Background Adaptive magnetic resonance imaging‐guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) can escalate dose to tumors while minimizing dose to normal tissue. We evaluated outcomes of inoperable pancreatic cancer patients treated using MRgRT with and without dose escalation. Methods We reviewed 44 patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer treated with MRgRT. Treatments included conventional fractionation, hypofractionation, and stereotactic body radiation therapy. Patients were stratified into high‐dose (biologically effective dose [BED 10 ] >70) and standard‐dose groups (BED 10 ≤70). Overall survival (OS), freedom from local failure (FFLF) and freedom from distant failure (FFDF) were evaluated using Kaplan‐Meier method. Cox regression was performed to identify predictors of OS. Acute gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity was assessed for 6 weeks after completion of RT. Results Median follow‐up was 17 months. High‐dose patients (n = 24, 55%) had statistically significant improvement in 2‐year OS (49% vs 30%, P = 0.03) and trended towards significance for 2‐year FFLF (77% vs 57%, P = 0.15) compared to standard‐dose patients (n = 20, 45%). FFDF at 18 months in high‐dose vs standard‐dose groups was 24% vs 48%, respectively ( P = 0.92). High‐dose radiation (HR: 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21‐0.94; P = 0.03) and duration of induction chemotherapy (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72‐0.98; P = 0.03) were significantly correlated with OS on univariate analysis but neither factor was independently predictive on multivariate analysis. Grade 3+ GI toxicity occurred in three patients in the standard‐dose group and did not occur in the high‐dose group. Conclusions Patients treated with dose‐escalated MRgRT demonstrated improved OS. Prospective evaluation of high‐dose RT regimens with standardized treatment parameters in inoperable pancreatic cancer patients is warranted.

BackgroundGlioblastoma is the most common brain tumor in adults. The mechanisms leading to glioblastoma are not well understood but animal studies support that inactivation of tumor suppressor genes in neural stem cells (NSC) is required and sufficient to induce glial cancers. This suggests that the NSC niches in the brain may harbor cancer stem cells (CSCs), Thus providing novel therapy targets. We hypothesize that higher radiation doses to these NSC niches improve patient survival by eradicating CSCs.Methods55 adult patients with Grade 3 or Grade 4 glial cancer treated with radiotherapy at UCLA between February of 2003 and May of 2009 were included in this retrospective study. Using radiation planning software and patient radiological records, the SVZ and SGL were reconstructed for each of these patients and dosimetry data for these structures was calculated.ResultsUsing Kaplan-Meier analysis we show that patients whose bilateral subventricular zone (SVZ) received greater than the median SVZ dose (= 43 Gy) had a significant improvement in progression-free survival if compared to patients who received less than the median dose (15.0 vs 7.2 months PFS; P = 0.028). Furthermore, a mean dose >43 Gy to the bilateral SVZ yielded a hazard ratio of 0.73 (P = 0.019). Importantly, similarly analyzing total prescription dose failed to illustrate a statistically significant impact.ConclusionsOur study leads us to hypothesize that in glioma targeted radiotherapy of the stem cell niches in the adult brain could yield significant benefits over radiotherapy of the primary tumor mass alone and that damage caused by smaller fractions of radiation maybe less efficiently detected by the DNA repair mechanisms in CSCs.

Purpose To report on a novel technique for providing artifact-free quantitative 4DCT image datasets for breathing motion modeling. Methods Commercial clinical four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) methods have trouble managing irregular breathing. The resulting images contain motion-induced artifacts that can distort structures and inaccurately characterize breathing motion. We have developed a novel scanning and analysis method for motion-correlated CT that utilizes standard repeated fast helical acquisitions, a simultaneous breathing surrogate measurement, deformable image registration, and a published breathing motion model. Results The motion model differs from the CT-measured motion by an average of 0.72 mm, indicating the precision of the motion model. The integral of the divergence of one of the motion model parameters is predicted to be a constant 1.11 and is found in this case to be 1.09, indicating the accuracy of the motion model. Conclusions The proposed technique shows promise for providing motion-artifact free images at user-selected breathing phases, accurate Hounsfield units, and noise characteristics similar to non-4D CT techniques, at a patient dose similar to or less than current 4DCT techniques.

No abstract

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance–guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) has recently become commercially available, offering the opportunity to accurately image and target moving tumors as compared with computed tomography-guided radiation therapy (CTgRT) systems. However, the costs of delivering care with these 2 modalities remain poorly described. With localized unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma as an example, we were able to use time-driven activity-based costing to determine the cost of treatment on linear accelerators with CTgRT compared with MRgRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Process maps, informed via interviews with departmental personnel, were created for each phase of the care cycle. Stereotactic body radiation therapy was delivered at 50 Gy in 5 fractions, either with CTgRT using fiducial placement, deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) with real-time position management, and volumetric-modulated arc therapy, or with MRgRT using real-time tumor gating, DIBH, and static-gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy. RESULTS: Direct clinical costs were $7,306 for CTgRT and $8,622 for MRgRT comprising personnel costs ($3,752 v $3,603), space and equipment costs ($2,912 v $4,769), and materials costs ($642 v $250). Increased MRgRT costs may be mitigated by forgoing CT simulation ($322 saved) or shortening treatment to 3 fractions ($1,815 saved). Conversely, adaptive treatment with MRgRT would result in an increase in cost of $529 per adaptive treatment. CONCLUSION: MRgRT offers real-time image guidance, avoidance of fiducial placement, and ability to use adaptive treatments; however, it is 18% more expensive than CTgRT under baseline assumptions. Future studies that elucidate the magnitude of potential clinical benefits of MRgRT are warranted to clarify the value of using this technology.