A dosimetric comparison of different radiotherapy modalities for Non-Resected oligometastatic liver Disease

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Cas Stefaan Dejonckheere , Mateusz Bilski , Younèss Nour , Davide Scafa , Paweł Cisek , Katarzyna Korab , Julia Ponikowska , Ewa Wojtyna , Sylwia Sroka , Fabian Kugel , Molina Grimmer , Jasmin Holz , Stephan Garbe , Patrick Eich , Eleni Gkika , Gustavo Renato Sarria , Julian Philipp Layer
{"title":"A dosimetric comparison of different radiotherapy modalities for Non-Resected oligometastatic liver Disease","authors":"Cas Stefaan Dejonckheere ,&nbsp;Mateusz Bilski ,&nbsp;Younèss Nour ,&nbsp;Davide Scafa ,&nbsp;Paweł Cisek ,&nbsp;Katarzyna Korab ,&nbsp;Julia Ponikowska ,&nbsp;Ewa Wojtyna ,&nbsp;Sylwia Sroka ,&nbsp;Fabian Kugel ,&nbsp;Molina Grimmer ,&nbsp;Jasmin Holz ,&nbsp;Stephan Garbe ,&nbsp;Patrick Eich ,&nbsp;Eleni Gkika ,&nbsp;Gustavo Renato Sarria ,&nbsp;Julian Philipp Layer","doi":"10.1016/j.ctro.2025.100947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The role of radiotherapy in the context of limited liver metastases is emerging rapidly with a variety of available technical approaches. Here, we provide a dosimetric comparison of three different radiotherapy modalities for non-resected liver metastases.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This multicentric study included 30 patients previously treated for solitary liver metastases. Interstitial high dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and kilovoltage electronic brachytherapy (eBT) with a single dwelling point, as an in this context novel modality, were planned with a 25-Gy single fraction and dosimetrically compared. The primary endpoint was difference in healthy liver tissue exposure. Secondary endpoints included target volume coverage, dose to the surrounding organs at risk (OARs), and radiation treatment time.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The median (range) lesion volume was 9.3 (2.5 − 29.7) cm<sup>3</sup>. Electronic BT yielded a significantly better OAR dose sparing compared to SBRT. Radiation exposure to the healthy liver was significantly lower with eBT (V9.1 Gy 13.8 [3.4–41.6] cm<sup>3</sup>) and HDR (49.2 [12.7–116.8] cm<sup>3</sup>) when compared with SBRT (98.8 [54.3–303.7] cm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001 for both). Mean treatment time was shortest for SBRT (6.1 min vs. 7.8 min for HDR [<em>p</em> = 0.003] vs. 16.1 min for eBT [<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001]). Equally, CTV D90% and D95% were superior for SBRT (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001 vs. HDR and eBT).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Minimally invasive single-catheter eBT provides a new potential approach in the context of unresectable liver metastases, with optimal OAR dose sparing, yet suboptimal target volume coverage. Combining the advantages of both modalities, a multi-dwelling eBT approach as in HDR might ease applicability in clinical routine with optimized target coverage while maintaining excellent OAR doses. Future prospective investigations are required to further define its role within well-established liver-directed therapies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10342,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","volume":"52 ","pages":"Article 100947"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630825000370","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The role of radiotherapy in the context of limited liver metastases is emerging rapidly with a variety of available technical approaches. Here, we provide a dosimetric comparison of three different radiotherapy modalities for non-resected liver metastases.

Methods

This multicentric study included 30 patients previously treated for solitary liver metastases. Interstitial high dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and kilovoltage electronic brachytherapy (eBT) with a single dwelling point, as an in this context novel modality, were planned with a 25-Gy single fraction and dosimetrically compared. The primary endpoint was difference in healthy liver tissue exposure. Secondary endpoints included target volume coverage, dose to the surrounding organs at risk (OARs), and radiation treatment time.

Results

The median (range) lesion volume was 9.3 (2.5 − 29.7) cm3. Electronic BT yielded a significantly better OAR dose sparing compared to SBRT. Radiation exposure to the healthy liver was significantly lower with eBT (V9.1 Gy 13.8 [3.4–41.6] cm3) and HDR (49.2 [12.7–116.8] cm3) when compared with SBRT (98.8 [54.3–303.7] cm3; p < 0.001 for both). Mean treatment time was shortest for SBRT (6.1 min vs. 7.8 min for HDR [p = 0.003] vs. 16.1 min for eBT [p < 0.001]). Equally, CTV D90% and D95% were superior for SBRT (p < 0.001 vs. HDR and eBT).

Conclusion

Minimally invasive single-catheter eBT provides a new potential approach in the context of unresectable liver metastases, with optimal OAR dose sparing, yet suboptimal target volume coverage. Combining the advantages of both modalities, a multi-dwelling eBT approach as in HDR might ease applicability in clinical routine with optimized target coverage while maintaining excellent OAR doses. Future prospective investigations are required to further define its role within well-established liver-directed therapies.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology
Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
114
审稿时长
40 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信