1
|
Hwang E, Gaito S, France A, Crellin AM, Thwaites DI, Ahern V, Indelicato D, Timmermann B, Smith E. Outcomes of Patients Treated in the UK Proton Overseas Programme: Non-central Nervous System Group. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2023; 35:292-300. [PMID: 36813694 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2023.02.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2022] [Revised: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 02/09/2023] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
Abstract
AIMS The UK Proton Overseas Programme (POP) was launched in 2008. The Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit (PCOU) warehouses a centralised registry for collection, curation and analysis of all outcomes data for all National Health Service-funded UK patients referred and treated abroad with proton beam therapy (PBT) via the POP. Outcomes are reported and analysed here for patients diagnosed with non-central nervous system tumours treated from 2008 to September 2020 via the POP. MATERIALS AND METHODS All non-central nervous system tumour files for treatments as of 30 September 2020 were interrogated for follow-up information, and type (following CTCAE v4) and time of onset of any late (>90 days post-PBT completion) grade 3-5 toxicities. RESULTS Four hundred and ninety-five patients were analysed. The median follow-up was 2.1 years (0-9.3 years). The median age was 11 years (0-69 years). 70.3% of patients were paediatric (<16 years). Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) and Ewing sarcoma were the most common diagnoses (42.6% and 34.1%). 51.3% of treated patients were for head and neck (H&N) tumours. At last known follow-up, 86.1% of all patients were alive, with a 2-year survival rate of 88.3% and 2-year local control of 90.3%. Mortality and local control were worse for adults (≥25 years) than for the younger groups. The grade 3 toxicity rate was 12.6%, with a median onset of 2.3 years. Most were in the H&N region in paediatric patients with RMS. Cataracts (30.5%) were the most common, then musculoskeletal deformity (10.1%) and premature menopause (10.1%). Three paediatric patients (1-3 years at treatment) experienced secondary malignancy. Seven grade 4 toxicities occurred (1.6%), all in the H&N region and most in paediatric patients with RMS. Six related to eyes (cataracts, retinopathy, scleral disorder) or ears (hearing impairment). CONCLUSIONS This study is the largest to date for RMS and Ewing sarcoma, undergoing multimodality therapy including PBT. It demonstrates good local control, survival and acceptable toxicity rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Hwang
- The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sydney West Radiation Oncology Network, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - S Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - A France
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - A M Crellin
- NHS England National Clinical Lead Proton Beam Therapy, UK
| | - D I Thwaites
- Institute of Medical Physics, School of Physics, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia; Radiotherapy Research Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research, St James's Hospital and School of Medicine, Leeds University, Leeds, UK
| | - V Ahern
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sydney West Radiation Oncology Network, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Westmead Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - D Indelicato
- University of Florida Department of Radiation Oncology, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - B Timmermann
- Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, West German Cancer Centre, German Cancer Consortium, Essen, Germany
| | - E Smith
- The Christie Proton Beam Therapy Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; University of Manchester, Manchester Cancer Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Takagi M, Demizu Y, Fujii O, Terashima K, Niwa Y, Daimon T, Tokumaru S, Fuwa N, Hareyama M, Okimoto T. Proton Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Results From a Single-Center Experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 109:964-974. [PMID: 33186616 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.11.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2020] [Revised: 10/22/2020] [Accepted: 11/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Although proton therapy is controversial, it has been used to treat localized prostate cancer over the past 2 decades. The purpose of this study is to examine the long-term efficacy and toxicity of proton therapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS This was a retrospective observational study of 2021 patients from 2003 to 2014 at a single institution. Patients were classified using the risk groups defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, version 4.2019. Ninety-eight percent of the patients received 74 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 37 fractions. Fifty-one and 6% of the patients received neoadjuvant and adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy, respectively. The outcomes were the time of freedom from biochemical relapse and the time to late toxicity by the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. The outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS The median follow-up period was 84 months (interquartile range, 60-110). The 5- and 10-year freedom from biochemical relapse rates were 100% and 100%, 99% and 88%, 93% and 86%, 90% and 79%, 88% and 68%, and 76% and 63% for the very low, low, favorable intermediate, unfavorable intermediate, high, and very high-risk groups, respectively. Patients with higher risk experienced biochemical relapse after shorter periods. The 5-year rates of grade 2 or higher late genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were 2.2% and 4.0%, respectively. The results of multivariable analyses indicate that younger patients more often experienced biochemical relapse. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates the favorable biochemical controls of proton therapy even in advanced localized prostate cancer patients with a low incidence of late toxicities, supporting the feasibility of conducting prospective clinical trials. The risk groups defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, version 4.2019, are useful to classify patients with localized prostate cancer. Our findings might suggest the necessity to develop a treatment strategy that accounts for the patient's age.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masaru Takagi
- Proton Therapy Center, Sapporo Teishinkai Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan; Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, Tatsuno, Hyogo, Japan.
| | - Yusuke Demizu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center Kobe Proton Center, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan; Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, Tatsuno, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Osamu Fujii
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hakodate Goryoukaku Hospital, Hakodate, Hokkaido, Japan
| | - Kazuki Terashima
- Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, Tatsuno, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Yasue Niwa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tsuyama Chuo Hospital, Tsuyama, Okayama, Japan
| | - Takashi Daimon
- Department of Biostatistics, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Sunao Tokumaru
- Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, Tatsuno, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Nobukazu Fuwa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ise Red Cross Hospital, Ise, Mie, Japan
| | - Masato Hareyama
- Proton Therapy Center, Sapporo Teishinkai Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
| | - Tomoaki Okimoto
- Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, Tatsuno, Hyogo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Panthi R, Maggi P, Peterson S, Mackin D, Polf J, Beddar S. Secondary Particle Interactions in a Compton Camera Designed for in vivo Range Verification of Proton Therapy. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RADIATION AND PLASMA MEDICAL SCIENCES 2020; 5:383-391. [PMID: 34056151 DOI: 10.1109/trpms.2020.3030166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the types, proportions, and energies of secondary particle interactions in a Compton camera (CC) during the delivery of clinical proton beams. The delivery of clinical proton pencil beams ranging from 70 to 200 MeV incident on a water phantom was simulated using Geant4 software (version 10.4). The simulation included a CC similar to the configuration of a Polaris J3 CC designed to image prompt gammas (PGs) emitted during proton beam irradiation for the purpose of in vivo range verification. The interaction positions and energies of secondary particles in each CC detector module were scored. For a 150-MeV proton beam, a total of 156,688(575) secondary particles per 108 protons, primarily composed of gamma rays (46.31%), neutrons (41.37%), and electrons (8.88%), were found to reach the camera modules, and 79.37% of these particles interacted with the modules. Strategies for using CCs for proton range verification should include methods of reducing the large neutron backgrounds and low-energy non-PG radiation. The proportions of interaction types by module from this study may provide information useful for background suppression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rajesh Panthi
- The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
| | - Paul Maggi
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, USA
| | | | - Dennis Mackin
- The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030
| | - Jerimy Polf
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21201
| | - Sam Beddar
- University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Sajja S, Lee Y, Eriksson M, Nordström H, Sahgal A, Hashemi M, Mainprize JG, Ruschin M. Technical Principles of Dual-Energy Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Clinical Applications for Radiation Therapy. Adv Radiat Oncol 2020; 5:1-16. [PMID: 32051885 PMCID: PMC7004939 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2019.07.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2019] [Revised: 05/21/2019] [Accepted: 07/20/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Medical imaging is an indispensable tool in radiotherapy for dose planning, image guidance and treatment monitoring. Cone beam CT (CBCT) is a low dose imaging technique with high spatial resolution capability as a direct by-product of using flat-panel detectors. However, certain issues such as x-ray scatter, beam hardening and other artifacts limit its utility to the verification of patient positioning using image-guided radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS Dual-energy (DE)-CBCT has recently demonstrated promise as an improved tool for tumor visualization in benchtop applications. It has the potential to improve soft-tissue contrast and reduce artifacts caused by beam hardening and metal. In this review, the practical aspects of developing a DE-CBCT based clinical and technical workflow are presented based on existing DE-CBCT literature and concepts adapted from the well-established library of work in DE-CT. Furthermore, the potential applications of DE-CBCT on its future role in radiotherapy are discussed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Based on current literature and an investigation of future applications, there is a clear potential for DE-CBCT technologies to be incorporated into radiotherapy. The applications of DE-CBCT include (but are not limited to): adaptive radiotherapy, brachytherapy, proton therapy, radiomics and theranostics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shailaja Sajja
- Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- QIPCM Imaging Core Lab, Techna Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Young Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | - Arjun Sahgal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | - Mark Ruschin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Clark CH, Gagliardi G, Heijmen B, Malicki J, Thorwarth D, Verellen D, Muren LP. Adapting training for medical physicists to match future trends in radiation oncology. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2019; 11:71-75. [PMID: 33458282 PMCID: PMC7807663 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2019.09.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Catharine H. Clark
- Medical Physics, St Lukes Cancer Centre, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
- Dept Medical Physics, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK
| | - Giovanna Gagliardi
- Department of Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ben Heijmen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Julian Malicki
- Department of Electroradiology, Poznań University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland
- Department of Medical Physics, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznań, Poland
| | - Daniela Thorwarth
- Section for Biomedical Physics, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Tübingen, Germany
| | - Dirk Verellen
- Iridium Kankernetwerk, Antwerp, Belgium; University of Antwerp, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Belgium
| | - Ludvig P. Muren
- Department of Medical Physics, Aarhus University Hospital/Aarhus University, Denmark
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Can proton therapy be considered a standard of care in oncology? Lessons from the United States. Br J Cancer 2019; 120:775-776. [PMID: 30911089 PMCID: PMC6474263 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-018-0324-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2018] [Revised: 10/03/2018] [Accepted: 10/04/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
|
7
|
Batista V, Richter D, Chaudhri N, Naumann P, Herfarth K, Jäkel O. Significance of intra-fractional motion for pancreatic patients treated with charged particles. Radiat Oncol 2018; 13:120. [PMID: 29941049 PMCID: PMC6020245 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-018-1060-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2017] [Accepted: 06/13/2018] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Uncertainties associated with the delivery of treatment to moving organs might compromise the accuracy of treatment. This study explores the impact of intra-fractional anatomical changes in pancreatic patients treated with charged particles delivered using a scanning beam. The aim of this paper is to define the potential source of uncertainties, quantify their effect, and to define clinically feasible strategies to reduce them. Methods The study included 14 patients treated at our facility with charged particles (protons or 12C) using intensity modulated particle therapy (IMPT). Treatment plans were optimized using the Treatment Planning System (TPS) Syngo® RT Planning. The pre-treatment dose distribution under motion (4D) was simulated using the TPS TRiP4D and the dose delivered for some of the treatment fractions was reconstructed. The volume receiving at least 95% of the prescribed dose (V95CTV) and the target dose homogeneity were evaluated. The results from the 4D dose calculations were compared with dose distributions in the static case and its variation correlated with the internal motion amplitude and plan modulation, through the Pearson correlation coefficient, as well the significant p-value. The concept of the modulation index (MI) was introduced to assess the degree of modulation of IMPT plans, through the quantification of intensity gradients between neighboring pencil beams. Results The induced breathing motion together with dynamic beam delivery results in an interplay effect, which affects the homogeneity and target coverage of the dose distribution. This effect is stronger (∆V95CTV > 10%) for patients with tumor motion amplitude above 5 mm and a highly modulated dose distribution between and within fields. The MI combined with the internal motion amplitude is shown to correlate with the target dose degradation and a lack of plan robustness against range and positioning uncertainties. Conclusions Under internal motion the use of inhomogeneous plans results in a decrease in the dose homogeneity and target coverage of dose distributions in comparison to the static case. Plan robustness can be improved by using multiple beams and avoiding beam entrance directions susceptible to density changes. 4D dose calculations support the selection of the most suitable plan for the specific patient’s anatomy. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13014-018-1060-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vania Batista
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. .,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. .,RadioOnkologie und Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Daniel Richter
- Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany.,GSI Helmholtz Centre for Heavy Ion Research, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Naved Chaudhri
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Patrick Naumann
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Jäkel
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center, Heidelberg, Germany.,German Cancer Research Center, Div. Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany.,Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zietman AL. Too Big to Fail? The Current Status of Proton Therapy in the USA. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2017; 30:271-273. [PMID: 29239732 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2017.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2017] [Accepted: 10/20/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- A L Zietman
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lacombe S, Porcel E, Scifoni E. Particle therapy and nanomedicine: state of art and research perspectives. Cancer Nanotechnol 2017; 8:9. [PMID: 29213338 PMCID: PMC5698390 DOI: 10.1186/s12645-017-0029-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2017] [Accepted: 09/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Cancer radiation therapy with charged particle beams, called particle therapy, is a new therapeutic treatment presenting major advantages when compared to conventional radiotherapy. Because ions have specific ballistic properties and a higher biological effectiveness, they are superior to x-rays. Numerous medical centres are starting in the world using mostly protons but also carbon ions as medical beams. Several investigations are attempting to reduce the cost/benefit ratio and enlarge the range of therapeutic indications. A major limitation of particle therapy is the presence of low but significant damage induced in healthy tissues located at the entrance of the ion track prior to reaching the tumour. It is thus a major challenge to improve the targeting of the tumours, concentrating radiation effects in the malignance. A novel strategy, based on the addition of nanoparticles targeting the tumour, was suggested over a decade ago to improve the performance of conventional photon therapy. Recently, similar developments have emerged for particle therapy and the amount of research is now exploding. In this paper, we review the experimental results, as well as theoretical and simulation studies that shed light in the promising outcomes of this strategy and in the underpinning mechanisms. Several experiments provide consistent evidence of significant enhancement of ion radiation effects in the presence of nanoparticles. In view of implementing this strategy for cancer treatment, simulation studies have begun to establish the rationale and the specificity of this effect. In addition, these studies will help to outline a list of possible mechanisms and to predict the impact of ion beams and nanoparticle characteristics. Many questions remain unsolved, but the findings of these first studies are encouraging and open new challenges. After summarizing the main results in the field, we propose a roadmap to pursue future research with the aim to strengthen the potential interplay between particle therapy and nanomedicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandrine Lacombe
- Institut des Sciences Moléculaires d'Orsay (UMR 8214) Bât 351, University Paris Saclay, University of Paris Sud, CNRS, 91405 Orsay Cedex, France
| | - Erika Porcel
- Institut des Sciences Moléculaires d'Orsay (UMR 8214) Bât 351, University Paris Saclay, University of Paris Sud, CNRS, 91405 Orsay Cedex, France
| | - Emanuele Scifoni
- Biophysics Department, GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany.,TIFPA-INFN, Trento Institute for Fundamental Physics and Applications, University of Trento, 38121 Trento, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Mohan R, Das IJ, Ling CC. Empowering Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Through Physics and Technology: An Overview. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 99:304-316. [PMID: 28871980 PMCID: PMC5651132 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2017] [Revised: 04/11/2017] [Accepted: 05/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
Considering the clinical potential of protons attributable to their physical characteristics, interest in proton therapy has increased greatly in this century, as has the number of proton therapy installations. Until recently, passively scattered proton therapy was used almost entirely. Notably, the overall clinical results to date have not shown a convincing benefit of protons over photons. A rapid transition is now occurring with the implementation of the most advanced form of proton therapy, intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT is superior to passively scattered proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dosimetrically. However, numerous limitations exist in the present IMPT methods. In particular, compared with IMRT, IMPT is highly vulnerable to various uncertainties. In this overview we identify three major areas of current limitations of IMPT: treatment planning, treatment delivery, and motion management, and discuss current and future efforts for improvement. For treatment planning, we need to reduce uncertainties in proton range and in computed dose distributions, improve robust planning and optimization, enhance adaptive treatment planning and delivery, and consider how to exploit the variability in the relative biological effectiveness of protons for clinical benefit. The quality of proton therapy also depends on the characteristics of the IMPT delivery systems and image guidance. Efforts are needed to optimize the beamlet spot size for both improved dose conformality and faster delivery. For the latter, faster energy switching time and increased dose rate are also needed. Real-time in-room volumetric imaging for guiding IMPT is in its early stages with cone beam computed tomography (CT) and CT-on-rails, and continued improvements are anticipated. In addition, imaging of the proton beams themselves, using, for instance, prompt γ emissions, is being developed to determine the proton range and to reduce range uncertainty. With the realization of the advances described above, we posit that IMPT, thus empowered, will lead to substantially improved clinical results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| | - Indra J Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Clifton C Ling
- Varian Medical Systems and Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Physicists' views on hadrontherapy: a survey of members of the Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM). TUMORI JOURNAL 2017; 103:430-437. [PMID: 28708234 DOI: 10.5301/tj.5000654] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/26/2017] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study was based on a survey to investigate perceptions of hadrontherapy of the members of the Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM). The survey was digitally submitted to the 991 members between the end of January and the beginning of April 2016. METHODS A 19-item questionnaire was designed focusing on advantages and disadvantages of hadrontherapy, current status and possible future improvements, and need and opportunities for future investments in Italy and abroad. Information about professional qualifications, main fields of clinical involvement and specific competencies of the respondents was also collected. RESULTS The survey was completed by 121 AIFM members (response rate 12.2%). In the answers collected, it was shown that medical physicists expressed interest in hadrontherapy mainly for reasons of personal interest rather than for professional needs (90% ± 2.5% vs. 52% ± 4.3% of the respondents, respectively), with a good knowledge of the related basic aspects as well as of the pros and cons of its application. However, poor knowledge of the current status of hadrontherapy was observed among the medical physicists not directly involved at a professional level, who were less than 3% of the physicists working in radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS In light of these results, the implementation of new training and education initiatives should be devised to promote a deeper and global knowledge of hadrontherapy-related issues, not only from a theoretical point of view but also in practical terms. Moreover, a close collaboration between highly specialized medical physicists employed in hadrontherapy centers and others in oncology hospitals should be -encouraged.
Collapse
|
12
|
Odei BCL, Boothe D, Keole SR, Vargas CE, Foote RL, Schild SE, Ashman JB. A 20-Year Analysis of Clinical Trials Involving Proton Beam Therapy. Int J Part Ther 2017; 3:398-406. [PMID: 31772989 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-d-16-00030.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2016] [Accepted: 12/06/2016] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Clinical trials (CTs) in proton beam therapy (PBT) are important for determining its benefits relative to other treatments. An analysis of PBT trials is, thus, warranted to understand the current state of PBT CTs and the factors affecting current and future trials. Materials and Methods We queried the clinicaltrials.gov Website using the search terms: proton beam therapy, proton radiation, and protons. A total of 152 PBT CTs were identified. We used χ2 analysis and logistic regression to evaluate trial characteristics. Results Most CTs were recruiting (n = 79; 52.0%), phase II (n = 95; 62.5%), open label (n = 134; 88.2%), single-group assignment (n = 84; 55.3%), and with primary treatment endpoints of safety and efficacy (n = 94; 61.8%). The primary treatment sites included gastrointestinal (n = 32; 21.1%), central nervous system (n = 31; 20.4%), lung (n = 21; 13.8%), prostate (n = 19; 12.5%), sarcoma (n = 15; 9.9%), and others (n = 24; 15.8%). Comparison studies between radiation modalities involved PBT and intensity-modulated photon therapy (n = 11; 7.2%), PBT and general photon therapy (n = 8; 5.3%), and PBT and carbon-ion therapy (n = 7; 4.6%). The PBT CTs underwent substantial growth after 2008 but now appear to be in decline. Nongovernmental institutions, comprising university centers, hospital systems, and research groups, have funded the greatest number of CTs (n= 106; 69.7%). The National Institutes of Health (NIH) were more likely to fund CTs involving the central nervous system (P = 0.02). Trials involving NIH funding were more likely to result in successful trial completion (P = 0.02). Conclusion Among PBT CTs, most were phase II trials, with a very few being phase III CTs. Funding of PBT CTs originating from industry or the NIH is limited. Recently, there has been a declining trajectory of newly initiated PBT trials. It is not yet clear whether this represents a true trend or just a pause in CT implementation. Despite multiple impediments to PBT CTs, the particle therapy community continues to work toward evidence generation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bismarck C L Odei
- David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Dustin Boothe
- Huntsman Cancer Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Sameer R Keole
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Carlos E Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Robert L Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Steven E Schild
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|