Prostate radiotherapy
Impact of planning target volume margins and rectal distention on biochemical failure in image-guided radiotherapy of prostate cancer

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2014.02.009Get rights and content

Abstract

Background and purpose

A previous study in our department demonstrated the negative impact on freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) of using too narrow planning target volume (PTV) margins during prostate image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). Here, we investigated the impact of appropriate PTV margins and rectal distention on FFBF.

Methods and materials

A total of 50 T1-T3N0M0 prostate cancer patients were treated with daily IGRT by implanted markers. In the first 25 patients, PTV margins were 3 mm laterolateral, 5 mm anterioposterior and 4 mm craniocaudal. The subsequent 25 patients were treated with isotropic margins of 6 mm. The rectal cross-sectional area (CSA) was determined on the planning CT. Median follow-up was 61 months.

Results

The overall 5-year FFBF was 83%. A 6 mm PTV margin was related to increased 5-year FFBF on univariate analysis (96% vs 74% with the tighter PTV margins, p = 0.04). The 5-year FFBF of patients with a rectal distention on the planning CT was worse compared to those with limited rectal filling (75% for CSA  9 cm2 vs 89% for CSA < 9 cm2, p = 0.02), which remained significant on multivariate analysis (p = 0.04).

Conclusion

This retrospective study illustrated the positive impact of PTV margin adaptation and addressed the importance of avoiding rectal distention at time of the planning CT.

Section snippets

Patient characteristics

We retrospectively evaluated a total institutional cohort of 50 men with cT1–3N0M0 prostate cancer who were treated consecutively between February 2002 and October 2009 with conformal arc RT (n = 42) or intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) (n = 8) on the Novalis system with daily IGRT by 3 fiducial gold markers, the latter implanted transrectal with ultrasound guidance. Mean age was 64 years (range, 52–79). Twenty of these patients in addition received concurrent androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The

Results

The overall 5-year FFBF was 83% (95% CI 67–92). The 5-year FFBF was 76% (95% CI 52–90) for the high- to very-high risk group compared to 90% (95% CI 63–97) for the intermediate- to low-risk group (p = 0.10). Patients in whom a PTV margin of 6 mm was applied (n = 25) displayed a statistically significant better FFBF compared to those (n = 25) with the tighter PTV margin of 3–5–4 mm (5-year FFBF 96% vs 74%, p = 0.04) (Fig. 1A). Of notice, the average CSA did not differ significantly between the group of

Discussion

The current retrospective study provides evidence of improved outcome after prostate IGRT with the use of adequate safety margins by demonstrating a 22% absolute gain in 5-year FFBF (96% vs 74%) with a PTV margin of 6, 6 and 6 mm in the LL, AP and CC directions as compared to 3, 5 and 4 mm. The isotropic 6 mm margin was applied for our marker positioning procedure since January 2008 based on data concerning intrafraction prostate motion and on the margin recipe by Van Herk et al. [6], [15], [16],

Conclusion

The combination of tight PTV margins and a distended rectum at time of the planning CT affected dramatically FFBF in prostate cancer patients undergoing daily IGRT by implanted markers. The current retrospective study illustrated a significant improvement in FFBF with the use of adequate PTV margins and emphasizes on the importance of avoiding rectal distention at time of the planning CT.

Conflict of interest

None to declare.

Acknowledgement

This research was not funded by grants.

References (25)

Cited by (0)

View full text