Skin/mucosa avoidance radiotherapy (SMART) versus conventional volumetric arc‐based radiotherapy (VMAT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer: Dosimetric feasibility study

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundIntensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for head and neck cancer has led to a reduction in radiotherapy doses to normal tissues, like the salivary glands, while maintaining high rates of local control. Oral mucosal and skin toxicity is still a major source of treatment—related morbidity, occurring in most patients.PurposeWe conducted a dosimetric feasibility study with the goal of creating a methodology that could theoretically reduce the dose of radiation to skin and oral mucosa, while maintaining comparable avoidance of other organs at risk, and planning target volume (PTV) coverage.MethodsThe clinical plans of patients treated previously were replanned using coplanar VMAT arcs on a TrueBeam STx using the photon optimizer (PO) version 15.6 and the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm. Comparisons were made between three methodologies: “Conventional,” “Skin Sparing” and a skin/mucosa avoiding (“SMART”) technique, with dose metrics being compared using analysis of variance, with a Bonferroni correction to account for multiple pairwise comparisons. The maximum grade of mucositis and radiation dermatitis during treatment was correlated to different dose‐volume metrics to predict what could be clinically meaningful.ResultsSixteen patients met the study criteria and were replanned using the skin sparing and SMART techniques. Maximum doses to the skin sparing structure were reduced from 64.2 Gy to 56.6 and 55.9 Gy, in the skin sparing and SMART plans (p < 0.0001), and mean doses reduced from 26.7 Gy to 20.0 and 20.2 Gy, respectively (p < 0.0001). Maximum doses to the oral cavity structure were not reduced by either technique, however mean dose to the oral cavity structure was reduced from 39.03 Gy to 33.5 Gy by the SMART technique (p < 0.0001). There was a slight reduction in PTV_High coverage by the V95% in the SMART plans (99.52% vs. 98.79%, p = 0.0073), and a similar slight reduction in PTV_Low coverage by the V95% by both the skin sparing and SMART plans (99.74% vs. 97.89% vs. 97.42%, p < 0.0001). Maximum doses to organs at risk were not statistically different between techniques. Dose to oral cavity and maximum grade experienced during radiotherapy correlated. The Spearman correlation coefficient for dose to 20%, 50%, and 80% of the volume of oral cavity was 0.5 (p = 0.048), 0.64 (p = 0.007), and 0.62 (p = 0.010), respectively. Skin toxicity grade was only found to be correlated with the D20% of the skin sparing structure (Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.58, p = 0.0177).ConclusionThe SMART technique appears to be able to reduce maximum and mean skin dose, as well as mean oral cavity doses, while only slightly reducing PTV coverage, with acceptable OAR doses. We feel the improvements warrant investigation in a clinical trial.