1
|
Borderías-Villarroel E, Barragán-Montero A, Sterpin E. Time is NTCP: Should we maximize patient throughput or perform online adaptation on proton therapy systems? Radiother Oncol 2024; 198:110389. [PMID: 38885906 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110389] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2024] [Accepted: 06/14/2024] [Indexed: 06/20/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Compared to conventional radiotherapy (XT), proton therapy (PT) may improve normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP). However, PT typically requires higher adaptation rates due to an increased sensitivity to anatomical changes. Systematic online adaptation may address this issue, but it requires additional replanning time, decreasing patient throughput. Therefore, less patients would benefit in such case from PT for a given machine capacity, with results in worse NTCP. AIM To investigate the trade-off between PT patient throughput and NTCP gain as a function of the time needed for adaptation. METHODS A retrospective database of 14 lung patients with two repeated 4DCTs was used to compare NTCP values between XT and PT for NTCP2ym (2-year mortality), NTCPdysphagia and NTCPpneumonitis. Four scenarios were considered for PT: no adaptation using clinical robustness parameters (4D robust optimization, 3 % range error and PTV-equivalent setup errors); systematic online adaptation with clinical robustness parameters; setup errors reduced to 4 mm and to 2 mm. Dose was accumulated on the planning CT. The number of patients treated with PT depended on the extra time needed for adaptation, assuming an 8-hours capacity (assuming 14 patients a day; thus minimum 34.2 min per treatment session if there is no or instantaneous adaptation). RESULTS Baseline NTCP gains (PT against XT without adaptation) equaled 6.9 %, 6.1 %, and 7.7 % for NTCP2ym, NTCPdysphagia and NTCPpneumonitis, respectively. Using instantaneous online adaptation and setup errors of 2 mm, the overall gains were then 10.7 %, 13.6 % and 12.4 %. Taking into account loss of capacity, 13.7 min was the maximum extra-time allowed to complete adaptation and maintain an advantage on all three metrics for the 2-mm setup error scenario. CONCLUSION This study highlights the critical importance of keeping short online adaptation times when using systems with limited capacity like PT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Borderías-Villarroel
- UCLouvain, Institut de recherche expérimentale et clinique, Molecular Imaging and Radiation Oncology (MIRO) Laboratory, Brussels, Belgium
| | - A Barragán-Montero
- UCLouvain, Institut de recherche expérimentale et clinique, Molecular Imaging and Radiation Oncology (MIRO) Laboratory, Brussels, Belgium
| | - E Sterpin
- UCLouvain, Institut de recherche expérimentale et clinique, Molecular Imaging and Radiation Oncology (MIRO) Laboratory, Brussels, Belgium; KU Leuven, Department of Oncology, Laboratory of external radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium; Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sterpin E, Widesott L, Poels K, Hoogeman M, Korevaar EW, Lowe M, Molinelli S, Fracchiolla F. Robustness evaluation of pencil beam scanning proton therapy treatment planning: A systematic review. Radiother Oncol 2024; 197:110365. [PMID: 38830538 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Revised: 04/30/2024] [Accepted: 05/29/2024] [Indexed: 06/05/2024]
Abstract
Compared to conventional radiotherapy using X-rays, proton therapy, in principle, allows better conformity of the dose distribution to target volumes, at the cost of greater sensitivity to physical, anatomical, and positioning uncertainties. Robust planning, both in terms of plan optimization and evaluation, has gained high visibility in publications on the subject and is part of clinical practice in many centers. However, there is currently no consensus on the methods and parameters to be used for robust optimization or robustness evaluation. We propose to overcome this deficiency by following the modified Delphi consensus method. This method first requires a systematic review of the literature. We performed this review using the PubMed and Web Of Science databases, via two different experts. Potential conflicts were resolved by a third expert. We then explored the different methods before focusing on clinical studies that evaluate robustness on a significant number of patients. Many robustness assessment methods are proposed in the literature. Some are more successful than others and their implementation varies between centers. Moreover, they are not all statistically or mathematically equivalent. The most sophisticated and rigorous methods have seen more limited application due to the difficulty of their implementation and their lack of widespread availability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Sterpin
- KU Leuven - Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium; UCLouvain - Institution de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Center of Molecular Imaging Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium; Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - L Widesott
- Proton Therapy Center - UO Fisica Sanitaria, Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS), Trento, Italy
| | - K Poels
- Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium; UZ Leuven, Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M Hoogeman
- Erasmus Medical Center, Cancer Institute, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; HollandPTC, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - E W Korevaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - M Lowe
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - S Molinelli
- Fondazione CNAO - Medical Physics Unit, Pavia, Italy
| | - F Fracchiolla
- Proton Therapy Center - UO Fisica Sanitaria, Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS), Trento, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Elshof J, Steenstra C, Niezink A, Wijkstra P, Wijsman R, Duiverman M. Continuous and bilevel positive airway pressure may improve radiotherapy delivery in patients with intra-thoracic tumors. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 47:100784. [PMID: 38706725 PMCID: PMC11063599 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100784] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2023] [Revised: 04/11/2024] [Accepted: 04/20/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Minimizing tumor motion in radiotherapy for intra-thoracic tumors reduces side-effects by limiting radiation exposure to healthy tissue. Continuous or Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP/BiPAP) could achieve this, since it could increase lung inflation and decrease tidal volume variability. We aim to identify the better CPAP/BiPAP setting for minimizing tumor motion. Methods In 10 patients (5 with lung cancer, 5 with other intra-thoracic tumors), CPAP/BiPAP was tested with the following settings for 10 min each: CPAP 5, 10 and 15 cmH2O and BiPAP 14/10 cmH2O with a lower (7 breaths/min) and higher back-up respiratory rate (BURR initially 1 breath/min above the spontaneous breathing frequency, with the option to adjust if the patient continued to initiate breaths). Electrical impedance tomography was used to analyse end-expiratory lung impedance (EELI) as an estimate of end-expiratory lung volume and tidal impedance variation (TIV) as an estimate of tidal volume. Results Nine out of ten patients tolerated all settings; one patient could not sustain CPAP-15. A significant difference in EELI was observed between settings (χ2 22.960, p < 0.001), with most increase during CPAP-15 (median (IQR) 1.03 (1.00 - 1.06), normalized to the EELI during spontaneous breathing). No significant differences in TIV and breathing variability were found between settings. Conclusions This study shows that the application of different settings of CPAP/BiPAP in patients with intra-thoracic tumors is feasible and tolerable. BiPAP with a higher BURR may offer the greatest potential for mitigating tumor motion among the applied settings, although further research investigating tumor motion should be conducted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. Elshof
- Department of Pulmonary Diseases/Home Mechanical Ventilation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - C.M. Steenstra
- Department of Pulmonary Diseases/Home Mechanical Ventilation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - A.G.H. Niezink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - P.J. Wijkstra
- Department of Pulmonary Diseases/Home Mechanical Ventilation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - R. Wijsman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M.L. Duiverman
- Department of Pulmonary Diseases/Home Mechanical Ventilation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Badiu V, Trier Taasti V, Defraene G, van Elmpt W, Sterpin E. Balancing robustness and adaptation rate for proton therapy of lung cancer patients. Radiother Oncol 2024; 196:110290. [PMID: 38643807 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110290] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2024] [Revised: 03/22/2024] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/23/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION An increase in plan robustness leads to a higher dose to organs-at-risk (OARs), and an increased chance of post-treatment toxicities. In contrast, more conformal plans lead to sparing of healthy surrounding tissue at the expense of a higher sensitivity to anatomical changes, requiring costly adaptations. In this study, we assess the trade-off and impact of treatment plan robustness on the adaptation rate. METHOD Treatment planning was performed for 40 lung cancer patients, each having a planning 4DCT and up to eight weekly repeated 4DCTs (reCTs). For each patient, plans were made with three different levels of robustness based on setup uncertainty of 3, 6 and 9 mm. These plans were robustly re-evaluated on all reCTs to assess whether the clinical constraints were met. RESULTS For the 3, 6 and 9 mm robustness levels, adaptation rates of 87.5 %, 70.0 % and 57.5 %, respectively, were observed. A mean absolute normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) gain of 2.9 percentage points (pp) was calculated for pneumonitis grade ≥ 2 when transitioning from 9 mm plans to 3 mm plans, 7.6 pp for esophagitis grade ≥ 2, and 2.5 pp for mortality risk 2 years post-treatment. CONCLUSION The lowered risk of post treatment toxicities at lower robustness levels is clinically relevant but comes at the expense of more treatment adaptations, particularly in cases where meeting our clinical goals is not compromised by having a dose that is more conformal to the target. The trade-off between workload and reduced NTCP needs to be individually assessed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vlad Badiu
- KU Leuven, Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium; UZ Leuven, Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Vicki Trier Taasti
- Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Gilles Defraene
- KU Leuven, Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Wouter van Elmpt
- Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Department of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Edmond Sterpin
- KU Leuven, Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Leuven, Belgium; UZ Leuven, Particle Therapy Interuniversity Center Leuven - PARTICLE, Leuven, Belgium; Université Catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Center of Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Knäusl B, Belotti G, Bertholet J, Daartz J, Flampouri S, Hoogeman M, Knopf AC, Lin H, Moerman A, Paganelli C, Rucinski A, Schulte R, Shimizu S, Stützer K, Zhang X, Zhang Y, Czerska K. A review of the clinical introduction of 4D particle therapy research concepts. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2024; 29:100535. [PMID: 38298885 PMCID: PMC10828898 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2024.100535] [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: 10/11/2023] [Revised: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 02/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Many 4D particle therapy research concepts have been recently translated into clinics, however, remaining substantial differences depend on the indication and institute-related aspects. This work aims to summarise current state-of-the-art 4D particle therapy technology and outline a roadmap for future research and developments. Material and methods This review focused on the clinical implementation of 4D approaches for imaging, treatment planning, delivery and evaluation based on the 2021 and 2022 4D Treatment Workshops for Particle Therapy as well as a review of the most recent surveys, guidelines and scientific papers dedicated to this topic. Results Available technological capabilities for motion surveillance and compensation determined the course of each 4D particle treatment. 4D motion management, delivery techniques and strategies including imaging were diverse and depended on many factors. These included aspects of motion amplitude, tumour location, as well as accelerator technology driving the necessity of centre-specific dosimetric validation. Novel methodologies for X-ray based image processing and MRI for real-time tumour tracking and motion management were shown to have a large potential for online and offline adaptation schemes compensating for potential anatomical changes over the treatment course. The latest research developments were dominated by particle imaging, artificial intelligence methods and FLASH adding another level of complexity but also opportunities in the context of 4D treatments. Conclusion This review showed that the rapid technological advances in radiation oncology together with the available intrafractional motion management and adaptive strategies paved the way towards clinical implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara Knäusl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Gabriele Belotti
- Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
| | - Jenny Bertholet
- Division of Medical Radiation Physics and Department of Radiation Oncology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Juliane Daartz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Mischa Hoogeman
- Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Antje C Knopf
- Institut für Medizintechnik und Medizininformatik Hochschule für Life Sciences FHNW, Muttenz, Switzerland
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Astrid Moerman
- Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Chiara Paganelli
- Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
| | - Antoni Rucinski
- Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, PL-31342 Krakow, Poland
| | - Reinhard Schulte
- Division of Biomedical Engineering Sciences, School of Medicine, Loma Linda University
| | - Shing Shimizu
- Department of Carbon Ion Radiotherapy, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Xiaodong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ye Zhang
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| | - Katarzyna Czerska
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Schmitz H, Rabe M, Janssens G, Rit S, Parodi K, Belka C, Kamp F, Landry G, Kurz C. Scatter correction of 4D cone beam computed tomography to detect dosimetric effects due to anatomical changes in proton therapy for lung cancer. Med Phys 2023; 50:4981-4992. [PMID: 36847184 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2022] [Revised: 02/01/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2023] [Indexed: 03/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The treatment of moving tumor entities is expected to have superior clinical outcomes, using image-guided adaptive intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). PURPOSE For 21 lung cancer patients, IMPT dose calculations were performed on scatter-corrected 4D cone beam CTs (4DCBCTcor ) to evaluate their potential for triggering treatment adaptation. Additional dose calculations were performed on corresponding planning 4DCTs and day-of-treatment 4D virtual CTs (4DvCTs). METHODS A 4DCBCT correction workflow, previously validated on a phantom, generates 4DvCT (CT-to-CBCT deformable registration) and 4DCBCTcor images (projection-based correction using 4DvCT as a prior) with 10 phase bins, using day-of-treatment free-breathing CBCT projections and planning 4DCT images as input. Using a research planning system, robust IMPT plans administering eight fractions of 7.5 Gy were created on a free-breathing planning CT (pCT) contoured by a physician. The internal target volume (ITV) was overridden with muscle tissue. Robustness settings for range and setup uncertainties were 3% and 6 mm, and a Monte Carlo dose engine was used. On every phase of planning 4DCT, day-of-treatment 4DvCT, and 4DCBCTcor , the dose was recalculated. For evaluation, image analysis as well as dose analysis were performed using mean error (ME) and mean absolute error (MAE) analysis, dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters, and 2%/2-mm gamma pass rate analysis. Action levels (1.6% ITV D98 and 90% gamma pass rate) based on our previous phantom validation study were set to determine which patients had a loss of dosimetric coverage. RESULTS Quality enhancements of 4DvCT and 4DCBCTcor over 4DCBCT were observed. ITV D98% and bronchi D2% had its largest agreement for 4DCBCTcor -4DvCT, and the largest gamma pass rates (>94%, median 98%) were found for 4DCBCTcor -4DvCT. Deviations were larger and gamma pass rates were smaller for 4DvCT-4DCT and 4DCBCTcor -4DCT. For five patients, deviations were larger than the action levels, suggesting substantial anatomical changes between pCT and CBCT projections acquisition. CONCLUSIONS This retrospective study shows the feasibility of daily proton dose calculation on 4DCBCTcor for lung tumor patients. The applied method is of clinical interest as it generates up-to-date in-room images, accounting for breathing motion and anatomical changes. This information could be used to trigger replanning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henning Schmitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
| | - Moritz Rabe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
| | | | - Simon Rit
- Univ Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, UJM-Saint Etienne, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1294, F-69373, Lyon, France
| | - Katia Parodi
- Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU Munich), Garching (Munich), Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Florian Kamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
| | - Christopher Kurz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhou P, Du Y, Zhang Y, Zhu M, Li T, Tian W, Wu T, Xiao Z. Efficacy and Safety in Proton Therapy and Photon Therapy for Patients With Esophageal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2023; 6:e2328136. [PMID: 37581887 PMCID: PMC10427943 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 06/29/2023] [Indexed: 08/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Radiotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Proton therapy has unique physical properties and higher relative biological effectiveness. However, whether proton therapy has greater benefit than photon therapy is still unclear. Objective To evaluate whether proton was associated with better efficacy and safety outcomes, including dosimetric, prognosis, and toxic effects outcomes, compared with photon therapy and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of proton therapy singly. Data Sources A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases was conducted for articles published through November 25, 2021, and updated to March 25, 2023. Study Selection For the comparison of proton and photon therapy, studies including dosimetric, prognosis, and associated toxic effects outcomes were included. The separate evaluation of proton therapy evaluated the same metrics. Data Extraction and Synthesis Data on study design, individual characteristics, and outcomes were extracted. If I2 was greater than 50%, the random-effects model was selected. This meta-analysis is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were organs at risk (OARs) dosimetric outcomes, prognosis (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], and objective response rate [ORR]), and radiation-related toxic effects. Results A total of 45 studies were included in the meta-analysis. For dosimetric analysis, proton therapy was associated with significantly reduced OARs dose. Meta-analysis showed that photon therapy was associated with poor OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.07-1.61; I2 = 11%), but no difference in PFS was observed. Subgroup analysis showed worse OS (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.78; I2 = 34%) and PFS (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.06-2.08; I2 = 7%) in the radical therapy group with photon therapy. The pathological complete response rate was similar between groups. Proton therapy was associated with significantly decreased grade 2 or higher radiation pneumonitis and pericardial effusion, and grade 4 or higher lymphocytopenia. Single-rate analysis of proton therapy found 89% OS and 65% PFS at 1 year, 71% OS and 56% PFS at 2 years, 63% OS and 48% PFS at 3 years, and 56% OS and 42% PFS at 5 years. The incidence of grade 2 or higher radiation esophagitis was 50%, grade 2 or higher radiation pneumonitis was 2%, grade 2 or higher pleural effusion was 4%, grade 2 or higher pericardial effusion was 3%, grade 3 or higher radiation esophagitis was 8%, and grade 4 or higher lymphocytopenia was 17%. Conclusions and Relevance In this meta-analysis, proton therapy was associated with reduced OARs doses and toxic effects and improved prognosis compared with photon therapy for esophageal cancer, but caution is warranted. In the future, these findings should be further validated in randomized clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pixiao Zhou
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| | - Yangfeng Du
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| | - Ying Zhang
- The Second People’s Hospital of Yibin, Yibin, China
| | - Mei Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| | - Ting Li
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| | - Wei Tian
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| | - Tao Wu
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| | - Zemin Xiao
- Department of Oncology, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changde, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Spautz S, Haase L, Tschiche M, Makocki S, Richter C, Troost EG, Stützer K. Comparison of 3D and 4D robustly optimized proton treatment plans for non-small cell lung cancer patients with tumour motion amplitudes larger than 5 mm. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100465. [PMID: 37449022 PMCID: PMC10338142 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2023] [Revised: 06/22/2023] [Accepted: 06/23/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose There is no consensus about an ideal robust optimization (RO) strategy for proton therapy of targets with large intrafractional motion. We investigated the plan robustness of 3D and different 4D RO strategies. Materials and methods For eight non-small cell lung cancer patients with clinical target volume (CTV) motion >5 mm, different RO approaches were investigated: 3DRO considering the average CT (AvgCT) with a target density override, 4DRO considering three/all 4DCT phases, and 4DRO considering the AvgCT and three/all 4DCT phases. Robustness against setup/range errors, interplay effects based on breathing and machine log file data for deliveries with/without rescanning, and interfractional anatomical changes were analyzed for target coverage and OAR sparing. Results All nominal plans fulfilled the clinical requirements with individual CTV coverage differences <2pp; 4DRO without AvgCT generated the most conformal dose distributions. Robustness against setup/range errors was best for 4DRO with AvgCT (18% more passed error scenarios than 3DRO). Interplay effects caused fraction-wise median CTV coverage loss of 3pp and missed maximum dose constraints for heart and esophagus in 18% of scenarios. CTV coverage and OAR sparing fulfilled requirements in all cases when accumulating four interplay scenarios. Interfractional changes caused less target misses for RO with AvgCT compared to 4DRO without AvgCT (≤42%/33% vs. ≥56%/44% failed single/accumulated scenarios). Conclusions All RO strategies provided acceptable plans with equally low robustness against interplay effects demanding other mitigation than rescanning to ensure fraction-wise target coverage. 4DRO considering three phases and the AvgCT provided best compromise on planning effort and robustness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saskia Spautz
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden, Rossendorf, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 41, 01307 Dresden, Germany
| | - Leon Haase
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden, Rossendorf, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 41, 01307 Dresden, Germany
| | - Maria Tschiche
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 50, 01307 Dresden, Germany
| | - Sebastian Makocki
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 50, 01307 Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Richter
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden, Rossendorf, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 41, 01307 Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 50, 01307 Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Bautzner Landstraße 400, 01328 Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69192 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Esther G.C. Troost
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden, Rossendorf, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 41, 01307 Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 50, 01307 Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Bautzner Landstraße 400, 01328 Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69192 Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany; Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69192 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden, Rossendorf, Fetscherstraße 74, PF 41, 01307 Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Bautzner Landstraße 400, 01328 Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Schmitz H, Thummerer A, Kawula M, Lombardo E, Parodi K, Belka C, Kamp F, Kurz C, Landry G. ScatterNet for projection-based 4D cone-beam computed tomography intensity correction of lung cancer patients. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100482. [PMID: 37680905 PMCID: PMC10480315 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose: In radiotherapy, dose calculations based on 4D cone beam CTs (4DCBCTs) require image intensity corrections. This retrospective study compared the dose calculation accuracy of a deep learning, projection-based scatter correction workflow (ScatterNet), to slower workflows: conventional 4D projection-based scatter correction (CBCTcor) and a deformable image registration (DIR)-based method (4DvCT). Materials and methods: For 26 lung cancer patients, planning CTs (pCTs), 4DCTs and CBCT projections were available. ScatterNet was trained with pairs of raw and corrected CBCT projections. Corrected projections from ScatterNet and the conventional workflow were reconstructed using MA-ROOSTER, yielding 4DCBCTSN and 4DCBCTcor. The 4DvCT was generated by 4DCT to 4DCBCT DIR, as part of the 4DCBCTcor workflow. Robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans were created on free-breathing pCTs. 4DCBCTSN was compared to 4DCBCTcor and the 4DvCT in terms of image quality and dose calculation accuracy (dose-volume-histogram parameters and 3 % /3 mm gamma analysis). Results: 4DCBCTSN resulted in an average mean absolute error of 87 HU and 102 HU when compared to 4DCBCTcor and 4DvCT respectively. High agreement was observed in targets with median dose differences of 0.4 Gy (4DCBCTSN-4DCBCTcor) and 0.3 Gy (4DCBCTSN-4DvCT). The gamma analysis showed high average 3 % /3 mm pass rates of 96 % for both 4DCBCTSN vs. 4DCBCTcor and 4DCBCTSN vs. 4DvCT. Conclusions: Accurate 4D dose calculations are feasible for lung cancer patients using ScatterNet for 4DCBCT correction. Average scatter correction times could be reduced from 10 min (4DCBCTcor) to 3.9 s , showing the clinical suitability of the proposed deep learning-based method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henning Schmitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Adrian Thummerer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Maria Kawula
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Elia Lombardo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Katia Parodi
- Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU Munich), Garching (Munich), Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - Florian Kamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Christopher Kurz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Lebbink F, Stocchiero S, Fossati P, Engwall E, Georg D, Stock M, Knäusl B. Parameter based 4D dose calculations for proton therapy. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100473. [PMID: 37520640 PMCID: PMC10374597 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100473] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2023] [Revised: 07/06/2023] [Accepted: 07/10/2023] [Indexed: 08/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and purpose Retrospective log file-based analysis provides the actual dose delivered based on the patient's breathing and the daily beam-delivery dynamics. To predict the motion sensitivity of the treatment plan on a patient-specific basis before treatment start a prospective tool is required. Such a parameter-based tool has been investigated with the aim to be used in clinical routine. Materials and Methods 4D dose calculations (4DDC) were performed for seven cancer patients with small breathing motion treated with scanned pulsed proton beams. Validation of the parameter-based 4DDC (p-4DDC) method was performed with an anthropomorphic phantom and patient data employing measurements and a log file-based 4DDC tool. The dose volume histogram parameters (Dx%) were investigated for the target and the organs at risk, compared to static and the file-based approach. Results The difference between the measured and the p-4DDC dose was within the deviation of the measurements. The maximum deviation was 0.4Gy. For the planning target volume D98% varied up to 15% compared to the static scenario, while the results from the log file and p-4DDC agreed within 2%. For the liver patients, D33%liver deviated up to 35% compared to static and 10% comparing the two 4DDC tools, while for the pancreas patients the D1%stomach varied up to 45% and 11%, respectively. Conclusion The results showed that p-4DDC could be used prospectively. The next step will be the clinical implementation of the p-4DDC tool, which can support a decision to either adapt the treatment plan or apply motion mitigation strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Franciska Lebbink
- Medical University of Vienna, Department of Radiation Oncology, Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Silvia Stocchiero
- Medical University of Vienna, Department of Radiation Oncology, Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Piero Fossati
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | | | - Dietmar Georg
- Medical University of Vienna, Department of Radiation Oncology, Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Barbara Knäusl
- Medical University of Vienna, Department of Radiation Oncology, Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Knäusl B, Lebbink F, Fossati P, Engwall E, Georg D, Stock M. Patient Breathing Motion and Delivery Specifics Influencing the Robustness of a Proton Pancreas Irradiation. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15092550. [PMID: 37174016 PMCID: PMC10177445 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15092550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/28/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Motion compensation strategies in particle therapy depend on the anatomy, motion amplitude and underlying beam delivery technology. This retrospective study on pancreas patients with small moving tumours analysed existing treatment concepts and serves as a basis for future treatment strategies for patients with larger motion amplitudes as well as the transition towards carbon ion treatments. The dose distributions of 17 hypofractionated proton treatment plans were analysed using 4D dose tracking (4DDT). The recalculation of clinical treatment plans employing robust optimisation for mitigating different organ fillings was performed on phased-based 4D computed tomography (4DCT) data considering the accelerator (pulsed scanned pencil beams delivered by a synchrotron) and the breathing-time structure. The analysis confirmed the robustness of the included treatment plans concerning the interplay of beam and organ motion. The median deterioration of D50% (ΔD50%) for the clinical target volume (CTV) and the planning target volume (PTV) was below 2%, while the only outlier was observed for ΔD98% with -35.1%. The average gamma pass rate over all treatment plans (2%/ 2 mm) was 88.8% ± 8.3, while treatment plans for motion amplitudes larger than 1 mm performed worse. For organs at risk (OARs), the median ΔD2% was below 3%, but for single patients, essential changes, e.g., up to 160% for the stomach were observed. The hypofractionated proton treatment for pancreas patients based on robust treatment plan optimisation and 2 to 4 horizontal and vertical beams showed to be robust against intra-fractional movements up to 3.7 mm. It could be demonstrated that the patient's orientation did not influence the motion sensitivity. The identified outliers showed the need for continuous 4DDT calculations in clinical practice to identify patient cases with more significant deviations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barbara Knäusl
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Franciska Lebbink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Piero Fossati
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Division Medical Physics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | | | - Dietmar Georg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
- Division Medical Physics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Clinical 3D/4D cumulative proton dose assessment methods for thoracic tumours with large motion. Radiother Oncol 2023; 182:109575. [PMID: 36822356 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109575] [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: 11/30/2022] [Revised: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 02/12/2023] [Indexed: 02/25/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Despite the anticipated clinical benefits of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), plan robustness may be compromised due to its sensitivity to patient treatment uncertainties, especially for tumours with large motion. In this study, we investigated treatment course-wise plan robustness for intra-thoracic tumours with large motion comparing a 4D pre-clinical evaluation method (4DREM) to our clinical 3D/4D dose reconstruction and accumulation methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty patients with large target motion (>10 mm) were treated with five times layered rescanned IMPT. The 3D-robust optimised plans were generated on the averaged planning 4DCT. Using multiple 4DCTs, treatment plan robustness was assessed on a weekly and treatment course-wise basis through the 3D robustness evaluation method (3DREM, based on averaged 4DCTs), the 4D robustness evaluation method (4DREM, including the time structure of treatment delivery and 4DCT phases) and 4D dose reconstruction and accumulation (4DREAL, based on fraction-wise information). RESULTS Baseline target motion for all patients ranged from 11-17 mm. For the offline adapted course-wise dose assessment, adequate target dose coverage was found for all patients. The target volume receiving 95% of the prescription dose was consistent between methods with 16/20 patients showing differences < 1%. 4DREAL showed the highest target coverage (99.8 ± 0.6%, p < 0.001), while no differences were observed between 3DREM and 4DREM (99.3 ± 1.3% and 99.4 ± 1.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION Our results show that intra-thoracic tumours can be adequately treated with IMPT in free breathing for target motion amplitudes up to 17 mm employing any of the accumulation methods. Anatomical changes, setup and range errors demonstrated a more severe impact on target coverage than motion in these patients treated with fractionated proton radiotherapy.
Collapse
|
13
|
Visser S, O Ribeiro C, Dieters M, Mul VE, Niezink AGH, van der Schaaf A, Knopf AC, Langendijk JA, Korevaar EW, Both S, Muijs CT. Robustness assessment of clinical adaptive proton and photon radiotherapy for oesophageal cancer in the model-based approach. Radiother Oncol 2022; 177:197-204. [PMID: 36368472 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2022] [Revised: 10/05/2022] [Accepted: 11/01/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In the Netherlands, oesophageal cancer (EC) patients are selected for intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using the expected normal tissue complication probability reduction (ΔNTCP) when treating with IMPT compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). In this study, we evaluate the robustness of the first EC patients treated with IMPT in our clinic in terms of target and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose with corresponding NTCP, as compared to VMAT. MATERIALS AND METHODS For 20 consecutive EC patients, clinical IMPT and VMAT plans were created on the average planning 4DCT. Both plans were robustly evaluated on weekly repeated 4DCTs and if target coverage degraded, replanning was performed. Target coverage was evaluated for complete treatment trajectories with and without replanning. The planned and accumulated mean lung dose (MLD) and mean heart dose (MHD) were additionally evaluated and translated into NTCP. RESULTS Replanning in the clinic was performed more often for IMPT (15x) than would have been needed for VMAT (8x) (p = 0.11). Both adaptive treatments would have resulted in adequate accumulated target dose coverage. Replanning in the first week of treatment had most clinical impact, as anatomical changes resulting in insufficient accumulated target coverage were already observed at this stage. No differences were found in MLD between the planned dose and the accumulated dose. Accumulated MHD differed from the planned dose (p < 0.001), but since these differences were similar for VMAT and IMPT (1.0 and 1.5 Gy, respectively), the ΔNTCP remained unchanged. CONCLUSION Following an adaptive clinical workflow, adequate target dose coverage and stable OAR doses with corresponding NTCPs was assured for both IMPT and VMAT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabine Visser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Cássia O Ribeiro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Margriet Dieters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Veronique E Mul
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Anne G H Niezink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen van der Schaaf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Antje-Christin Knopf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands; Department of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Cologne, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Erik W Korevaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Stefan Both
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Christina T Muijs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
The impact of organ motion and the appliance of mitigation strategies on the effectiveness of hypoxia-guided proton therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol 2022; 176:208-214. [PMID: 36228759 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.09.021] [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: 04/25/2022] [Revised: 09/26/2022] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To investigate the impact of organ motion on hypoxia-guided proton therapy treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS Hypoxia PET and 4D imaging data of six NSCLC patients were used to simulate hypoxia-guided proton therapy with different motion mitigation strategies including rescanning, breath-hold, respiratory gating and tumour tracking. Motion-induced dose degradation was estimated for treatment plans with dose painting of hypoxic tumour sub-volumes at escalated dose levels. Tumour control probability (TCP) and dosimetry indices were assessed to weigh the clinical benefit of dose escalation and motion mitigation. In addition, the difference in normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) between escalated proton and photon VMAT treatments has been assessed. RESULTS Motion-induced dose degradation was found for target coverage (CTV V95% up to -4%) and quality of the dose-escalation-by-contour (QRMS up to 6%) as a function of motion amplitude and amount of dose escalation. The TCP benefit coming from dose escalation (+4-13%) outweighs the motion-induced losses (<2%). Significant average NTCP reductions of dose-escalated proton plans were found for lungs (-14%), oesophagus (-10%) and heart (-16%) compared to conventional VMAT plans. The best plan dosimetry was obtained with breath hold and respiratory gating with rescanning. CONCLUSION NSCLC affected by hypoxia appears to be a prime target for proton therapy which, by dose-escalation, allows to mitigate hypoxia-induced radio-resistance despite the sensitivity to organ motion. Furthermore, substantial reduction in normal tissue toxicity can be expected compared to conventional VMAT. Accessibility and standardization of hypoxia imaging and clinical trials are necessary to confirm these findings in a clinical setting.
Collapse
|
15
|
Volpe S, Piperno G, Colombo F, Biffi A, Comi S, Mastroleo F, Maria Camarda A, Casbarra A, Cattani F, Corrao G, de Marinis F, Spaggiari L, Guckenberger M, Orecchia R, Alterio D, Alicja Jereczek-Fossa B. Hypofractionated proton therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: Ready for prime time? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev 2022; 110:102464. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2022.102464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2022] [Revised: 09/02/2022] [Accepted: 09/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
|
16
|
Lebbink F, Stock M, Georg D, Knäusl B. The Influence of Motion on the Delivery Accuracy When Comparing Actively Scanned Carbon Ions versus Protons at a Synchrotron-Based Radiotherapy Facility. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14071788. [PMID: 35406558 PMCID: PMC8997550 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14071788] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2022] [Revised: 03/28/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The interplay of breathing and beam motion reduces the efficacy of particle irradiation in moving tumours. The effect of motion on protons and carbon ion treatments was investigated dosimetrically and the results were benchmarked against each other by employing an anthropomorphic thorax phantom that was able to simulate tumour, rib, and lung motion. The critical question was whether target coverage and organ-at-risk sparing could be maintained when the application of simple motion mitigation was addressed. Special focus was put on unique synchrotron characteristics, such as pulsed beam delivery and beam intensity variations. It could be demonstrated that the effect of motion was greater for carbon ions than for protons. These findings demonstrated the need for applying motion mitigation techniques depending on the motion amplitude, particle type, and treatment prescription considering complex time correlations. Abstract Motion amplitudes, in need of mitigation for moving targets irradiated with pulsed carbon ions and protons, were identified to guide the decision on treatment and motion mitigation strategy. Measurements with PinPoint ionisation chambers positioned in an anthropomorphic breathing phantom were acquired to investigate different tumour motion scenarios, including rib and lung movements. The effect of beam delivery dynamics and spot characteristics was considered. The dose in the tumour centre was deteriorated up to 10% for carbon ions but only up to 5% for protons. Dose deviations in the penumbra increased by a factor of two when comparing carbon ions to protons, ranging from 2 to 30% for an increasing motion amplitude that was strongly dependent on the beam intensity. Layer rescanning was able to diminish the dose distortion caused by tumour motion, but an increase in spot size could reduce it even further to 5% within the target and 10% at the penumbra. An increased need for motion mitigation of carbon ions compared to protons was identified to assure target coverage and sparing of adjacent organs at risk in the penumbra region and outside the target. For the clinical implementation of moving target treatments at a synchrotron-based particle facility complex, time dependencies needed to be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Franciska Lebbink
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (F.L.); (M.S.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria;
| | - Markus Stock
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (F.L.); (M.S.)
| | - Dietmar Georg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria;
| | - Barbara Knäusl
- MedAustron Ion Therapy Centre, Medical Physics, 2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria; (F.L.); (M.S.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria;
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Spautz S, Jakobi A, Meijers A, Peters N, Löck S, Knopf AC, Troost EGC, Richter C, Stützer K. Experimental validation of 4D log file-based proton dose reconstruction for interplay assessment considering amplitude-sorted 4DCTs. Med Phys 2022; 49:3538-3549. [PMID: 35342943 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The unpredictable interplay between dynamic proton therapy delivery and target motion in the thorax can lead to severe dose distortions. A fraction-wise four-dimensional (4D) dose reconstruction workflow allows for the assessment of the applied dose after patient treatment while considering the actual beam delivery sequence extracted from machine log files, the recorded breathing pattern and the geometric information from a 4D computed tomography scan (4DCT). Such an algorithm capable of accounting for amplitude-sorted 4DCTs was implemented and its accuracy as well as its sensitivity to input parameter variations was experimentally evaluated. METHODS An anthropomorphic thorax phantom with a movable insert containing a target surrogate and a radiochromic film was irradiated with a monoenergetic field for various 1D target motion forms (sin, sin4) and peak-to-peak amplitudes (5/10/15/20/30 mm). The measured characteristic film dose distributions were compared to the respective sections in the 4D reconstructed doses using a 2D γ-analysis (3mm, 3%); γ-pass rates were derived for different dose grid resolutions (1mm/3mm) and deformable image registrations (DIR, automatic/manual) applied during the 4D dose reconstruction process. In an additional analysis, the sensitivity of reconstructed dose distributions against potential asynchronous timing of the motion and machine log files was investigated for both a monoenergetic field and more realistic 4D robustly optimized fields by artificially introduced offsets of ± 1/5/25/50/250 ms. The resulting dose distributions with asynchronized log files were compared to those with synchronized log files by means of a 3D γ-analysis (1mm, 1%) and the evaluation of absolute dose differences. RESULTS The induced characteristic interplay patterns on the films were well reproduced by the 4D dose reconstruction with 2D γ-pass rates ≥95% for almost all cases with motion magnitudes ≤15 mm. In general, the 2D γ-pass rates showed a significant decrease for larger motion amplitudes and increase when using a finer dose grid resolution but were not affected by the choice of motion form (sin, sin4). There was also a trend, though not statistically significant, towards the manually defined DIR for better quality of the reconstructed dose distributions in the area imaged by the film. The 4D dose reconstruction results for the monoenergetic as well as the 4D robustly optimized fields were robust against small asynchronies between motion and machine log files of up to 5 ms, which is in the order of potential network latencies. CONCLUSIONS We have implemented a 4D log file-based proton dose reconstruction that accounts for amplitude-sorted 4DCTs. Its accuracy was proven to be clinically acceptable for target motion magnitudes of up to 15 mm. Particular attention should be paid to the synchronization of the log file generating systems as the reconstructed dose distribution may vary with log file asynchronies larger than those caused by realistic network delays. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saskia Spautz
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Annika Jakobi
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Arturs Meijers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Nils Peters
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Antje-Christin Knopf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.,Department 1 of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Cologne, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Esther G C Troost
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.,National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Richter
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Substantial Sparing of Organs at Risk with Modern Proton Therapy in Lung Cancer, but Altered Breathing Patterns Can Jeopardize Target Coverage. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14061365. [PMID: 35326516 PMCID: PMC8945974 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14061365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Revised: 03/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/04/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Treatment of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) is a fine balance between toxicity and cure. Modern proton therapy might offer a more gentle radiation treatment compared to state-of-the-art photon radiotherapy, but is also more susceptible to the influence of breathing motion and anatomical changes. In this study, the influence of such uncertainties on treatment delivery was thoroughly investigated. Modern proton therapy did indeed show potential to reduce the risk of toxicity for the heart and lungs. This potential was maintained under the influence of anatomical and delivery uncertainties. However, changes in breathing motion jeopardized the target dose distribution in a subset of patients. We therefore recommend imaging at onset or early in treatment to recognize these patients and adapt the treatment. Abstract Enhancing treatment of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) by using pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT) is attractive, but little knowledge exists on the effects of uncertainties occurring between the planning (Plan) and the start of treatment (Start). In this prospective simulation study, we investigated the clinical potential for PBS-PT under the influence of such uncertainties. Imaging with 4DCT at Plan and Start was carried out for 15 patients that received state-of-the-art intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Three PBS-PT plans were created per patient: 3D robust single-field uniform dose (SFUD), 3D robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), and 4D robust IMPT (4DIMPT). These were exposed to setup and range uncertainties and breathing motion at Plan, and changes in breathing motion and anatomy at Start. Target coverage and dose-volume parameters relevant for toxicity were compared. The organ at risk sparing at Plan was greatest with IMPT, followed by 4DIMPT, SFUD and IMRT, and persisted at Start. All plans met the preset criteria for target robustness at Plan. At Start, three patients had a lack of CTV coverage with PBS-PT. In conclusion, the clinical potential for heart and lung toxicity reduction with PBS-PT was substantial and persistent. Altered breathing patterns between Plan and Start jeopardized target coverage for all PBS-PT techniques.
Collapse
|
19
|
Knopf AC, Czerska K, Fracchiolla F, Graeff C, Molinelli S, Rinaldi I, Rucincki A, Sterpin E, Stützer K, Trnkova P, Zhang Y, Chang JY, Giap H, Liu W, Schild SE, Simone CB, Lomax AJ, Meijers A. Clinical necessity of multi-image based (4DMIB) optimization for targets affected by respiratory motion and treated with scanned particle therapy – a comprehensive review. Radiother Oncol 2022; 169:77-85. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.02.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2021] [Revised: 01/31/2022] [Accepted: 02/14/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
|
20
|
Tambas M, van der Laan HP, Steenbakkers RJHM, Doyen J, Timmermann B, Orlandi E, Hoyer M, Haustermans K, Georg P, Burnet NG, Gregoire V, Calugaru V, Troost EGC, Hoebers F, Calvo FA, Widder J, Eberle F, van Vulpen M, Maingon P, Skóra T, Weber DC, Bergfeldt K, Kubes J, Langendijk JA. Current practice in proton therapy delivery in adult cancer patients across Europe. Radiother Oncol 2021; 167:7-13. [PMID: 34902370 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2021] [Revised: 11/18/2021] [Accepted: 12/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Major differences exist among proton therapy (PT) centres regarding PT delivery in adult cancer patient. To obtain insight into current practice in Europe, we performed a survey among European PT centres. MATERIALS AND METHODS We designed electronic questionnaires for eight tumour sites, focusing on four main topics: 1) indications and patient selection methods; 2) reimbursement; 3) on-going or planned studies, 4) annual number of patients treated with PT. RESULTS Of 22 centres, 19 (86%) responded. In total, 4233 adult patients are currently treated across Europe annually, of which 46% consists of patients with central nervous system tumours (CNS), 15% head and neck cancer (HNC), 15% prostate, 9% breast, 5% lung, 5% gastrointestinal, 4% lymphoma, 0.3% gynaecological cancers. CNS are treated in all participating centres (n = 19) using PT, HNC in 16 centres, lymphoma in 10 centres, gastrointestinal in 10 centres, breast in 7 centres, prostate in 6 centres, lung in 6 centres, and gynaecological cancers in 3 centres. Reimbursement is provided by national health care systems for the majority of commonly treated tumour sites. Approximately 74% of centres enrol patients for prospective data registration programs. Phase II-III trials are less frequent, due to reimbursement and funding problems. Reasons for not treating certain tumour types with PT are lack of evidence (30%), reimbursement issues (29%) and/or technical limitations (20%). CONCLUSION Across European PT centres, CNS tumours and HNC are the most frequently treated tumour types. Most centres use indication protocols. Lack of evidence for PT and reimbursement issues are the most reported reasons for not treating specific tumour types with PT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Makbule Tambas
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands.
| | - Hans Paul van der Laan
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands
| | - Roel J H M Steenbakkers
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands
| | - Jerome Doyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
| | - Beate Timmermann
- Department of Particle Therapy, University Hospital Essen, West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen (WPE), West German Cancer Center (WTZ), Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Germany
| | - Ester Orlandi
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), Pavia, Italy
| | - Morten Hoyer
- Danish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | - Neil G Burnet
- Proton Beam Therapy Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Valentin Calugaru
- Institut Curie, Radiation Oncology Department, Paris & Proton Center, Orsay, France
| | - Esther G C Troost
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Partner Site Dresden, Germany: German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz Association / Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf (HZDR), Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Frank Hoebers
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO Clinic), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, The Netherlands
| | - Felipe A Calvo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Navarra, Madrid, Spain
| | - Joachim Widder
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
| | - Fabian Eberle
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiooncology, University Hospital Marburg, Marburg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (MIT), University Center for Tumor Diseases Frankfurt and Marburg (UCT), Germany
| | | | - Philippe Maingon
- Sorbonne University, AP-HP. Sorbonne University, Hôpitaux Universitaires La Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris, France
| | - Tomasz Skóra
- Maria Skłodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Department of Radiotherapy, Kraków, Poland
| | - Damien C Weber
- Center for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, Switzerland
| | | | - Jiri Kubes
- Depatment of Oncology, Motol University Hospital and Proton Therapy Center Czech, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Korreman SS, Vogelius IR, Abdi AJ, Hansen SB, Behrens CP. Novel technologies in radiotherapy in the Nordic countries - report from the NACP2020/21 conference. Acta Oncol 2021; 60:1383-1385. [PMID: 34612766 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2021.1979250] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Stine Sofia Korreman
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Danish Center for Particle Therapy, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Ivan Richter Vogelius
- Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Copenhagen University, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Ahmed Jibril Abdi
- Region of Southern Denmark, Clinical Engineering Department, Area of Diagnostic Radiology, Odense, Denmark
- Research and Innovation Unit, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Søren Baarsgaard Hansen
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET Center, Aarhus University Hospital Aarhus, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Visser S, den Otter LA, Ribeiro CO, Korevaar EW, Both S, Langendijk JA, Muijs CT, Sijtsema NM, Knopf A. Diaphragm-Based Position Verification to Improve Daily Target Dose Coverage in Proton and Photon Radiation Therapy Treatment of Distal Esophageal Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021; 112:463-474. [PMID: 34530091 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.09.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Revised: 08/21/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In modern conformal radiation therapy of distal esophageal cancer, target coverage can be affected by variations in the diaphragm position. We investigated if daily position verification (PV) extended by a diaphragm position correction would optimize target dose coverage for esophageal cancer treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS For 15 esophageal cancer patients, intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were computed. Displacements of the target volume were correlated with diaphragm displacements using repeated 4-dimensional computed tomography images to determine the correction needed to account for diaphragm variations. Afterwards, target coverage was evaluated for 3 PV approaches based on: (1) bony anatomy (PV_B), (2) bony anatomy corrected for the diaphragm position (PV_BD) and (3) target volume (PV_T). RESULTS The cranial-caudal mean target displacement was congruent with almost half of the diaphragm displacement (y = 0.459x), which was used for the diaphragm correction in PV_BD. Target dose coverage using PV_B was adequate for most patients with diaphragm displacements up till 10 mm (≥94% of the dose in 98% of the volume [D98%]). For larger displacements, the target coverage was better maintained by PV_T and PV_BD. Overall, PV_BD accounted best for target displacements, especially in combination with tissue density variations (D98%: IMPT 94% ± 5%, VMAT 96% ± 5%). Diaphragm displacements of more than 10 mm were observed in 22% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS PV_B was sufficient to achieve adequate target dose coverage in case of small deviations in diaphragm position. However, large deviations of the diaphragm were best mitigated by PV_BD. To detect the cases where target dose coverage could be compromised due to diaphragm position variations, we recommend monitoring of the diaphragm position before treatment through online imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabine Visser
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Lydia A den Otter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Cássia O Ribeiro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Erik W Korevaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Stefan Both
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Christina T Muijs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Nanna M Sijtsema
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Antje Knopf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Schmitz H, Rabe M, Janssens G, Bondesson D, Rit S, Parodi K, Belka C, Dinkel J, Kurz C, Kamp F, Landry G. Validation of proton dose calculation on scatter corrected 4D cone beam computed tomography using a porcine lung phantom. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [PMID: 34293737 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac16e9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2021] [Accepted: 07/22/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Proton therapy treatment for lungs remains challenging as images enabling the detection of inter- and intra-fractional motion, which could be used for proton dose adaptation, are not readily available. 4D computed tomography (4DCT) provides high image quality but is rarely available in-room, while in-room 4D cone beam computed tomography (4DCBCT) suffers from image quality limitations stemming mostly from scatter detection. This study investigated the feasibility of using virtual 4D computed tomography (4DvCT) as a prior for a phase-per-phase scatter correction algorithm yielding a 4D scatter corrected cone beam computed tomography image (4DCBCTcor), which can be used for proton dose calculation. 4DCT and 4DCBCT scans of a porcine lung phantom, which generated reproducible ventilation, were acquired with matching breathing patterns. Diffeomorphic Morphons, a deformable image registration algorithm, was used to register the mid-position 4DCT to the mid-position 4DCBCT and yield a 4DvCT. The 4DCBCT was reconstructed using motion-aware reconstruction based on spatial and temporal regularization (MA-ROOSTER). Successively for each phase, digitally reconstructed radiographs of the 4DvCT, simulated without scatter, were exploited to correct scatter in the corresponding CBCT projections. The 4DCBCTcorwas then reconstructed with MA-ROOSTER using the corrected CBCT projections and the same settings and deformation vector fields as those already used for reconstructing the 4DCBCT. The 4DCBCTcorand the 4DvCT were evaluated phase-by-phase, performing proton dose calculations and comparison to those of a ground truth 4DCT by means of dose-volume-histograms (DVH) and gamma pass-rates (PR). For accumulated doses, DVH parameters deviated by at most 1.7% in the 4DvCT and 2.0% in the 4DCBCTcorcase. The gamma PR for a (2%, 2 mm) criterion with 10% threshold were at least 93.2% (4DvCT) and 94.2% (4DCBCTcor), respectively. The 4DCBCTcortechnique enabled accurate proton dose calculation, which indicates the potential for applicability to clinical 4DCBCT scans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henning Schmitz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Moritz Rabe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | | | - David Bondesson
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Simon Rit
- Univ Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, UJM-Saint Etienne, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1206, F-69373, LYON, France
| | - Katia Parodi
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU Munich), Garching (Munich), Germany
| | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Julien Dinkel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Christopher Kurz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU Munich), Garching (Munich), Germany
| | - Florian Kamp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU Munich), Garching (Munich), Germany
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Taasti VT, Hattu D, Vaassen F, Canters R, Velders M, Mannens J, van Loon J, Rinaldi I, Unipan M, van Elmpt W. Treatment planning and 4D robust evaluation strategy for proton therapy of lung tumors with large motion amplitude. Med Phys 2021; 48:4425-4437. [PMID: 34214201 PMCID: PMC8456954 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Revised: 05/29/2021] [Accepted: 06/21/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for lung tumors with a large tumor movement is challenging due to loss of robustness in the target coverage. Often an upper cut‐off at 5‐mm tumor movement is used for proton patient selection. In this study, we propose (1) a robust and easily implementable treatment planning strategy for lung tumors with a movement larger than 5 mm, and (2) a four‐dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) robust evaluation strategy for evaluating the dose distribution on the breathing phases. Materials and methods We created a treatment planning strategy based on the internal target volume (ITV) concept (aim 1). The ITV was created as a union of the clinical target volumes (CTVs) on the eight 4DCT phases. The ITV expanded by 2 mm was the target during robust optimization on the average CT (avgCT). The clinical plan acceptability was judged based on a robust evaluation, computing the voxel‐wise min and max (VWmin/max) doses over 28 error scenarios (range and setup errors) on the avgCT. The plans were created in RayStation (RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden) using a Monte Carlo dose engine, commissioned for our Mevion S250i Hyperscan system (Mevion Medical Systems, Littleton, MA, USA). We developed a new 4D robust evaluation approach (4DRobAvg; aim 2). The 28 scenario doses were computed on each individual 4DCT phase. For each scenario, the dose distributions on the individual phases were deformed to the reference phase and combined to a weighted sum, resulting in 28 weighted sum scenario dose distributions. From these 28 scenario doses, VWmin/max doses were computed. This new 4D robust evaluation was compared to two simpler 4D evaluation strategies: re‐computing the nominal plan on each individual 4DCT phase (4DNom) and computing the robust VWmin/max doses on each individual phase (4DRobInd). The treatment planning and dose evaluation strategies were evaluated for 16 lung cancer patients with tumor movement of 4–26 mm. Results The ratio of the ITV and CTV volumes increased linearly with the tumor amplitude, with an average ratio of 1.4. Despite large ITV volumes, a clinically acceptable plan fulfilling all target and organ at risk (OAR) constraints was feasible for all patients. The 4DNom and 4DRobInd evaluation strategies were found to under‐ or overestimate the dosimetric effect of the tumor movement, respectively. 4DRobInd showed target underdosage for five patients, not observed in the robust evaluation on the avgCT or in 4DRobAvg. The accuracy of dose deformation used in 4DRobAvg was quantified and found acceptable, with differences for the dose‐volume parameters below 1 Gy in most cases. Conclusion The proposed ITV‐based planning strategy on the avgCT was found to be a clinically feasible approach with adequate tumor coverage and no OAR overdosage even for large tumor movement. The new proposed 4D robust evaluation, 4DRobAvg, was shown to give an easily interpretable understanding of the effect of respiratory motion dose distribution, and to give an accurate estimate of the dose delivered in the different breathing phases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vicki Trier Taasti
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Djoya Hattu
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Femke Vaassen
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Richard Canters
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Marije Velders
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Jolein Mannens
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Judith van Loon
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Ilaria Rinaldi
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Mirko Unipan
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Wouter van Elmpt
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|