Proton-based chemoradiation for synchronous bilateral non-small-cell lung cancers: A case report

Dosimetric comparison of IMPT vs VMAT for multiple lung lesions: an NTCP model-based decision-making strategy

To compare the dosimetric differences in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of multiple lung lesions and determine a normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model-based decision strategy that determines which treatment modality the patient will use. A total of 41 patients were retrospectively selected for this study. The number of patients with 1-6 lesions was 5, 16, 7, 6, 3, and 4, respectively. A prescription dose of 70 GyRBE in 10 fractions was given to each lesion. SBRT plans were generated using VMAT and IMPT. All the IMPT plans used robustness optimization with ± 3.5% range uncertainties and 5 mm setup uncertainties. Dosimetric metrics and the predicted NTCP value of radiation pneumonitis (RP), esophagitis, and pericarditis were analyzed to evaluate the potential clinical benefits between different planning groups. In addition, a threshold for the ratio of PTV to lungs (%) to determine whether a patient would benefit highly from IMPT was determined using receiver operating characteristic curves. All plans reached target coverage (V70GyRBE ≥ 95%). Compared with VMAT, IMPT resulted in a significantly lower dose of most thoracic normal tissues. For the 1-2, 3-4 and 5-6 lesion groups, the lung V5 was 29.90 ± 9.44%, 58.33 ± 13.35%, and 81.02 ± 5.91% for VMAT and 11.34 ± 3.11% (p < 0.001), 21.45 ± 3.80% (p < 0.001), and 32.48 ± 4.90% (p < 0.001) for IMPT, respectively. The lung V20 was 12.07 ± 4.94%, 25.57 ± 6.54%, and 43.99 ± 11.83% for VMAT and 6.76 ± 1.80% (p < 0.001), 13.14 ± 2.27% (p < 0.01), and 19.62 ± 3.48% (p < 0.01) for IMPT. The Dmean of the total lung was 7.65 ± 2.47 GyRBE, 14.78 ± 2.75 GyRBE, and 21.64 ± 4.07 GyRBE for VMAT and 3.69 ± 1.04 GyRBE (p < 0.001), 7.13 ± 1.41 GyRBE (p < 0.001), and 10.69 ± 1.81 GyRBE (p < 0.001) for IMPT. Additionally, in the VMAT group, the maximum NTCP value of radiation pneumonitis was 73.91%, whereas it was significantly lower in the IMPT group at 10.73%. The accuracy of our NTCP model-based decision model, which combines the number of lesions and PTV/Lungs (%), was 97.6%. The study demonstrated that the IMPT SBRT for multiple lung lesions had satisfactory dosimetry results, even when the number of lesions reached 6. The NTCP model-based decision strategy presented in our study could serve as an effective tool in clinical practice, aiding in the selection of the optimal treatment modality between VMAT and IMPT.

Proton therapy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

In the setting of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), defining the optimal clinical context for proton beam therapy (PBT) is challenging due to the increasing evidence demonstrating high rates of local control and good tolerance of stereotactic ablative body radiation (SABR). Given the relatively small percentage of lung and other critical structures treated with SABR, dosimetric studies comparing the two techniques have typically concluded that there are modest advantages to PBT, typically by reducing the low dose volumes, such as volume of lung receiving 5 Gy. This advantage may be more significant in treating larger tumors, multiple tumors, or central tumors. Most of the published studies are based on passive scattering PBT. Dosimetric benefits are likely to increase when pencil beam scanning/intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is employed, as has been observed in dosimetric reports in the locally advanced setting. More clinical data is needed regarding the safety and efficacy of stereotactic PBT in comparison to SABR. However, the only randomized trial that has been attempted closed early due to poor accrual, thus demonstrating the difficulty in designing trials in this context that incorporate a relevant and focused scientific question that can be extrapolated to clinical practice, yet also accrue sufficiently. The advent and increased use of advanced image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) techniques in the context of proton therapy, as well as the widespread implementation of IMPT, will increase the potential benefit of PBT. The next 5-10 years will likely yield more appropriate, feasible studies that will help answer the question of patient selection for this advanced technology.

Effects of anatomical changes on pencil beam scanning proton plans in locally advanced NSCLC patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Daily anatomical variations can cause considerable differences between delivered and planned dose. This study simulates and evaluates these effects in spot-scanning proton therapy for lung cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Robust intensity modulated treatment plans were designed on the mid-position CT scan for sixteen locally advanced lung cancer patients. To estimate dosimetric uncertainty, deformable registration was performed on their daily CBCTs to generate 4DCT equivalent scans for each fraction and to map recomputed dose to a common frame.

RESULTS

Without adaptive planning, eight patients had an undercoverage of the targets of more than 2GyE (maximum of 14.1GyE) on the recalculated treatment dose from the daily anatomy variations including respiration. In organs at risk, a maximum increase of 4.7GyE in the D1 was found in the mediastinal structures. The effect of respiratory motion alone is smaller: 1.4GyE undercoverage for targets and less than 1GyE for organs at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily anatomical variations over the course of treatment can cause considerable dose differences in the robust planned dose distribution. An advanced planning strategy including knowledge of anatomical uncertainties would be recommended to improve plan robustness against interfractional variations. For large anatomical changes, adaptive therapy is mandatory.

Consensus Statement on Proton Therapy in Early-Stage and Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Radiation dose escalation has been shown to improve local control and survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer in some studies, but randomized data have not supported this premise, possibly owing to adverse effects. Because of the physical characteristics of the Bragg peak, proton therapy (PT) delivers minimal exit dose distal to the target volume, resulting in better sparing of normal tissues in comparison to photon-based radiation therapy. This is particularly important for lung cancer given the proximity of the lung, heart, esophagus, major airways, large blood vessels, and spinal cord. However, PT is associated with more uncertainty because of the finite range of the proton beam and motion for thoracic cancers. PT is more costly than traditional photon therapy but may reduce side effects and toxicity-related hospitalization, which has its own associated cost. The cost of PT is decreasing over time because of reduced prices for the building, machine, maintenance, and overhead, as well as newer, shorter treatment programs. PT is improving rapidly as more research is performed particularly with the implementation of 4-dimensional computed tomography-based motion management and intensity modulated PT. Given these controversies, there is much debate in the oncology community about which patients with lung cancer benefit significantly from PT. The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group (PTCOG) Thoracic Subcommittee task group intends to address the issues of PT indications, advantages and limitations, cost-effectiveness, technology improvement, clinical trials, and future research directions. This consensus report can be used to guide clinical practice and indications for PT, insurance approval, and clinical or translational research directions.

Advantages of proton therapy in non-small cell lung cancers

The advantage of proton therapy over conventional radiotherapy is enormous, with many clinical advantages. In this review, we summarized the important literature in the advantages of Proton Therapy in Non-small Cell Lung Cancers.