Post on 03-Feb-2016
description
Comparison Of Two Contouring Methods Of Bone Marrow On CT & Correlation With Hematological Toxicities (HT) In Non Bone Marrow Sparing Pelvic IMRT (NBM-IMRT) With Concurrent Cisplatin For
Cervical CancerR. Krishnatry*, U. M. Mahantshetty, S. Chaudhri, A. Kanujia, R. Engineer, S. Chopra, S. K. Shrivastava,
Tata Memoiral Hosptial, Mumbai, India
Two setsVs.
In cervical cancer patients treated with Non Bone Marrow sparing IMRT (NBM-IMRT) & concurrent cisplatin.
• Compare the volumes & Dose volume parameters (DVH) for contours of bone marrow using two methods of contouring on CT scan
• Correlation of DVH parameters with > grade 2 (RTOG) Hematological Toxicity (HT).
• 47 patients prospectively enrolled & treated in pelvic IMRT (NBM-IMRT) and concurrent
cisplatinum in Phase II trial (NCT00193804).
• The planning CT scans contoured for pelvic bone marrow in two sets: (Fig 1)
- Whole bone using auto-segmentation (WB)
- Free hand (FH) inner cavity of bone
• Various sub-volumes were made in each set as sacrum; ilium; ischium; Lower Pelvis (pubes,
ischia, acetabula, & proximal femora); lumbosacral spine; sacrum & whole pelvis (all sub-
volumes as one)
• Volume & DVH parameters compared for two sets using paired t test
Purpose / Objectives
Conclusion
Materials / Methods
Results
• Free Hand bone marrow cavity volume is a better surrogate of active bone marrow on CT images both in terms of volumes and DVH parameters.• Only Free hand Whole Pelvis V40 >40% correlated with higher than grade 2 HT • It may be an important marker of high toxicity especially when V10 <90%.
Figure 1. Bone Marrow Contouring using Whole Bone & Free Hand Technique And various sub-volumes in each.
Number of Patients 47Age (years) - Mean (Range) 49.2 (33-65)
Stage IIB IMRT dose 50Gy/25#/5WeeksBrachy Dose 7Gy x 5 #
Transfusion - n(%) Pre-treatment [whole blood only]
On treatment Whole blood
G-CCFPlatelet
5(11%)
11 (24.7%)5 (10.6%)2(4.7%)
Chemotherapy (number)Chemotherapy agent / Dose
Mean no of cycles
47/47Cisplatin / 40 mg/m2
4.6
Mean PTV volume (range) cc 1440.37 (974-2352) cc
Table 1: General Characteristics
Comparison of volume
Whole bone (W)
Mean (Range) cc
Bone cavity free hand (F)
Mean (Range) ccF/Wx100 (%)
SacrumIlium
IschiumLower Pelvis
LS SpineWhole Pelvis
147 (105-218)265 (200-377)220 (139-369)417 (295-557)230 (150-322)
925 (690-1268)
31.4 (18-50)82.65 (53-139)
49.4 (27-81)105.9 (70-164)
47.3 (26-77)240 (170-372)
21.08%30.94%22.27%25.18%20.43%25.95%
Table 2: Comparison of Volumes
SPECT
IMRT [1]
Mean
Anal Ca,
Mell [2]
Mean (SD)
Cervix,
Mell [3]
Mean (SD)
Current,
Whole bone
Mean (SD)
Current, Free
hand
Mean (SD)
Whole pelvis
V10
V20
V30
V40
100
88
66
23
85(15)
75(17)
56(19)
32(17)
91(3.6)
74(6.1)
53(7.5)
28(10.3)
88(5.18)
79.6(5.2)
62.9(6.5)
40(0.45)
86.5 (6.8)
77.5 (6.2)
62.5 (6.5)
40.5 (8.4)
Table 3: Comparison of whole pelvis doses in various studies.
Figure 2: DVH of a Patient Developing Grade 3 Neutropenia
• Significant difference between DVH parameters of two sets (p<0.05) for all sub-volumes.
• Leucopenia, neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia > grade 2 was seen in 53%, 29.8%, 65.9%, and 10.6%, respectively.
• On both univariate and multivariate analysis only FH whole pelvis V40 ≥40% correlated with >grade 2 leucopenia (Whitney U,
p=0.026) and neutropenia (p=0.05) with OR 4 (CI, 1 .166 Y 13.728 ;P =0.028).
References1. Roeske et al. Incorp of SPECT bone marrow . Radiother Oncol 2005;77:11-72. Mell et al Association between….IJOBP 2008;70:1431-7. 3. Mell et al Dosimetric predic…. IJROBP 2006; 66 (5):1356–1365.
• Hematological parameters during treatment analyzed for > grade 2 (RTOG) HT as significant toxicity & correlated with DVH parameters using log regression analysis
Article in press in IJGC. Contact : krishnatry@gmail.com
drumeshm@gmail.com
Poster number 2554; E-01