Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:02:23.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of brachial plexus movement during radical radiotherapy for head and neck cancers: the case for a larger planning organ at risk volume margin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2019

Asma Sarwar Open the ORCID record for Asma Sarwar [Opens in a new window] ,
Shelly English ,
Yanni Papastavrou  and
Anna Thompson
Asma Sarwar*
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, UK
Shelly English
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, UK
Yanni Papastavrou
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, UK
Anna Thompson
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy Department, North Middlesex University Hospital, London, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Asma Sarwar, Radiotherapy Department, North Middlesex University Hospital, Sterling Way, London N18 1QX, UK. Tel: +44 7939718251. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Treatment volumes for radical radiotherapy to head and neck cancers commonly extend into the lower neck, the territory of the brachial plexus (BP). There is a risk of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy, a non-reversible late toxicity experienced by a small number of patients. The BP was anatomically divided into superior and inferior divisions and analysed to establish if segmental inter-fractional BP movement should be considered when planning radiotherapy in this high-dose region.

Methods:

A retrospective single-centre analysis of 15 patients with head and neck cancers treated with radical bilateral neck irradiation was conducted. The extent of BP movement relative to the planning scan was assessed using weekly cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. The BP was contoured on the planning scan and the subsequent six weekly CBCTs; this was used to calculate the Jaccard Conformity Index (JCI) for the left, right, superior and inferior divisions of the BP.

Results:

The mean (±SD) JCI for right and left superior BP was 44·4±15·5%, whereas the mean (±SD) JCI for right and left inferior BP was 38·3±15·5%. There was a statistically significant difference between superior and inferior JCI, p=0·0002, 95% CI (−9·26 to −2·88). Bilateral superior BP JCI was higher, with better conformity than the corresponding inferior divisions.

Conclusions:

Inter-fractional BP movement occurs; the greatest movement is seen at the inferior division. This data suggest the need for re-evaluation of current BP margins and consideration of a larger inferior BP planning at risk volume (PRV) margin.

Keywords

Brachial plexushead and neck cancersinterfractionalorgan at risk volumeradical radiotherapy
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 2020 , pp. 103 - 107
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Emami, B, Lyman, J, Brown, Aet al.Tolerance of normal tissue to therapeutic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991; 21: 109–122.10.1016/0360-3016(91)90171-YCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arya, A, Jinzhong, Y, Williamson, Ret al. Dose constraints to prevent radiation-induced brachial plexopathy in patients treated for lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82 (3): e391–e398.Google Scholar
Delanian, S, Lefaix, J L, Pradat, P F.Radiation-induced neuropathy in cancer survivors. Radiother Oncol 2012; 105 (3): 273–282.10.1016/j.radonc.2012.10.012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ang, K K, Harris, J, Wheeler, Ret al.Human papillomavirus and survival of patients with oropharyngeal cancer. NEJM 2010; 363: 24–35.10.1056/NEJMoa0912217CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, W H, Guiou, M, Lee, N Yet al. Development and validation of a standardised method for contouring the brachial plexus: preliminary dosimetric analysis amoung patients treated with IMRT for head and neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 72 (5): 1362–1367.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neubauer, E, Dong, L, Followill, D Set al.Assessment of shoulder position variation and its impact on IMRT and VMAT doses for head and neck cancer. Radiat Oncol 2012; 7: 19.10.1186/1748-717X-7-19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahn, P H, Ahn, A I, Lee, C Jet al. Random positional variation among the skull, mandible, and cervical spine with treatment progression during head and neck radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 73 (2): 626–633.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.10.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ove, R, Cavalieri, R, Noble, Det al. Variation of neck position with image-guided radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2012; 35 (1): 1–5.10.1097/COC.0b013e3181fe46bbCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amira, B, Dirk, R, Fabian, Fet al.Is there a life-long risk of brachial plexopathy after radiotherapy of supraclavicular lymph nodes in breast cancer patients? Radonc 2004; 71 (3): 297–301.Google Scholar
Schierle, A, Winograd, J M. Radiation induced brachial plexopathy: review. Complication without a cure. J Reconstr Microsurg 2004; 20 (2): 149–152.Google ScholarPubMed
Gillette, E L, Mahler, P A, Powers, B E, et al.Late radiation injury to muscle and peripheral nerves. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31: 1309–1318.10.1016/0360-3016(94)00422-HCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schierle, C, Winogard, J M.Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy: review. J Reconsrt Microsurg 2004; 20: 149–151.Google ScholarPubMed
Cai, Z, Li, Y, Hu, Zet al. Radiation induced brachial plexopathy in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a retrospective study. Oncotarget 2016; 7 (14): 18887–18895.10.18632/oncotarget.7748CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schierle, C, Winogard, J M.Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy: review. J Reconsrt Microsurg 2004; 20: 149–151.Google ScholarPubMed
Galecki, J, Hicer-Grzenkowicz, J, Grudzien-Kowalska, Met al.Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy and hypofractionated regimens in adjuvant irradiation of patients with breast cancer–A review. Acta Oncol 2006; 45: 280–284.10.1080/02841860500371907CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierce, S M, Recht, A, Lingos, T Iet al.Long-term radiation complication following conservative surgery (CS) and radiation therapy (RT) in patients with early stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1992; 23: 915–923.10.1016/0360-3016(92)90895-OCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, N K, Pfeiffer, P, Johannsen, L, Schroder, H, Rose, C.Radiation-induced brachial plexopathy: neurological follow-up in 161 recurrence free breast cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 26: 43–49.10.1016/0360-3016(93)90171-QCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khan, M, Siddiqui, S A, Gupta, M Ket al. Normal tissue complications following hypofractionated chest wall radiotherapy in breast cancer patients and their correlation with patient, tumor and treatment characteristics. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2017; 38 (2): 121–127.Google ScholarPubMed
Gilbeau, L, Octave-Prignot, M, Loncol, T, Renard, L, Scalliet, P, Gregoire, V.Comparison of setup accuracy of three different thermoplastic masks for the treatment of brain and head and neck tumours. Radiother Oncol 2001; 58: 155–162.10.1016/S0167-8140(00)00280-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kneebone, A, Gebski, V, Hogebdoom, N, Tumer, S.A randomized trial evaluating rigid immobilisation for pelvic irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 56: 1105–1111.10.1016/S0360-3016(03)00222-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenthal, S A, Roche, M, Goldsmith, B Jet al.Immobilisation improves the reproducibility of patient positioning during 6-field conformal radiation therapy for prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 27: 921–926.10.1016/0360-3016(93)90469-CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, H, Zhu, X R, Zhang, Let al.Comparison of 2D radiographic images and 3D cone beam computed tomotherapy for positioning head and neck radiotherapy patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 71: 916–925.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.01.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jena, R, Kirkby, N F, Burton, K Eet al.A novel algorithm for the morphometric assessment of radiotherapy treatment planning volumes. Br J Radiol 2010; 83: 44–51.10.1259/bjr/27674581CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, R P, Truong, P T, Kader, H Aet al.Target volume delineation for partial breast radiotherapy planning: clinical characteristics associated with low interobserver concordance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69: 41–48.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.01.070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gwynne, S, Spezi, E, Sebag-Montefiore, Det al.Improving radiotherapy quality assurance in clinical trials: assessment of target volume delineation of the preaccrual benchmark case. Br J Radiol 2013; 1024: 20120398.10.1259/bjr.20120398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feuvret, L, Noel, G, Mazeron, J J, Bay, P.Conformity index: a review. Int J Radiat Onc Biol Phys 2006; 64: 333–342.10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.09.028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsson, M, Hedelin, B, Johansson, I, Athlin, E. Eating problems and weight loss for patients with head and neck cancer: a chart review from diagnosis until one year after treatment. Cancer Nursing 2005; 28: 425–435.10.1097/00002820-200511000-00004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed