Article

Benedict SH, Yenice KM, Followill D, et al. Stereotactic body radiation therapy: the report of AAPM Task Group 101

University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908, USA.
Medical Physics (Impact Factor: 3.01). 08/2010; 37(8):4078-101. DOI: 10.1118/1.3438081
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Task Group 101 of the AAPM has prepared this report for medical physicists, clinicians, and therapists in order to outline the best practice guidelines for the external-beam radiation therapy technique referred to as stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). The task group report includes a review of the literature to identify reported clinical findings and expected outcomes for this treatment modality. Information is provided for establishing a SBRT program, including protocols, equipment, resources, and QA procedures. Additionally, suggestions for developing consistent documentation for prescribing, reporting, and recording SBRT treatment delivery is provided.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Bill J Salter, Aug 19, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
461 Views
  • Source
    • "While differences in treatment capabilities exist in the various lung SABR delivery platforms, a systematic review found no differences in overall survival for ES-NSCLC when using different technologies [83]. Published guidelines in both North America [84] [85] [86] and the European Union [47] [87] have supported institutional credentialing procedures, standardization of normal tissue tolerances, and increased discourse on the use of SABR in a multidisciplinary setting. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer is growing rapidly, particularly since it has become the recommended therapy for unfit patients in current European and North American guidelines. As three randomized trials comparing surgery and SABR closed prematurely because of poor accrual, clinicians are faced with a dilemma in individual patient decision-making. Radiation oncologists, in particular, should be aware of the data from comparative effectiveness studies that suggest similar survival outcomes irrespective of local treatment modality. The necessity of obtaining a pathological diagnosis, particularly in frail patients prior to treatment remains a challenge, and this topic was addressed in recent European recommendations. Awareness of the high incidence of a second primary lung cancer in survivors, as well as other competing causes of mortality, is needed. The challenges in distinguishing focal scarring from recurrence after SABR also need to be appreciated by multidisciplinary tumor boards. With a shift in focus toward patient-centered decision-making, clinicians will need to be aware of these new developments and communicate effectively with patients, to ensure that treatment decisions are reflective of patient preferences. Priorities for additional research in the area are proposed. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Radiotherapy and Oncology 12/2014; 114(2). DOI:10.1016/j.radonc.2014.11.036 · 4.86 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Common criteria chosen to evaluate the treatment plans were taken from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for Non-small cell lung cancer [21], Timmerman et al. [22], and AAPM task group no. 101 report on SABR for lung cancer [23]. The constraints adopted to accept a treatment plan were: "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Boron Neutron Capture Therapy (BNCT) is a radiotherapy that combines biological targeting and high LET radiation. It consists in the enrichment of tumour with (10)B and in the successive irradiation of the target with low energy neutrons producing charged particles that mainly cause non-repairable damages to the cells. The feasibility to treat Non Small Cells Lung Cancer (NSCLC) with BNCT was explored. This paper proposes a new approach to determine treatment plans, introducing the possibility to choose the irradiation start and duration to maximize the tumour dose. A Tumour Control Probability (TCP) suited for lung BNCT as well as other high dose radiotherapy schemes was also introduced. Treatment plans were evaluated in localized and disseminated lung tumours. Semi-ideal and real energy spectra beams were employed to assess the best energy range and the performance of non-tailored neutron sources for lung tumour treatments. The optimal neutron energy is within [500 eV-3 keV], lower than the 10 keV suggested for the treatment of deep-seated tumours in the brain. TCPs higher than 0.6 and up to 0.95 are obtained for all cases. Conclusions drawn from [Suzuki et al., Int Canc Conf J 1 (4) (2012) 235-238] supporting the feasibility of BNCT for shallow lung tumours are confirmed, however discussions favouring the treatment of deeper lesions and disseminated disease are also opened. Since BNCT gives the possibility to deliver a safe and potentially effective treatment for NSCLC, it can be considered a suitable alternative for patients with few or no treatment options.
    Physica Medica 08/2014; 30(8). DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.07.342 · 1.85 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "NA Total dose (Gy) [r] 81 54 (45–54) [36–60] 79 70.2 (70.2–70.2) [60–72.3] NA Fraction (#) [r] 81 3 (3–3) [2] [3] [4] [5] 79 26 (26–26) [17–30] NA "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and accelerated hypofractionated radiation therapy (AHRT) have favorable local control (LC) relative to conventional fractionation in the treatment of stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the results of our single institution experience with the treatment of early stage NSCLC with SBRT or AHRT in cases where SBRT was felt to be suboptimal. One hundred and sixty patients with Stage 1 and node negative Stage 2 NSCLC were treated with SBRT or AHRT from 2003 to 2011. Median follow-up was 29.4 and 19 months (mo), respectively. The median dose was 54Gy in 3 fractions (fx) (SBRT) and 70.2Gy in 26 fx (AHRT). Acute and late toxicities (tox) were graded (G) per CTCAE v4. Time to local (LF), regional (RF) and distant (DF) failure were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The impact of patient and tumor related factors on LF were estimated by multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. Three-year LC rates were 87.7% (SBRT) and 71.7% (AHRT). The 3-year freedom from DF was 73.3% and 68.1%. Median OS was 38.4 (95% CI 29.7-51.6) and 35 (95% CI 22-48.3) mo. No G3 or 4 tox were observed. At 1 year, 30% and 50% of complications resolved, while (5-6%) had persistent chest wall pain. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that increasing dose per fraction and tumor size (>5.5 vs. 4cm) in the AHRT and SBRT group were found to be associated with a reduced (HR 0.33 95% CI 0.13-0.84, p=0.021) and increased (HR: 6.372 95% CI 1.23-32.92, p=0.027) hazard for local failure respectively. Our results compare favorably with other reports of treatment for early stage NSCLC. AHRT patients had comparable LC despite increased size and central disease. Toxicity was limited and overall survival, regional and distant recurrences were similar between groups.
    Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 04/2014; 85(1). DOI:10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.04.003 · 3.74 Impact Factor
Show more