Briceño Guel, Diana Nohemi and Laverick, Nicola and MacLaren, Linda and MacLeod, Nicholas and Glegg, Martin and Lamb, Gillian and Houston, Peter and Carruthers, Ross and Grocutt, Laura and Valentine, Ronan (2024) Adaptive radiotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a retrospective audit of two bladder filling protocols. Radiation Oncology, 19 (1): 92. ISSN 1748-717X
AI Summary:
This study compared a bladder emptying (BE) protocol to a bladder filling (BF) protocol for radical radiotherapy of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The results showed that the BE protocol had smaller treatment volumes, reduced OAR and total body doses, and more consistent dosimetry throughout the treatment course.AI Topics:
Background:
Radical radiotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is challenging due to large variations in bladder shape, size and volume during treatment, with drinking protocols often employed to mitigate geometric uncertainties. Utilising adaptive radiotherapy together with CBCT imaging to select a treatment plan that best fits the bladder target and reduce normal tissue irradiation is an attractive option to compensate for anatomical changes. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare a bladder empty (BE) protocol to a bladder filling (BF) protocol with regards to variations in target volumes, plan of the day (PoD) selection and plan dosimetry throughout treatment.
Methods:
Forty patients were included in the study; twenty were treated with a BE protocol and twenty with a BF protocol to a total prescribed dose of 55 Gy in 20 fractions. Small, medium and large bladder plans were generated using three different CTV to PTV margins. Bladder (CTV) volumes were delineated on planning CTs and online pre-treatment CBCTs. Differences in CTV volumes throughout treatment, plan selection, PTV volumes and resulting dose metrics were compared for both protocols.
Results:
Mean bladder volume differed significantly on both the planning CTs and online pre-treatment CBCTs between the protocols (p < 0.05). Significant differences in bladder volumes were observed between the planning CT and pre-treatment CBCTs for BF (p < 0.05) but not for BE (p = 0.11). Both protocols saw a significant decrease in bladder volume between first and final treatment fractions (p < 0.05). Medium plans were preferentially selected for BE whilst when using the BF protocol the small plan was chosen most frequently. With no significant change to PTV coverage between the protocols, the volume of body receiving 25.0–45.8 Gy was found to be significantly smaller for BE patients (p < 0.05).
Conclusions:
This work provides evidence in favour of a BE protocol compared to a BF protocol for radical radiotherapy for MIBC. The smaller treatment volumes observed in the BE protocol led to reduced OAR and total body doses and were also observed to be more consistent throughout the treatment course. These results highlight improvements in dosimetry for patients who undergo a BE protocol for MIBC.
Title | Adaptive radiotherapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a retrospective audit of two bladder filling protocols |
---|---|
Creators | Briceño Guel, Diana Nohemi and Laverick, Nicola and MacLaren, Linda and MacLeod, Nicholas and Glegg, Martin and Lamb, Gillian and Houston, Peter and Carruthers, Ross and Grocutt, Laura and Valentine, Ronan |
Identification Number | 10.1186/s13014-024-02484-9 |
Date | 19 June 2024 |
Divisions | College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Cancer Sciences College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing College of Science and Engineering > School of Engineering |
Publisher | BioMed Central |
Additional Information | This study was part funded by the CRUK RadNet Award [grant number C16583/A28803]. Open Access funding enabled and organised by CRUK RadNet Glasgow, University of Glasgow, UK. |
URI | https://pub.demo35.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/227 |
---|
Item Type | Article |
---|---|
Depositing User | Unnamed user with email ejo1f20@soton.ac.uk |
Date Deposited | 11 Jun 2025 16:36 |
Revision | 38 |
Last Modified | 12 Jun 2025 10:54 |
![]() |