Quantitative analysis of Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery for uveal melanoma

Raj Kishor Bisht 1 , Gopishankar Natanasabapathi 2  and Shashank Sharad Kale 1
  • 1 Department of Neurosurgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
  • 2 Dr B.R. Ambedkar Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, , New Delhi, India

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to analyze single fraction Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for uveal melanoma (UM). In the treatment of UMs, the dose distribution exhibited by an irregular eye surface has more calculation uncertainty. A tissue-equivalent bolus was placed on the left eye surface of a human head-shaped phantom. It was assumed that the treated eye is fixed using retrobulbar anesthesia and suture on extraocular muscles for phantom study. Leksell stereotactic frame was fixed around phantom’s head and the stereotactic computed tomography (CT) was performed. Two sets of scans were acquired (a) without bolus and (b) with a bolus of 1.0 cm thickness. These scans were transferred into a treatment planning system (TPS). The skull contouring was performed using stereotactic CT images. The target, visual pathways, and eye lens were delineated in stereotactic CT space created on TPS. A clinical relevant plan was designed on the CT study set “a” to deliver a radiation dose of 30Gy at tumor margin. The plan superimposed over CT study set “b” and compiled for convincing treatment strategy. The tumor coverage was 95% at 50% prescription isodose line. The conformity index, selectivity and the gradient index were 1.27, 0.80 and 3.28 respectively. The left optic nerve and eye lens received a maximum dose of 11.1 Gy and 11.0 Gy respectively. The treatment plan overlay showed similar planning indices and critical organ doses. The plan comparison showed: an irradiated volume received the radiation dose > 15 Gy varies < 1.0% whereas the volume received < 15 Gy were larger (> 1.0%) in the study set “b”. The distant lateral points from the target volume which describe the phantom’s eyelid showed a radiation dose of 3.2 Gy - 2.5 Gy. The doses to these points were misled and ignored in the CT study set “a”. The eye bolus provides better dosimetric information in the estimation of low dose areas which is commonly misled on TPS in SRS planning for UMs.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] Shields CL, Kaliki S, Furuta M, et al. Clinical spectrum and prognosis of uveal melanoma based on age at presentation in 8,033 cases. Retina. 2012;32(7):1363-1372.

  • [2] Chang AE, Karnell LH, Menck HR. The National Cancer Data Base report on cutaneous and noncutaneous melanoma: a summary of 84,836 cases from the past decade. The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer and the American Cancer Society. Cancer. 1998;83(8):1664-1678.

  • [3] Gunduz K, Bechrakis NE. Exoresection and endoresection for uveal melanoma. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2010;17(3):210-216.

  • [4] Virgili G, Gatta G, Ciccolallo L, et al. Incidence of uveal melanoma in Europe. Ophthalmology. 2007;114(12):2309-2315.

  • [5] Isager P, Osterlind A, Engholm G, Heegaard S, Lindegaard J, Overgaard J, Storm HH. Uveal and conjunctival malignant melanoma in Denmark, 1943-97: incidence and validation study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2005;12(4):223-232.

  • [6] Singh AD, Topham A. Incidence of uveal melanoma in the United States: 1973-1997. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:956-961.

  • [7] Furdova A, Strmen P, Sramka M. Complications in patients with uveal melanoma after stereotactic radiosurgery and brachytherapy. Bratisl Lek Listy. 2005;106(12):401-406.

  • [8] Laver NV, McLaughlin ME, Duker JS. Ocular melanoma. Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine. 2010;134(12):1778-1784

  • [9] Karkhaneh R, Chams H, Amoli FA, et.al. Long-term surgical outcome of posterior choroidal melanoma treated by endore section. Retina.2007;27(7):908-914.

  • [10] Dunavoelgyi R, Dieckmann K, Gleiss A et al. Local tumor control, visual acuity and survival after hypofractionated stereotactic photon radiotherapy of choroidal melanomain 212 patients treated between 1997 and 2007. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(1):199-205.

  • [11] Desjardins L, Lumbroso-Le Rouic L, Levy-Gabriel C, et al. Treatment of uveal melanoma by accelerated proton beam. Dev Ophthalmol. 2012;49:41-57.

  • [12] Marconi DG, de Castro DG, Rebouças LM, et al. Tumor control, eye preservation and visual outcomes of ruthenium plaque brachy therapy for choroidal melanoma. Brachytherapy. 2013;12(3):235-259.

  • [13] Correa R, Pera J, Gómez J, et al.125I episcleral plaque brachytherapy in the treatment of choroidal melanoma: a single-institution experience in Spain. Brachytherapy. 2009;8(3):290-296.

  • [14] Verschueren KM, Creutzberg CL, Schalij-Delfos NE, et al. Long-term outcomes of eye-conserving treatment with ruthenium106 brachytherapy for choroidal melanoma. Radiother Oncol. 2010;95(3):332-338.

  • [15] Chojniak MM, Chojniak R, NishimotoI N, et al. Primary transpupillary thermotherapy for small choroidal melanoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;249(12):1859-1865.

  • [16] Robertson DM. Melanoma endoresection: aperspective. Retina.2001;21(5):403-407.

  • [17] Bechrakis NE, Petousis V, Willerding G et al. Ten-year results of transscleral resection of large uveal melanomas: local tumour control and metastatic rate. Br J Ophthalmol. 2010;94(4):460-466.

  • [18] Bisht RK, Kale SS, Natanasabapathi G, et al. Verification of Gamma Knife based fractionated radiosurgery with newly developed head-thorax phantom. Radiat Measur. 2016;91:65-74. doi: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2016.06.001.

  • [19] Wilkinson DA, Kolar M, Fleming PA, Singh AD. Dosimetric comparison of 106Ru and 125I plaques for treatment of shallow (< or = 5 mm) choroidal melanoma lesions. Br J Radiol. 2008;81(970):784-789.

  • [20] Wackernagel W, Holl E, Tarmann L, et al. Local tumour control and eye preservation after gamma-knife radiosurgery of choroidal melanomas. Br J Ophthalmol. 2014;98:218-223.

  • [21] Nakazawa H, Komori M, Mori Y, et al. Effect of skull contours on dose calculations in Gamma Knife Perfexion stereotactic radiosurgery. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(2):4603. doi:10.1120/jacmp.v15i2.4603

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search