1
|
Isaksson LJ, Mastroleo F, Vincini MG, Marvaso G, Zaffaroni M, Gola M, Mazzola GC, Bergamaschi L, Gaito S, Alongi F, Doyen J, Fossati P, Haustermans K, Høyer M, Langendijk JA, Matute R, Orlandi E, Schwarz M, Troost EGC, Vondracek V, La Torre D, Curigliano G, Petralia G, Orecchia R, Alterio D, Jereczek-Fossa BA. The emerging role of Artificial Intelligence in proton therapy: A review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2024; 204:104485. [PMID: 39233128 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2024.104485] [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: 04/23/2024] [Accepted: 08/25/2024] [Indexed: 09/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has made a tremendous impact in the space of healthcare, and proton therapy is not an exception. Proton therapy has witnessed growing popularity in oncology over recent decades, and researchers are increasingly looking to develop AI and machine learning tools to aid in various steps of the treatment planning and delivery processes. This review delves into the emergent role of AI in proton therapy, evaluating its development, advantages, intended clinical contexts, and areas of application. Through the analysis of 76 studies, we aim to underscore the importance of AI applications in advancing proton therapy and to highlight their prospective influence on clinical practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lars Johannes Isaksson
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Federico Mastroleo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Maria Giulia Vincini
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy.
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy.
| | - Mattia Zaffaroni
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Michał Gola
- Department of Human Histology and Embryology, Collegium Medicum, School of Medicine, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn 10-082, Poland
| | - Giovanni Carlo Mazzola
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Luca Bergamaschi
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Simona Gaito
- Proton Clinical Outcomes Unit, The Christie NHS Proton Beam Therapy Centre, Manchester M20 4BX, UK; Division of Clinical Cancer Science, School of Medical Sciences, The University of Manchester Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Filippo Alongi
- Department of Advanced Radiation Oncology, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, 37024 Negrar-Verona, Italy & DSMC, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Jerome Doyen
- Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, University of Côte d'Azur, Nice 06189, France; University Côte d'Azur, CNRS UMR 7284, INSERM U1081, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Institute for Research on Cancer and Aging of Nice (IRCAN), 06189 Nice, France, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice 06189, France
| | - Piero Fossati
- EBG MedAustron GmbH, Marie-Curie-Str. 5, Wiener Neustadt 2700, Austria; Department of General and Translational Oncology and Hematology, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, 3500, Austria
| | - Karin Haustermans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Morten Høyer
- Aarhus University (AU), Nordre Ringgade 1, Aarhus C 8000, Denmark
| | - Johannes Albertus Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Raùl Matute
- Centro de Protonterapia Quironsalud, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid 28223, Spain
| | - Ester Orlandi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, CNAO National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy; Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Marco Schwarz
- Radiation Oncology Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98109, USA
| | - 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 01309, 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 01307, Germany; Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden 01309, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology-OncoRay, Dresden 01328, Germany
| | - Vladimir Vondracek
- Proton Therapy Centre Czech, Prague, Czech Republic and Department of Health Care Disciplines and Population Protection, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University Prague, Kladno, Czech Republic
| | - Davide La Torre
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy; SKEMA Business School, Université Côte d'Azur, Sophia Antipolis, France
| | - Giuseppe Curigliano
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy; Division of Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapy, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Petralia
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy; Division of Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Directorate, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan 20141, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan 20141, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kong W, Huiskes M, Habraken SJM, Astreinidou E, Rasch CRN, Heijmen BJM, Breedveld S. Reducing the lateral dose penumbra in IMPT by incorporating transmission pencil beams. Radiother Oncol 2024; 198:110388. [PMID: 38897315 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110388] [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: 04/04/2024] [Revised: 05/30/2024] [Accepted: 06/13/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE In intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), Bragg peaks result in steep distal dose fall-offs, while the lateral IMPT dose fall-off is often less steep than in photon therapy. High-energy pristine transmission ('shoot through') pencil beams have no Bragg peak in the patient, but show a sharp lateral penumbra at the target level. We investigated whether combining Bragg peaks with Transmission pencil beams ('IMPT&TPB') could improve head-and-neck plans by exploiting the steep lateral dose fall-off of transmission pencil beams. APPROACH Our system for automated multi-criteria IMPT plan optimisation was extended for combined optimisation of BPs and TPBs. The system generates for each patient a Pareto-optimal plan using a generic 'wish-list' with prioritised planning objectives and hard constraints. For eight nasopharynx cancer patients (NPC) and eight oropharynx cancer (OPC) patients, the IMPT&TPB plan was compared to the competing conventional IMPT plan with only Bragg peaks, which was generated with the same optimiser, but without transmission pencil beams. MAIN RESULTS Clinical OAR and target constraints were met in all plans. By allowing transmission pencil beams in the optimisation, on average 14 of the 25 investigated OAR plan parameters significantly improved for NPC, and 9 of the 17 for OPC, while only one OPC parameter showed small but significant deterioration. Non-significant differences were found in the remaining parameters. In NPC, cochlea Dmean reduced by up to 17.5 Gy and optic nerve D2% by up to 11.1 Gy. CONCLUSION Compared to IMPT, IMPT&TPB resulted in comparable target coverage with overall superior OAR sparing, the latter originating from steeper dose fall-offs close to OARs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Kong
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - M Huiskes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - S J M Habraken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; HollandPTC, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - E Astreinidou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - C R N Rasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; HollandPTC, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - B J M Heijmen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Breedveld
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Huiskes M, Kong W, Oud M, Crama K, Rasch C, Breedveld S, Heijmen B, Astreinidou E. Validation of Fully Automated Robust Multicriterial Treatment Planning for Head and Neck Cancer IMPT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:968-977. [PMID: 38284961 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.12.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2023] [Revised: 12/10/2023] [Accepted: 12/23/2023] [Indexed: 01/30/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Our purpose was to compare robust intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans, automatically generated with wish-list-based multicriterial optimization as implemented in Erasmus-iCycle, with manually created robust clinical IMPT plans for patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS Thirty-three patients with head and neck cancer were retrospectively included. All patients were previously treated with a manually created IMPT plan with 7000 cGy dose prescription to the primary tumor (clinical target volume [CTV]7000) and 5425 cGy dose prescription to the bilateral elective volumes (CTV5425). Plans had a 4-beam field configuration and were generated with scenario-based robust optimization (21 scenarios, 3-mm setup error, and ±3% density uncertainty for the CTVs). Three clinical plans were used to configure the Erasmus-iCycle wish-list for automated generation of robust IMPT plans for the other 30 included patients, in line with clinical planning requirements. Automatically and manually generated IMPT plans were compared for (robust) target coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP). No manual fine-tuning of automatically generated plans was performed. RESULTS For all automatically generated plans, voxel-wise minimum D98% values for the CTVs were within clinical constraints and similar to manual plans. All investigated OAR parameters were favorable in the automatically generated plans (all P < .001). Median reductions in mean dose to OARs went up to 667 cGy for the inferior pharyngeal constrictor muscle, and median reductions in D0.03cm3 in serial OARs ranged up to 1795 cGy for the spinal cord surface. The observed lower mean dose in parallel OARs resulted in statistically significant lower NTCP for xerostomia (grade ≥2: 34.4% vs 38.0%; grade ≥3: 9.0% vs 10.2%) and dysphagia (grade ≥2: 11.8% vs 15.0%; grade ≥3: 1.8% vs 2.8%). CONCLUSIONS Erasmus-iCycle was able to produce IMPT dose distributions fully automatically with similar (robust) target coverage and improved OAR doses and NTCPs compared with clinical manual planning, with negligible hands-on planning workload.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Merle Huiskes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | - Wens Kong
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michelle Oud
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Koen Crama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Coen Rasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Breedveld
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ben Heijmen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eleftheria Astreinidou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Chen M, Pang B, Zeng Y, Xu C, Chen J, Yang K, Chang Y, Yang Z. Evaluation of an automated clinical decision system with deep learning dose prediction and NTCP model for prostate cancer proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:115056. [PMID: 38718814 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad48f6] [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: 12/08/2023] [Accepted: 05/08/2024] [Indexed: 05/31/2024]
Abstract
Objective.To evaluate the feasibility of using a deep learning dose prediction approach to identify patients who could benefit most from proton therapy based on the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model.Approach.Two 3D UNets were established to predict photon and proton doses. A dataset of 95 patients with localized prostate cancer was randomly partitioned into 55, 10, and 30 for training, validation, and testing, respectively. We selected NTCP models for late rectum bleeding and acute urinary urgency of grade 2 or higher to quantify the benefit of proton therapy. Propagated uncertainties of predicted ΔNTCPs resulting from the dose prediction errors were calculated. Patient selection accuracies for a single endpoint and a composite evaluation were assessed under different ΔNTCP thresholds.Main results.Our deep learning-based dose prediction technique can reduce the time spent on plan comparison from approximately 2 days to as little as 5 seconds. The expanded uncertainty of predicted ΔNTCPs for rectum and bladder endpoints propagated from the dose prediction error were 0.0042 and 0.0016, respectively, which is less than one-third of the acceptable tolerance. The averaged selection accuracies for rectum bleeding, urinary urgency, and composite evaluation were 90%, 93.5%, and 93.5%, respectively.Significance.Our study demonstrates that deep learning dose prediction and NTCP evaluation scheme could distinguish the NTCP differences between photon and proton treatment modalities. In addition, the dose prediction uncertainty does not significantly influence the decision accuracy of NTCP-based patient selection for proton therapy. Therefore, automated deep learning dose prediction and NTCP evaluation schemes can potentially be used to screen large patient populations and to avoid unnecessary delays in the start of prostate cancer radiotherapy in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mei Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 20025, People's Republic of China
| | - Bo Pang
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
| | - Yiling Zeng
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
| | - Cheng Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 20025, People's Republic of China
| | - Jiayi Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 20025, People's Republic of China
| | - Kunyu Yang
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Radiation Oncology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
| | - Yu Chang
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Radiation Oncology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhiyong Yang
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Radiation Oncology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kong W, Oud M, Habraken SJM, Huiskes M, Astreinidou E, Rasch CRN, Heijmen BJM, Breedveld S. SISS-MCO: large scale sparsity-induced spot selection for fast and fully-automated robust multi-criteria optimisation of proton plans. Phys Med Biol 2024; 69:055035. [PMID: 38224619 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ad1e7a] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 01/17/2024]
Abstract
Objective.Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is an emerging treatment modality for cancer. However, treatment planning for IMPT is labour-intensive and time-consuming. We have developed a novel approach for multi-criteria optimisation (MCO) of robust IMPT plans (SISS-MCO) that is fully automated and fast, and we compare it for head and neck, cervix, and prostate tumours to a previously published method for automated robust MCO (IPBR-MCO, van de Water 2013).Approach.In both auto-planning approaches, the applied automated MCO of spot weights was performed with wish-list driven prioritised optimisation (Breedveld 2012). In SISS-MCO, spot weight MCO was applied once for every patient after sparsity-induced spot selection (SISS) for pre-selection of the most relevant spots from a large input set of candidate spots. IPBR-MCO had several iterations of spot re-sampling, each followed by MCO of the weights of the current spots.Main results.Compared to the published IPBR-MCO, the novel SISS-MCO resulted in similar or slightly superior plan quality. Optimisation times were reduced by a factor of 6 i.e. from 287 to 47 min. Numbers of spots and energy layers in the final plans were similar.Significance.The novel SISS-MCO automatically generated high-quality robust IMPT plans. Compared to a published algorithm for automated robust IMPT planning, optimisation times were reduced on average by a factor of 6. Moreover, SISS-MCO is a large scale approach; this enables optimisation of more complex wish-lists, and novel research opportunities in proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Kong
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center , Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Oud
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center , Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S J M Habraken
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center , Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - M Huiskes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - E Astreinidou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C R N Rasch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- HollandPTC, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - B J M Heijmen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center , Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Breedveld
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center , Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Huet-Dastarac M, Michiels S, Rivas ST, Ozan H, Sterpin E, Lee JA, Barragan-Montero A. Patient selection for proton therapy using Normal Tissue Complication Probability with deep learning dose prediction for oropharyngeal cancer. Med Phys 2023; 50:6201-6214. [PMID: 37140481 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2022] [Revised: 03/07/2023] [Accepted: 04/01/2023] [Indexed: 05/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In cancer care, determining the most beneficial treatment technique is a key decision affecting the patient's survival and quality of life. Patient selection for proton therapy (PT) over conventional radiotherapy (XT) currently entails comparing manually generated treatment plans, which requires time and expertise. PURPOSE We developed an automatic and fast tool, AI-PROTIPP (Artificial Intelligence Predictive Radiation Oncology Treatment Indication to Photons/Protons), that assesses quantitatively the benefits of each therapeutic option. Our method uses deep learning (DL) models to directly predict the dose distributions for a given patient for both XT and PT. By using models that estimate the Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP), namely the likelihood of side effects to occur for a specific patient, AI-PROTIPP can propose a treatment selection quickly and automatically. METHODS A database of 60 patients presenting oropharyngeal cancer, obtained from the Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc in Belgium, was used in this study. For every patient, a PT plan and an XT plan were generated. The dose distributions were used to train the two dose DL prediction models (one for each modality). The model is based on U-Net architecture, a type of convolutional neural network currently considered as the state of the art for dose prediction models. A NTCP protocol used in the Dutch model-based approach, including grades II and III xerostomia and grades II and III dysphagia, was later applied in order to perform automatic treatment selection for each patient. The networks were trained using a nested cross-validation approach with 11-folds. We set aside three patients in an outer set and each fold consists of 47 patients in training, five in validation and five for testing. This method allowed us to assess our method on 55 patients (five patients per test times the number of folds). RESULTS The treatment selection based on the DL-predicted doses reached an accuracy of 87.4% for the threshold parameters set by the Health Council of the Netherlands. The selected treatment is directly linked with these threshold parameters as they express the minimal gain brought by the PT treatment for a patient to be indicated to PT. To validate the performance of AI-PROTIPP in other conditions, we modulated these thresholds, and the accuracy was above 81% for all the considered cases. The difference in average cumulative NTCP per patient of predicted and clinical dose distributions is very similar (less than 1% difference). CONCLUSIONS AI-PROTIPP shows that using DL dose prediction in combination with NTCP models to select PT for patients is feasible and can help to save time by avoiding the generation of treatment plans only used for the comparison. Moreover, DL models are transferable, allowing, in the future, experience to be shared with centers that would not have PT planning expertise.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Steven Michiels
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Sara Teruel Rivas
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Hamdiye Ozan
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Edmond Sterpin
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - John A Lee
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Ana Barragan-Montero
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
José Santo R, Habraken SJM, Breedveld S, Hoogeman MS. Pencil-beam Delivery Pattern Optimization Increases Dose Rate for Stereotactic FLASH Proton Therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023; 115:759-767. [PMID: 36057377 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.08.053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2022] [Revised: 08/15/2022] [Accepted: 08/22/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE FLASH dose rates >40 Gy/s are readily available in proton therapy (PT) with cyclotron-accelerated beams and pencil-beam scanning (PBS). The PBS delivery pattern will affect the local dose rate, as quantified by the PBS dose rate (PBS-DR), and therefore needs to be accounted for in FLASH-PT with PBS, but it is not yet clear how. Our aim was to optimize patient-specific scan patterns for stereotactic FLASH-PT of early-stage lung cancer and lung metastases, maximizing the volume irradiated with PBS-DR >40 Gy/s of the organs at risk voxels irradiated to >8 Gy (FLASH coverage). METHODS AND MATERIALS Plans to 54 Gy/3 fractions with 3 equiangular coplanar 244 MeV proton shoot-through transmission beams for 20 patients were optimized with in-house developed software. Planning target volume-based planning with a 5 mm margin was used. Planning target volume ranged from 4.4 to 84 cc. Scan-pattern optimization was performed with a Genetic Algorithm, run in parallel for 20 independent populations (islands). Mapped crossover, inversion, swap, and shift operators were applied to achieve (local) optimality on each island, with migration between them for global optimality. The cost function was chosen to maximize the FLASH coverage per beam at >8 Gy, >40 Gy/s, and 40 nA beam current. The optimized patterns were evaluated on FLASH coverage, PBS-DR distribution, and population PBS-DR-volume histograms, compared with standard line-by-line scanning. Robustness against beam current variation was investigated. RESULTS The optimized patterns have a snowflake-like structure, combined with outward swirling for larger targets. A population median FLASH coverage of 29.0% was obtained for optimized patterns compared with 6.9% for standard patterns, illustrating a significant increase in FLASH coverage for optimized patterns. For beam current variations of 5 nA, FLASH coverage varied between -6.1%-point and 2.2%-point for optimized patterns. CONCLUSIONS Significant improvements on the PBS-DR and, hence, on FLASH coverage and potential healthy-tissue sparing are obtained by sequential scan-pattern optimization. The optimizer is flexible and may be further fine-tuned, based on the exact conditions for FLASH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rodrigo José Santo
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Instituto Superior Técnico, Department of Physics, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Steven J M Habraken
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, Delft, The Netherlands.
| | - Sebastiaan Breedveld
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mischa S Hoogeman
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, Delft, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Habraken S, Breedveld S, Groen J, Nuyttens J, Hoogeman M. Trade-off in healthy tissue sparing of FLASH and fractionation in stereotactic proton therapy of lung lesions with transmission beams. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:231-237. [PMID: 35988773 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2022] [Revised: 08/12/2022] [Accepted: 08/14/2022] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE Besides a dose-rate threshold of 40-100 Gy/s, the FLASH effect may require a dose >3.5-7 Gy. Even in hypofractioned treatments, with all beams delivered in each fraction (ABEF), most healthy tissue is irradiated to a lower fraction dose. This can be circumvented by single-beam-per-fraction (SBPF) delivery, with a loss of healthy tissue sparing by fractionation. We investigated the trade-off between FLASH and loss of fractionation in SBPF stereotactic proton therapy of lung cancer and determined break-even FLASH-enhancement ratios (FERs). MATERIALS AND METHODS Treatment plans for 12 patients were generated. GTV delineations were available and a 5 mm GTV-PTV margin was applied. Equiangular arrangements of 3, 5, 7, and 9 244 MeV proton transmission beams were used. To facilitate SBPF, the number of fractions was equal to the number of beams. Iso-effective fractionation schedules with a single field uniform dose prescription were used: D95%,PTV = 100%Dpres per beam. All plans were evaluated in terms of dose to lung and conformity of dose to target of FLASH-enhanced biologically equivalent dose (EQD2). RESULTS Compared to ABEF, SBPF resulted in a median increase of EQD2mean to healthy lung of 56%, 58%, 55% and 54% in plans with 3, 5, 7 and 9 fractions respectively and of 90%, 108%, 106% and 102% in V100% EQD2, quantifying conformity. This can be compensated for by FERs of at least 1.28, 1.32, 1.30 and 1.23 respectively for EQD2mean and 1.29, 1.18, 1.28 and 1.15 for V100%,EQD2. CONCLUSION A FLASH effect outweighing the loss of fractionation in SBPF may be achieved in stereotactic lung treatments. The trade-off with fractionation depends on the conditions under which the FLASH effect occurs. Better understanding of the underlying biology and the impact of delivery conditions is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven Habraken
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, Delft, The Netherlands.
| | - Sebastiaan Breedveld
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jort Groen
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Nuyttens
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Department Radiation Oncology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Mischa Hoogeman
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Radiotherapy, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Holland Proton Therapy Center, Department of Medical Physics & Informatics, Delft, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Zhang Y, Alshaikhi J, Amos RA, Lowe M, Tan W, Bär E, Royle G. Improving workflow for adaptive proton therapy with predictive anatomical modelling: A proof of concept. Radiother Oncol 2022; 173:93-101. [PMID: 35667573 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.05.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2021] [Revised: 05/29/2022] [Accepted: 05/31/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To demonstrate predictive anatomical modelling for improving the clinical workflow of adaptive intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for head and neck cancer. METHODS 10 radiotherapy patients with nasopharyngeal cancer were included in this retrospective study. Each patient had a planning CT, weekly verification CTs during radiotherapy and predicted weekly CTs from our anatomical model. Predicted CTs were used to create predicted adaptive plans in advance with the aim of maintaining clinically acceptable dosimetry. Adaption was triggered when the increase in mean dose (Dmean) to the parotid glands exceeded 3 Gy(RBE). We compared the accumulated dose of two adaptive IMPT strategies: 1) Predicted plan adaption: One adaptive plan per patient was optimised on a predicted CT triggered by replan criteria. 2) Standard replan: One adaptive plan was created reactively in response to the triggering weekly CT. RESULTS Statistical analysis demonstrates that the accumulated dose differences between two adaptive strategies are not significant (p > 0.05) for CTVs and OARs. We observed no meaningful differences in D95 between the accumulated dose and the planned dose for the CTVs, with mean differences to the high-risk CTV of -1.20 %, -1.23 % and -1.25 % for no adaption, standard and predicted plan adaption, respectively. The accumulated parotid Dmean using predicted plan adaption is within 3 Gy(RBE) of the planned dose and 0.31 Gy(RBE) lower than the standard replan approach on average. CONCLUSION Prediction-based replanning could potentially enable adaptive therapy to be delivered without treatment gaps or sub-optimal fractions, as can occur during a standard replanning strategy, though the benefit of using predicted plan adaption over the standard replan was not shown to be statistically significant with respect to accumulated dose in this study. Nonetheless, a predictive replan approach can offer advantages in improving clinical workflow efficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ying Zhang
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom.
| | - Jailan Alshaikhi
- Saudi Proton Therapy Center, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Richard A Amos
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Matthew Lowe
- Christie Medical Physics and Engineering, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom; Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Wenyong Tan
- Department of Oncology, Shenzhen Hospital of Southern Medical University, China
| | - Esther Bär
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom; University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Gary Royle
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Nuyts S, Bollen H, Ng SP, Corry J, Eisbruch A, Mendenhall WM, Smee R, Strojan P, Ng WT, Ferlito A. Proton Therapy for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Early Clinical Experience and Current Challenges. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14112587. [PMID: 35681568 PMCID: PMC9179360 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14112587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2022] [Revised: 05/18/2022] [Accepted: 05/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Proton therapy is a promising type of radiation therapy used to destroy tumor cells. It has the potential to further improve the outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer since it allows to minimize the radiation dose to vital structures around the tumor, leading to less toxicity. This paper describes the current experience worldwide with proton therapy in head and neck cancer. Abstract Proton therapy (PT) is a promising development in radiation oncology, with the potential to further improve outcomes for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). By utilizing the finite range of protons, healthy tissue can be spared from beam exit doses that would otherwise be irradiated with photon-based treatments. Current evidence on PT for HNSCC is limited to comparative dosimetric analyses and retrospective single-institution series. As a consequence, the recognized indications for the reimbursement of PT remain scarce in most countries. Nevertheless, approximately 100 PT centers are in operation worldwide, and initial experiences for HNSCC are being reported. This review aims to summarize the results of the early clinical experience with PT for HNSCC and the challenges that are currently faced.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Nuyts
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
- Correspondence:
| | - Heleen Bollen
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia;
| | - June Corry
- Division of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent’s Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia;
| | - Avraham Eisbruch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;
| | - William M Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32209, USA;
| | - Robert Smee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Prince of Wales Cancer Centre, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia;
| | - Primoz Strojan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia;
| | - Wai Tong Ng
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China;
| | - Alfio Ferlito
- Coordinator of the International Head and Neck Scientific Group, 35125 Padua, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Bogers S, Petoukhova A, Penninkhof J, Mast M, Poortmans P, Hoogeman M, Struikmans H. Target Volume Coverage and Organ at Risk Doses for Left-sided Whole-breast Irradiation With or Without Internal Mammary Chain Irradiation: A Comparison Between Three Techniques Representing the Past and the Present. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2022; 34:537-544. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2022.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2021] [Revised: 02/24/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
|
12
|
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: 0.3] [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
|
13
|
A Decision Support Tool to Optimize Selection of Head and Neck Cancer Patients for Proton Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14030681. [PMID: 35158949 PMCID: PMC8833534 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14030681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2021] [Revised: 01/23/2022] [Accepted: 01/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary A decision support tool was developed to select head and neck cancer patients for proton therapy. The tool uses delineation data to predict expected toxicity risk reduction with proton therapy and can be used before a treatment plan is created. The positive predictive value of the tool is >90%. This tool significantly reduces delays in commencing treatment and avoid redundant photon vs. proton treatment plan comparison. Abstract Selection of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients for proton therapy (PT) using plan comparison (VMAT vs. IMPT) for each patient is labor-intensive. Our aim was to develop a decision support tool to identify patients with high probability to qualify for PT, at a very early stage (immediately after delineation) to avoid delay in treatment initiation. A total of 151 HNC patients were included, of which 106 (70%) patients qualified for PT. Linear regression models for individual OARs were created to predict the Dmean to the OARs for VMAT and IMPT plans. The predictors were OAR volume percentages overlapping with target volumes. Then, actual and predicted plan comparison decisions were compared. Actual and predicted OAR Dmean (VMAT R2 = 0.953, IMPT R2 = 0.975) and NTCP values (VMAT R2 = 0.986, IMPT R2 = 0.992) were highly correlated. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the decision support tool were 64%, 87%, 92% and 51%, respectively. The expected toxicity reduction with IMPT can be predicted using only the delineation data. The probability of qualifying for PT is >90% when the tool indicates a positive outcome for PT. This tool will contribute significantly to a more effective selection of HNC patients for PT at a much earlier stage, reducing treatment delay.
Collapse
|
14
|
Hytonen R, Vergeer MR, Vanderstraeten R, Koponen TK, Smith C, Verbakel WF. Fast, automated knowledge-based treatment planning for selecting patients for proton therapy based on normal tissue complication probabilities. Adv Radiat Oncol 2022; 7:100903. [PMID: 35282398 PMCID: PMC8904224 DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2022.100903] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2021] [Accepted: 12/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Selecting patients who will benefit from proton therapy is laborious and subjective. We demonstrate a novel automated solution for creating high-quality knowledge-based plans (KBPs) using proton and photon beams to identify patients for proton treatment based on their normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP). Methods and Materials Two previously validated RapidPlan PT models for locally advanced head and neck cancer were used in combination with scripting to automatically create proton and photon KBPs for 72 patients with recent oropharynx cancer. NTCPs were calculated for each patient based on the KBPs, and patient selection was simulated according to the current Dutch national protocol. Results The photon/proton KBP exhibited good correlation between predicted and achieved organ-at-risk mean doses, with a ≤5 Gy difference in 208/196 out of 215 structures relevant for the head and neck cancer NTCP model. The proton KBPs yielded on average 7.1/6.1/7.6 Gy lower dose to salivary/swallowing structures/oral cavity than the photon KBPs. This reduced average grade 2/3 dysphagia and xerostomia by 7.1/3.3 and 5.5/2.0 percentage points, resulting in 16 of 72 patients (22%) being indicated for proton treatment. The entire automated process took <30 minutes per patient. Conclusions Automated support for decision making using KBP is feasible and fast. The planning solution has potential to speed up the planning and patient-selection process significantly without major compromises to the plan quality.
Collapse
|
15
|
Jampa-Ngern S, Kobashi K, Shimizu S, Takao S, Nakazato K, Shirato H. Prediction of liver Dmean for proton beam therapy using deep learning and contour-based data augmentation. JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH 2021:rrab095. [PMID: 34617104 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrab095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2021] [Revised: 08/13/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
The prediction of liver Dmean with 3-dimensional radiation treatment planning (3DRTP) is time consuming in the selection of proton beam therapy (PBT), and deep learning prediction generally requires large and tumor-specific databases. We developed a simple dose prediction tool (SDP) using deep learning and a novel contour-based data augmentation (CDA) approach and assessed its usability. We trained the SDP to predict the liver Dmean immediately. Five and two computed tomography (CT) data sets of actual patients with liver cancer were used for the training and validation. Data augmentation was performed by artificially embedding 199 contours of virtual clinical target volume (CTV) into CT images for each patient. The data sets of the CTVs and OARs are labeled with liver Dmean for six different treatment plans using two-dimensional calculations assuming all tissue densities as 1.0. The test of the validated model was performed using 10 unlabeled CT data sets of actual patients. Contouring only of the liver and CTV was required as input. The mean relative error (MRE), the mean percentage error (MPE) and regression coefficient between the planned and predicted Dmean was 0.1637, 6.6%, and 0.9455, respectively. The mean time required for the inference of liver Dmean of the six different treatment plans for a patient was 4.47±0.13 seconds. We conclude that the SDP is cost-effective and usable for gross estimation of liver Dmean in the clinic although the accuracy should be improved further if we need the accuracy of liver Dmean to be compatible with 3DRTP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sira Jampa-Ngern
- Graduate School of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
| | - Keiji Kobashi
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
| | - Shinichi Shimizu
- Graduate School of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
| | - Seishin Takao
- Global Center for Biomedical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608628, Japan
| | - Keiji Nakazato
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
| | - Hiroki Shirato
- Graduate School of Biomedical Science and Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
- Global Center for Biomedical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 0608638, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Thariat J, Calugaru V, Aloi D, Maingon P, Grégoire V. Head and neck proton therapy in France: A missed opportunity or a challenge in front of us? Cancer Radiother 2021; 25:537-544. [PMID: 34272183 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2021.06.018] [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: 06/10/2021] [Revised: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 06/24/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Following major advances of the best of photon-techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and, to arrive soon, magnetic resonance (MR)-linac radiotherapy, there are still substantial opportunities in the treatment of head and neck cancers to further reduce the toxicity burden. Proton therapy represents another attractive option in this high-quality and highly competitive precision radiotherapy landscape. Proton therapy holds promises to reduce toxicities and to escalate the dose in radioresistant cases or cases where dose distribution is not satisfactory with photons. However, the selection of patients for proton therapy needs to be done using evidence-based medicine to build arguments in favor of personalized precision radiation therapy. Referral to proton therapy versus IMRT or SBRT should be registered (ProtonShare® platform) and envisioned in a formalized clinical research perspective through randomized trials. The use of an enrichment process using a model-based approach should be done to only randomize patients doomed to benefit from proton. To tackle such great opportunities, the French proton therapy challenge is to collaborate at the national and international levels, and to demonstrate that the extra-costs of treatment are worth clinically and economically in the short, mid, and long-term. In parallel to the clinical developments, there are still preclinical issues to be tackled (e.g., proton FLASH, mini-beams, combination with immunotherapy), for which the French Radiotransnet network offers a unique platform. The current article provides a personal view of the challenges and opportunities with a focus on clinical research and randomized trial requirements as well as the needs for strong collaborations at the national and international levels for PT in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck to date.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Thariat
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre François-Baclesse, Caen, France; Laboratoire de physique Corpusculaire IN2P3/ENSICAEN/CNRS UMR 6534, Normandie Université, Caen, France; GORTEC - Intergroupe ORL, Tours, France.
| | - V Calugaru
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - D Aloi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Côte d'Azur University, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
| | - P Maingon
- Department of Oncology Radiotherapy, CLIP (2) Galilée, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), Sorbonne University, Pitié Salpêtrière Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - V Grégoire
- Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Léon-Bérard, Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|