaard FJ, et al. Recommendations for implementing stereotactic radiotherapy in peripheral stage IA non-small cell lung cancer: report from the Quality Assurance Working Party of the randomised phase III ROSEL study. Radiat Oncol. 2009; 4: 1.
  11. Vieillevigne L, Bessieres S, Ouali M, et al. Dosimetric comparison of flattened and unflattened beams for stereotactic body radiation therapy: Impact of the size of the PTV on dynamic conformal arc and volumetric modulated arc therapy. Phys Med. 2016; 32(11): 1405–1414.
  12. Vassiliev ON, Kry SF, Chang JY, et al. Stereotactic radiotherapy for lung cancer using a flattening filter free Clinac. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009; 10(1): 14–21.
  13. Pokhrel D, Halfman M, Sanford L. FFF-VMAT for SBRT of lung lesions: Improves dose coverage at tumor-lung interface compared to flattened beams. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020; 21(1): 26–35.
  14. Ohtakara K, Hayashi S, Hoshi H. The relation between various conformity indices and the influence of the target coverage difference in prescription isodose surface on these values in intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery. Br J Radiol. 2012; 85(1014): e223–e228.
  15. Lee J, Dean C, Patel R, et al. Multi-center evaluation of dose conformity in stereotactic body radiotherapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2019; 11: 41–46.



Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy