Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

MRgSBRT and replanned CTgSBRT show similar organ-at-risk dosimetry in prostate cancerReplanning CT scans with smaller margins improved safety for prostate cancer patients compared to standard plans

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider that reduced PTV margins for CTgSBRT may improve rectal dosimetry but the bladder toxicity impact is uncertain.

This is a post hoc analysis of a Phase 3 trial, retrospectively replanning CT-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy (CTgSBRT) for patients with localized prostate cancer. The study compared replanned CTgSBRT with 3-mm or 2-mm planning target volume (PTV) margins to the standard 4-mm margin and to MR-guided SBRT (MRgSBRT) plans.

For rectal dosimetry, results were similar with a 3-mm margin and statistically significantly improved with a 2-mm margin compared to MRgSBRT. Bladder dosimetry was similar. Modeled rectal toxicity probability showed a relative reduction of 56% when moving from a 4-mm to a 3-mm margin and 78% when moving to a 2-mm margin. Bladder toxicity probability showed a relative reduction of 96%, but this was not statistically significant.

Safety data, including adverse events, serious adverse events, discontinuations, and tolerability, were not reported. Key limitations include an incomplete understanding of drivers of post-SBRT urinary toxicity and large but nonsignificant relative differences for bladder toxicity.

The practice relevance is that reducing PTV margins for CTgSBRT plans produced similar to improved organs-at-risk dosimetry compared with clinical MRgSBRT plans. The improvement in dosimetry could explain the reduction in modeled rectal toxicity, but the impact on bladder toxicity is unclear.

A recent look at radiation plans for localized prostate cancer found that adjusting standard computer tomography scans worked well. Some patients received plans based on magnetic resonance imaging, which usually uses very tight safety borders. Other patients had their standard scans re-planned to match these tighter borders.

When comparing the radiation doses to healthy tissue, the re-planned scans performed very well. The amount of radiation near the rectum was either the same or better than the magnetic resonance imaging plans. The amount of radiation near the bladder stayed about the same as the standard magnetic resonance imaging approach.

Looking at actual side effects, the re-planned scans showed a big drop in the chance of rectal issues. The chance of bladder problems also dropped, though this change was not large enough to be certain. Overall, making standard scans tighter helped protect healthy organs without losing too much radiation to the tumor.

What this means for you:
Re-planning standard scans with smaller margins improved rectal safety and matched bladder safety to standard magnetic resonance imaging plans.

Study Details

Study typePhase3
Sample sizen = 79
EvidenceLevel 2
PublishedMay 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
PURPOSE: The MIRAGE (Magnetic resonance imaging-guided versus computed tomography-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy for prostate cancer) trial (NCT04384770) showed that aggressive planning target volume (PTV) margin reduction, achieved by leveraging the advanced image-guidance of magnetic resonance imaging guided radiation therapy, led to lower toxicity after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to the prostate compared with computed tomography guided SBRT (CTgSBRT) with a standard PTV margin. It is unknown whether the dosimetric benefit of reducing PTV margins alone-independent of the other components of advanced image guided radiation therapy that allowed margin reduction-would be predicted to replicate this decrease in toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively replanned 16 CTgSBRT patients with 3- and 2-mm PTV margins from the 4 mm used in MIRAGE to compare with magnetic resonance imaging guided SBRT (MRgSBRT) patients' radiation therapy plans (n = 79), which used a 2-mm PTV margin. We compared target and organs-at-risk dosimetry and performed multivariable linear regression to control for potentially related covariates. We estimated normal tissue complication probability to assess the potential impact of PTV margin reduction on the risks of rectal and bladder toxicity. RESULTS: Compared with MRgSBRT patients, replanned CTgSBRT patients had similar (3 mm) or statistically significantly improved (2 mm) rectal dosimetry and similar bladder dosimetry (2 mm). These trends persisted on multivariable linear regression. Normal tissue complication probability modeling demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in rectal toxicity whereby margin reduction from 4→3 mm and 4→2 mm resulted in relative reductions in toxicity probabilities of 56% and 78%, respectively. For bladder toxicity, reducing margins from 4 to 3 or 2 mm reduced the probability of bladder toxicity by 96%, although these relative differences were not statistically significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing PTV margins for CTgSBRT plans produced similar to improved organs-at-risk dosimetry compared with the clinical MRgSBRT plans, which in turn would be predicted to reduce toxicity when compared to larger margin CTgSBRT plans. This improvement in dosimetry could explain the reduction in modeled rectal toxicity, but the impact on bladder toxicity is unclear, with large, but nonsignificant relative differences underscoring our incomplete understanding of the drivers of post-SBRT urinary toxicity.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.