Time-driven activity-based cost comparison of prostate cancer brachytherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy

PurposeTo evaluate the delivery cost of frequently used radiotherapy options offered to patients with intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer using time-driven activity-based costing and compare the results with Medicare reimbursement and relative value units (RVUs).Methods and MaterialsProcess maps were created to represent each step of prostate radiotherapy treatment at our institution. Salary data, equipment purchase costs, and consumable costs were factored into the cost analysis. The capacity cost rate was determined for each resource and calculated for each treatment option from initial consultation to its completion. Treatment options included low-dose-rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT), combined high-dose-rate brachytherapy single fraction boost with 25-fraction intensity-modulated radiotherapy (HDR-BT-IMRT), moderately hypofractionated 28-fraction IMRT, conventionally fractionated 39-fraction IMRT, and conventionally fractionated (2 Gy/fraction) 23-fraction pelvis irradiation with 16-fraction prostate boost.ResultsThe total cost to deliver LDR-BT, HDR-BT-IMRT, moderately hypofractionated 28-fraction IMRT, conventionally fractionated 39-fraction IMRT, conventionally fractionated 39-fraction IMRT, and conventionally fractionated (2 Gy/fraction) 23-fraction pelvis irradiation with 16-fraction prostate boost was $2719, $6517, $4173, $5507, and $5663, respectively. Total reimbursement for each course was $3123, $10,156, $7862, $9725, and $10,377, respectively. Radiation oncology attending time was 1.5–2 times higher for treatment courses incorporating BT. Attending radiation oncologist’s time consumed per RVU was higher with BT (4.83 and 2.56 minutes per RVU generated for LDR-BT and HDR-BT-IMRT, respectively) compared to without BT (1.41–1.62 minutes per RVU).ConclusionsTime-driven activity-based costing analysis identified higher delivery costs associated with prostate BT compared with IMRT alone. In light of recent guidelines promoting BT for intermediate- to high-risk disease, re-evaluation of payment policies is warranted to encourage BT delivery.     

Clinical experience with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for prostate cancer with the use of rectal balloon for prostate immobilization.

The implementation of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is the result of advances in imaging, radiotherapy planning technologies, and computer-controlled linear accelerators. IMRT allows both conformal treatment of tumors and conformal avoidance of the surrounding normal structures. The first patient treated with Peacock IMRT at Baylor College of Medicine took place in March 1994. To date, more than 1500 patients have been treated with IMRT; more than 700 patients were treated for prostate cancer. Our experience in treating prostate cancer with IMRT was reviewed. Patient and prostate motions are important issues to address in delivering IMRT. The Vac-Lok bag-and-box system, as well as rectal balloon for immobilization of patient and prostate gland, respectively, are employed. Treatment planning also plays a very important role. IMRT as a boost after conventional external beam radiotherapy is not our treatment strategy. To derive maximal benefits with this new technology, all patients received full course IMRT. Three separate groups of patients receiving (1) primary IMRT, (2) combined radioactive seed implant and IMRT, and (3) post-prostatectomy IMRT were addressed. Overall, toxicity profiles in these patients were very favorable. IMRT has the potential to improve treatment outcome with dose escalation while minimizing treatment-related toxicity.     

Cost-effectiveness of prostate boost with high-dose-rate brachytherapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of intermediate-high risk prostate cancer

PurposeThe recently published ASCENDE-RT randomized clinical trial demonstrated improved biochemical control, albeit with increased toxicity, for a prostate boost with brachytherapy versus external beam radiation therapy alone in patients with intermediate-high risk prostate cancer. In this study, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of these two modalities in the treatment of intermediate-high risk prostate cancer.Methods and materialsA multistate Markov model was created to model a patient with intermediate-high risk prostate cancer. The two treatment options modeled were (1) 23 fractions of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and two fractions of high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy (brachytherapy boost) and (2) 44 fractions of IMRT (IMRT alone). Each patient received 1 year of hormone therapy, per the ASCENDE-RT protocol. Model assumptions, including clinical outcomes, toxicity, and utilities were derived from the medical literature. Costs of radiation therapy were estimated using Medicare reimbursement data.ResultsThe estimated expected lifetime cost of brachytherapy boost was $68,696, compared to $114,944 for IMRT alone. Brachytherapy boost significantly lowered expected lifetime treatment costs because it decreased the incidence of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, cutting the use of expensive targeted therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Brachytherapy boost had an expected quality-adjusted life years of 10.8 years, compared to 9.3 years for IMRT alone. One-way sensitivity analyses of our results found brachytherapy boost to be cost-effective over a wide range of cost, utility, and cancer progression rate assumptions.ConclusionsIMRT with high-dose-rate brachytherapy boost is a cost-effective treatment for intermediate-high risk prostate cancer compared to IMRT alone.     

Dosimetric effects of weight loss or gain during volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Weight loss or gain during the course of radiation therapy for prostate cancer can alter the planned dose to the target volumes and critical organs. Typically, source-to-surface distance (SSD) measurements are documented by therapists on a weekly basis to ensure that patients' exterior surface and isocenter-to-skin surface distances remain stable. The radiation oncology team then determines whether the patient has undergone a physical change sufficient to require a new treatment plan. The effect of weight change (SSD increase or decrease) on intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dosimetry is not well known, and it is unclear when rescanning or replanning is needed. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of weight change (SSD increase or decrease) on IMRT or VMAT dose delivery in patients with prostate cancer and to determine the SSD change threshold for replanning. Whether IMRT or VMAT provides better dose stability under weight change conditions was also determined. We generated clinical IMRT and VMAT prostate and seminal vesicle treatment plans for varying SSDs for 10 randomly selected patients with prostate cancer. The differences due to SSD change were quantified by a specific dose change for a specified volume of interest. The target mean dose, decreased or increased by 2.9% per 1-cm SSD decrease or increase in IMRT and by 3.6% in VMAT. If the SSD deviation is more than 1 cm, the radiation oncology team should determine whether to continue treatment without modifications, to adjust monitor units, or to resimulate and replan.     

Larynx-sparing techniques using intensity-modulated radiation therapy for oropharyngeal cancer

The purpose of the current study was to explore whether the laryngeal dose can be reduced by using 2 intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques: whole-neck field IMRT technique (WF-IMRT) vs. junctioned IMRT (J-IMRT). The effect on planning target volumes (PTVs) coverage and laryngeal sparing was evaluated. WF-IMRT technique consisted of a single IMRT plan, including the primary tumor and the superior and inferior neck to the level of the clavicular heads. The larynx was defined as an organ at risk extending superiorly to cover the arytenoid cartilages and inferiorly to include the cricoid cartilage. The J-IMRT technique consisted of an IMRT plan for the primary tumor and the superior neck, matched to conventional antero-posterior opposing lower neck fields at the level of the thyroid notch. A central block was used for the anterior lower neck field at the level of the larynx to restrict the dose to the larynx. Ten oropharyngeal cancer cases were analyzed. Both the primary site and bilateral regional lymphatics were included in the radiotherapy targets. The averaged V95 for the PTV57.6 was 99.2% for the WF-IMRT technique compared with 97.4% (p = 0.02) for J-IMRT. The averaged V95 for the PTV64 was 99.9% for the WF-IMRT technique compared with 98.9% (p = 0.02) for J-IMRT and the averaged V95 for the PT70 was 100.0% for WF-IMRT technique compared with 99.5% (p = 0.04) for J-IMRT. The averaged mean laryngeal dose was 18 Gy with both techniques. The averaged mean doses within the matchline volumes were 69.3 Gy for WF-MRT and 66.2 Gy for J-IMRT (p = 0.03). The WF-IMRT technique appears to offer an optimal coverage of the target volumes and a mean dose to the larynx similar with J-IMRT and should be further evaluated in clinical trials.     

Verification of the dose attenuation of a newly developed vacuum cushion for intensity-modulated radiation therapy of prostate cancer

This study measured the dose attenuation of a newly developed vacuum cushion for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) of prostate cancer, and verified the effect of dose-correction accuracy in a radiation treatment planning system (RTPS). The new cushion was filled with polystyrene foams inflated 15-fold (Sφ ≒ 1 mm) to reduce contraction caused by air suction and was compared to normal polystyrene foam inflated to 50-fold (Sφ ≒ 2 mm). The dose attenuation at several thicknesses of compression bag filled with normal and low-inflation materials was measured using an ionization chamber; and then the calculated RTPS dose was compared to ionization chamber measurements, while the new cushion was virtually included as region of interest in the calculation area. The dose attenuation rate of the normal cushion was 0.010 %/mm (R ² = 0.9958), compared to 0.031 %/mm (R ² = 0.9960) in the new cushion. Although the dose attenuation rate of the new cushion was three times that of the normal cushion, the high agreement between calculated dose by RTPS and ionization chamber measurements was within approximately 0.005 %/mm. Thus, the results of the current study indicate that the new cushion may be effective in clinical use for dose calculation accuracy in RTPS.     

子宫颈癌术后调强放疗照射野设计的探讨

目的 通过对子宫颈癌调强放疗各种布野方案的比较,探讨符合临床要求的最佳照射方案。方法 对10例子宫颈癌患者采用调强治疗方案,处方剂量为46 Gy,分次量为2 Gy。每位患者做6个不同的治疗计划,分别为5野、7野、9野均分照射,初始入射角度选用0°和180°。分别计算比较靶区的覆盖度、均匀性、适形度各项指标。结果 7野和9野的靶区适形度基本一致,7野的均匀性最好,5野靶区覆盖度也能达到要求,但适形度和均匀度都次于7、9野;9野IMRT计划与5野IMRT计划相比没有减少正常组织的受照剂量,但增加了子野数和照射的总跳数,延长了治疗时间。结论 在子宫颈癌的调强放疗中,综合考虑各种物理和生物因素,建议在设计照射野时尽量选择7野照射。     

Evaluation of bladder dose in intensity-modulated radiation therapy of the prostate.

Day-to-day variation in bladder and rectal filling affects prostate location and positioning accuracy. Systems using ultrasonic localization or gold seed placement are most often used to help correct for these changes. At some institutions, patients are instructed to empty their rectum and fill their bladders prior to treatment in an attempt to standardize the prostate location, displace small bowel out of the radiation field, and move some of the bladder wall away from the high-dose area. Although instructed to come to treatment with a full bladder, it is presumed that there is variability in bladder filling each day of treatment, depending on the amount of fluids consumed and time to treatment. We have reviewed daily bladder volumes on a subset of 5 prostate patients, all of them prescribed to receive 7560 cGy in 42 fractions, and have evaluated the dosimetric consequences of bladder volume changes from full to two-third or one-third filling. All of these patients' positions were verified daily with ultrasonic localization. Those measurements have been used to help analyze the actual treated bladder volumes for comparison with the treatment plan. We find that, in general, maximum filling only occurred on the initial simulation/image acquisition day and was typically smaller on all the following treatment days. Based on our dose-volume model, we estimate that average bladder daily doses were 8-50% higher than predicted by the initial intensity-modulation radiation therapy (IMRT) plan.     

前列腺癌放射治疗进展

现代计算机技术推动医学影像技术高速发展,高水平的图像技术又推动放射治疗计划系统进入到更复杂、更高水平。放射治疗计划的设计由原来的二维图像和人工计算发展到了X射线图像和复杂的计算机运算。在治疗过程中,由于肿瘤代谢、抗原的差别,已经考虑到其与正常组织不同的生物学变量,使执行治疗计划时更加精确,如摆位误差、器官运动等已被全面系统地考虑,故又称四维放射治疗。     

Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment

The surface doses of 6- and 15-MV prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) irradiations were measured and compared to those from a 15-MV prostate 4-beam box (FBB). IMRT plans (step-and-shoot technique) using 5, 7, and 9 beams with 6- and 15-MV photon beams were generated from a Pinnacle treatment planning system (version 6) using computed tomography (CT) scans from a Rando Phantom (ICRU Report 48). Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor detectors were used and placed on a transverse contour line along the Phantom surface at the central beam axis in the measurement. Our objectives were to investigate: (1) the contribution of the dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC) to the surface dose during the IMRT irradiation; (2) the effects of photon beam energy and number of beams used in the IMRT plan on the surface dose. The results showed that with the same number of beams used in the IMRT plan, the 6-MV irradiation gave more surface dose than that of 15 MV to the phantom. However, when the number of beams in the plan was increased, the surface dose difference between the above 2 photon energies became less. The average surface dose of the 15-MV IMRT irradiation increased with the number of beams in the plan, from 0.86% to 1.19%. Conversely, for 6 MV, the surface dose decreased from 1.33% to 1.24% as the beam number increased from 7 to 9. Comparing the 15-MV FBB and 6-MV IMRT plans with 2 Gy/fraction, the IMRT irradiations gave generally more surface dose, from 15% to 30%, depending on the number of beams in the plan. It was found that the increase in surface dose for the IMRT technique compared to the FBB plan was predominantly due to the number of beams and the calculated monitor units required to deliver the same dose at the isocenter in the plans. The head variation due to the dynamic MLC movement changing the surface dose distribution on the patient was reflected by the IMRT dose-intensity map. Although prostate IMRT in this study had an average higher surface dose than that of FBB, the more even distribution of relatively lower surface dose in IMRT field could avoid the big dose peaks at the surface positions directly under the FBB fields. Such an even and low surface dose distribution surrounding the patient in IMRT is believed to give less skin complication than that of FBB with the same prescribed dose.     

Study on surface dose generated in prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment

The surface doses of 6- and 15-MV prostate intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) irradiations were measured and compared to those from a 15-MV prostate 4-beam box (FBB). IMRT plans (step-and-shoot technique) using 5, 7, and 9 beams with 6- and 15-MV photon beams were generated from a Pinnacle treatment planning system (version 6) using computed tomography (CT) scans from a Rando Phantom (ICRU Report 48). Metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor detectors were used and placed on a transverse contour line along the Phantom surface at the central beam axis in the measurement. Our objectives were to investigate: (1) the contribution of the dynamic multileaf collimator (MLC) to the surface dose during the IMRT irradiation; (2) the effects of photon beam energy and number of beams used in the IMRT plan on the surface dose. The results showed that with the same number of beams used in the IMRT plan, the 6-MV irradiation gave more surface dose than that of 15 MV to the phantom. However, when the number of beams in the plan was increased, the surface dose difference between the above 2 photon energies became less. The average surface dose of the 15-MV IMRT irradiation increased with the number of beams in the plan, from 0.86% to 1.19%. Conversely, for 6 MV, the surface dose decreased from 1.33% to 1.24% as the beam number increased from 7 to 9. Comparing the 15-MV FBB and 6-MV IMRT plans with 2 Gy/fraction, the IMRT irradiations gave generally more surface dose, from 15% to 30%, depending on the number of beams in the plan. It was found that the increase in surface dose for the IMRT technique compared to the FBB plan was predominantly due to the number of beams and the calculated monitor units required to deliver the same dose at the isocenter in the plans. The head variation due to the dynamic MLC movement changing the surface dose distribution on the patient was reflected by the IMRT dose-intensity map. Although prostate IMRT in this study had an average higher surface dose than that of FBB, the more even distribution of relatively lower surface dose in IMRT field could avoid the big dose peaks at the surface positions directly under the FBB fields. Such an even and low surface dose distribution surrounding the patient in IMRT is believed to give less skin complication than that of FBB with the same prescribed dose.     

Automated prediction of dosimetric eligibility of patients with prostate cancer undergoing intensity-modulated radiation therapy using a convolutional neural network

The quality of radiotherapy has greatly improved due to the high precision achieved by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Studies have been conducted to increase the quality of planning and reduce the costs associated with planning through automated planning method; however, few studies have used the deep learning method for optimization of planning. The purpose of this study was to propose an automated method based on a convolutional neural network (CNN) for predicting the dosimetric eligibility of patients with prostate cancer undergoing IMRT. Sixty patients with prostate cancer who underwent IMRT were included in the study. Treatment strategy involved division of the patients into two groups, namely, meeting all dose constraints and not meeting all dose constraints, by experienced medical physicists. We used AlexNet (i.e., one of common CNN architectures) for CNN-based methods to predict the two groups. An AlexNet CNN pre-trained on ImageNet was fine-tuned. Two dataset formats were used as input data: planning computed tomography (CT) images and structure labels. Five-fold cross-validation was used, and performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, and prediction accuracy. Class activation mapping was used to visualize the internal representation learned by the CNN. Prediction accuracies of the model with the planning CT image dataset and that with the structure label dataset were 56.7?±?9.7% and 70.0?±?11.3%, respectively. Moreover, the model with structure labels focused on areas associated with dose constraints. These results revealed the potential applicability of deep learning to the treatment planning of patients with prostate cancer undergoing IMRT.     

Multiplanar arc boost radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Localized prostatic carcinoma may be treated with either radical surgery or radiation therapy. Radiation therapy techniques for localized prostatic carcinoma include mega-voltage external irradiation or interstitial implantation, usually with iodine-125 seeds. Two external-beam techniques, multiplanar arc and biplanar arc, are additional options for the treatment of localized prostatic carcinoma. Film dosimetry measurements were made in pelvic phantoms to compare the isodose distributions of various external-beam radiation therapy techniques for boost treatment of prostate target volumes. Idealized calculations were performed to determine the isodose distribution of an I-125 implant. A comparison of these techniques shows that the multiplanar and biplanar arc techniques produce isodose distributions that may be useful in the treatment of prostate carcinoma.     

宫颈癌术后限定骨髓剂量盆腔调强放疗的临床研究

目的 观察宫颈癌患者术后限定骨髓剂量的盆腔调强放疗(BMS-IMRT)与非限定骨髓剂量的盆腔调强放疗(IMRT)联合化疗的近期疗效及不良反应。方法 本院宫颈癌术后患者70例,用抽签方法随机分为BMS-IMRT组34例和IMRT组36例,行盆腔外照射调强放疗联合化疗,计划靶体积剂量45 Gy分25次。BMS-IMRT组勾画骨盆并给予单独限量:骨盆V₃₀≤50%;70例患者同期每周40 mg/m²顺铂化疗。结果 除3例因重度骨髓抑制未完成化疗外,67例患者顺利完成治疗。两组2年的局部控制率及生存率、下消化道及泌尿系统不良反应差异无统计学意义,BMS-IMRT组血液学不良反应较IMRT组轻,差异有统计学意义(χ²=14.355,P<0.05)。结论 宫颈癌术后行盆腔同步放化疗患者,BMS-IMRT组较IMRT组血液学不良反应减轻,近期疗效及其他放疗不良反应无明显差异。     

剂量验证在宫颈癌全盆调强放疗中的应用

目的 探讨电离室法和胶片法评价宫颈癌全盆调强放射治疗的剂量准确性.方法 采用Pinnacle 7.0逆向调强计划系统对宫颈癌患者设计全盆调强计划,并将该治疗计划移植至模体,采用指形电离室测量预先设定的空间点的绝对剂量,然后将各照射野机架角置于0°,用胶片分别测量各射野在模体表面下2cm实际的注量图,将实测的剂量和注量图与治疗计划系统给出的结果 相比对.结果 各有效测量点绝对剂量与实测剂量的偏差均低于5%,而实际照射注量图与计划输出注量图的比对结果 基本一致.结论 采用电离室法和胶片法验证宫颈癌全盆调强切实可行,测量结果 符合临床要求.     

Combined brachytherapy with external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: reduced morbidity with an intraoperative brachytherapy planning technique and supplemental intensity-modulated radiation therapy

PURPOSE: To report the acute and late treatment-related toxicities of combined permanent interstitial (125)I implantation delivered via real-time intraoperative planning and supplemental intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: One hundred twenty-seven patients were treated with a combined modality (CM) regimen consisting of (125)I implantation (110Gy) using a transrectal ultrasound-guided approach followed 2 months later by 50.4Gy of IMRT directed to the prostate and seminal vesicles. Late toxicity was scored according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity scale. The acute and late toxicities were compared to a contemporaneously treated cohort of 216 patients treated with (125)I alone to a prescribed dose of 144Gy. RESULTS: The incidence of Grade 2 acute rectal and urinary side effects was 1% and 10%, respectively, and 2 patients developed Grade 3 acute urinary toxicities. The 4-year incidence of late Grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity was 9%, and no Grade 3 or 4 complications have been observed. The 4-year incidence of late Grade 2 gastrourinary toxicities was 15% and 1 patient developed a Grade 3 urethral stricture, which was corrected with urethral dilatation. The percentage of patients who experienced resolution of late rectal and urinary symptoms was 92% and 65%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that in addition to higher baseline International Prostate Symptom Score, those patients treated with implant alone compared to CM were more likely to experience Grade 2 acute urinary symptoms. Increased Grade 2 late rectal toxicities were noted for CM patients (9% vs. 1%; p=0.001) as well as a significant increase for late Grade 2 urinary toxicities (15% vs. 9%; p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to dose constraints with combination real-time brachytherapy using real-time intraoperative planning and IMRT is associated with a low incidence of acute and late toxicities. Acute urinary side effects were significantly less common for CM patients compared to those treated with implantation alone. Late Grade 2 rectal and urinary toxicities were more common for patients treated with CM compared to implant alone.     

调强适形放射治疗计划剂量学的验证

目的探讨逆向调强适形放射治疗(IMRT)过程中剂量学验证的方法，保证IMRT治疗计划临床实施的正确性。方法针对实施IMRT病人，使用CMS FOCUS9200三维治疗计划系统设计出5野IMRT治疗计划。利用固体水模板在治疗计划系统中建立三维等效体模。将待验证病人的IMRT计划移置到体模中重新进行优化，计算出体模中感兴趣点或平面上的剂量和剂量分布。将体模移放到加速器治疗床上，调用体模IMRT计划数据对体模进行模拟照射。使用0．23 cc电离室测量出体模中感兴趣点上的吸收剂量；使用RIT 113胶片剂量分析系统测量出体模中感兴趣平面上的剂量分布。然后和计划系统计算的结果相比较，验证绝对剂量和相对剂量。结果绝对剂量和相对剂量的测量结果基本上和计划系统计算的结果相一致。测量的绝对剂量误差在3％以内，相对剂量曲线分布也是比较准确的。结论IMRT计划剂量学验证是临床实施IMRT治疗过程中的可靠保证。