1
|
Harrison N, Charyyev S, Oancea C, Stanforth A, Gelover E, Zhou S, Dynan WS, Zhang T, Biegalski S, Lin L. Characterizing devices for validation of dose, dose rate, and LET in ultra high dose rate proton irradiations. Med Phys 2024; 51:8411-8422. [PMID: 39153223 DOI: 10.1002/mp.17359] [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: 04/27/2024] [Revised: 07/19/2024] [Accepted: 07/31/2024] [Indexed: 08/19/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ultra high dose rate (UHDR) radiotherapy using ridge filter is a new treatment modality known as conformal FLASH that, when optimized for dose, dose rate (DR), and linear energy transfer (LET), has the potential to reduce damage to healthy tissue without sacrificing tumor killing efficacy via the FLASH effect. PURPOSE Clinical implementation of conformal FLASH proton therapy has been limited by quality assurance (QA) challenges, which include direct measurement of UHDR and LET. Voxel DR distributions and LET spectra at planning target margins are paramount to the DR/LET-related sparing of organs at risk. We hereby present a methodology to achieve experimental validation of these parameters. METHODS Dose, DR, and LET were measured for a conformal FLASH treatment plan involving a 250-MeV proton beam and a 3D-printed ridge filter designed to uniformly irradiate a spherical target. We measured dose and DR simultaneously using a 4D multi-layer strip ionization chamber (MLSIC) under UHDR conditions. Additionally, we developed an "under-sample and recover (USRe)" technique for a high-resolution pixelated semiconductor detector, Timepix3, to avoid event pile-up and to correct measured LET at high-proton-flux locations without undesirable beam modifications. Confirmation of these measurements was done using a MatriXX PT detector and by Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. RESULTS MC conformal FLASH computed doses had gamma passing rates of >95% (3 mm/3% criteria) when compared to MatriXX PT and MLSIC data. At the lateral margin, DR showed average agreement values within 0.3% of simulation at 100 Gy/s and fluctuations ∼10% at 15 Gy/s. LET spectra in the proximal, lateral, and distal margins had Bhattacharyya distances of <1.3%. CONCLUSION Our measurements with the MLSIC and Timepix3 detectors shown that the DR distributions for UHDR scenarios and LET spectra using USRe are in agreement with simulations. These results demonstrate that the methodology presented here can be used effectively for the experimental validation and QA of FLASH treatment plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Shuang Zhou
- Washington University of St. Louis, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | | - Tiezhi Zhang
- Washington University of St. Louis, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Yamano A, Inoue T, Shiba S, Shimo T, Yamanaka M, Shirata R, Matsumoto K, Yagihashi T, Tokuuye K, Chang W. Dosimetric Evaluation of Beam-specific PTV and Worst-case Optimization Methods for Liver Proton Therapy. In Vivo 2024; 38:3059-3067. [PMID: 39477417 PMCID: PMC11535939 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13790] [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: 08/05/2024] [Revised: 09/02/2024] [Accepted: 09/12/2024] [Indexed: 11/07/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM In spot-scanning proton therapy, intra-fractional anatomical changes by organ movement can lead to deterioration in dose distribution due to beam range variation. To explore a more robust treatment planning method, this study evaluated the dosimetric characteristics and robustness of two proton therapy planning methods for liver cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two- or three-field treatment plans were created for 11 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer using a single-field uniform dose (SFUD) technique. The plans were optimized using either beam-specific planning target volume (BSPTV) or worst-case optimization (WCO). The target coverage for the gross tumor volume (GTV), planning target volume (PTV), and organs at risk (OAR) parameters related to toxicity were calculated from the perturbed dose distributions, considering setup and range uncertainties. Statistical analyses of the BSPTV and WCO plans were performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank sum test (p<0.05). The calculation times for a single optimization process were also recorded and compared. RESULTS The robustness of the WCO plans in the worst-case scenario was significantly higher than that of the BSPTV plan in terms of GTV target coverage, prevention of maximum dose increase to the gastrointestinal tract, and the dose received by normal liver regions. However, there were no significant differences in PTV, and the calculation time required to create the WCO plan was considerably longer. CONCLUSION In SFUD proton therapy for liver cancer, the WCO plans required a longer optimization time but exhibited superior robustness in GTV coverage and sparing of OARs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akihiro Yamano
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
- Graduate School of Human Health Sciences, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Inoue
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shintaro Shiba
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Takahiro Shimo
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Masashi Yamanaka
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Ryosuke Shirata
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Kazuki Matsumoto
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Takayuki Yagihashi
- Department of Medical Physics, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Koichi Tokuuye
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Japan
| | - Weishan Chang
- Graduate School of Human Health Sciences, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Harrison N, Kang M, Liu R, Charyyev S, Wahl N, Liu W, Zhou J, Higgins KA, Simone CB, Bradley JD, Dynan WS, Lin L. A Novel Inverse Algorithm To Solve the Integrated Optimization of Dose, Dose Rate, and Linear Energy Transfer of Proton FLASH Therapy With Sparse Filters. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:957-967. [PMID: 38104869 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.11.061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2023] [Revised: 09/27/2023] [Accepted: 11/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The recently proposed Integrated Physical Optimization Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IPO-IMPT) framework allows simultaneous optimization of dose, dose rate, and linear energy transfer (LET) for ultra-high dose rate (FLASH) treatment planning. Finding solutions to IPO-IMPT is difficult because of computational intensiveness. Nevertheless, an inverse solution that simultaneously specifies the geometry of a sparse filter and weights of a proton intensity map is desirable for both clinical and preclinical applications. Such solutions can reduce effective biologic dose to organs at risk in patients with cancer as well as reduce the number of animal irradiations needed to derive extra biologic dose models in preclinical studies. METHODS AND MATERIALS Unlike the initial forward heuristic, this inverse IPO-IMPT solution includes simultaneous optimization of sparse range compensation, sparse range modulation, and spot intensity. The daunting computational tasks vital to this endeavor were resolved iteratively with a distributed computing framework to enable Simultaneous Intensity and Energy Modulation and Compensation (SIEMAC). SIEMAC was demonstrated on a human patient with central lung cancer and a minipig. RESULTS SIEMAC simultaneously improves maps of spot intensities and patient-field-specific sparse range compensators and range modulators. For the patient with lung cancer, at our maximum nozzle current of 300 nA, dose rate coverage above 100 Gy/s increased from 57% to 96% in the lung and from 93% to 100% in the heart, and LET coverage above 4 keV/µm dropped from 68% to 9% in the lung and from 26% to <1% in the heart. For a simple minipig plan, the full-width half-maximum of the dose, dose rate, and LET distributions decreased by 30%, 1.6%, and 57%, respectively, again with similar target dose coverage, thus reducing uncertainty in these quantities for preclinical studies. CONCLUSIONS The inverse solution to IPO-IMPT demonstrated the capability to simultaneously modulate subspot proton energy and intensity distributions for clinical and preclinical studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ruirui Liu
- Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; University of Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska
| | | | - Niklas Wahl
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Wei Liu
- Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Jun Zhou
- Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Valdes G, Scholey J, Nano TF, Gennatas ED, Mohindra P, Mohammed N, Zeng J, Kotecha R, Rosen LR, Chang J, Tsai HK, Urbanic JJ, Vargas CE, Yu NY, Ungar LH, Eaton E, Simone CB. Predicting the Effect of Proton Beam Therapy Technology on Pulmonary Toxicities for Patients With Locally Advanced Lung Cancer Enrolled in the Proton Collaborative Group Prospective Clinical Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2024; 119:66-77. [PMID: 38000701 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.11.026] [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: 10/27/2022] [Revised: 10/27/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to predict the probability of grade ≥2 pneumonitis or dyspnea within 12 months of receiving conventionally fractionated or mildly hypofractionated proton beam therapy for locally advanced lung cancer using machine learning. METHODS AND MATERIALS Demographic and treatment characteristics were analyzed for 965 consecutive patients treated for lung cancer with conventionally fractionated or mildly hypofractionated (2.2-3 Gy/fraction) proton beam therapy across 12 institutions. Three machine learning models (gradient boosting, additive tree, and logistic regression with lasso regularization) were implemented to predict Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 grade ≥2 pulmonary toxicities using double 10-fold cross-validation for parameter hyper-tuning without leak of information. Balanced accuracy and area under the curve were calculated, and 95% confidence intervals were obtained using bootstrap sampling. RESULTS The median age of the patients was 70 years (range, 20-97), and they had predominantly stage IIIA or IIIB disease. They received a median dose of 60 Gy in 2 Gy/fraction, and 46.4% received concurrent chemotherapy. In total, 250 (25.9%) had grade ≥2 pulmonary toxicity. The probability of pulmonary toxicity was 0.08 for patients treated with pencil beam scanning and 0.34 for those treated with other techniques (P = 8.97e-13). Use of abdominal compression and breath hold were highly significant predictors of less toxicity (P = 2.88e-08). Higher total radiation delivered dose (P = .0182) and higher average dose to the ipsilateral lung (P = .0035) increased the likelihood of pulmonary toxicities. The gradient boosting model performed the best of the models tested, and when demographic and dosimetric features were combined, the area under the curve and balanced accuracy were 0.75 ± 0.02 and 0.67 ± 0.02, respectively. After analyzing performance versus the number of data points used for training, we observed that accuracy was limited by the number of observations. CONCLUSIONS In the largest analysis of prospectively enrolled patients with lung cancer assessing pulmonary toxicities from proton therapy to date, advanced machine learning methods revealed that pencil beam scanning, abdominal compression, and lower normal lung doses can lead to significantly lower probability of developing grade ≥2 pneumonitis or dyspnea.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gilmer Valdes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Jessica Scholey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Tomi F Nano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, California.
| | - Efstathios D Gennatas
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- University of Maryland School of Medicine and Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Nasir Mohammed
- Northwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, Warrenville, Illinois
| | - Jing Zeng
- University of Washington and Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Rupesh Kotecha
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Lane R Rosen
- Willis-Knighton Medical Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - John Chang
- Oklahoma Proton Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | - Henry K Tsai
- New Jersey Procure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - James J Urbanic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, California Protons Therapy Center, San Diego, California
| | - Carlos E Vargas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Proton Center, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Nathan Y Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Proton Center, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Lyle H Ungar
- Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Eric Eaton
- Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, New York
| |
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: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [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
|
Pennock M, Wei S, Cheng C, Lin H, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Bakst RL, Kabarriti R, Simone II CB, Lee NY, Kang M, Press RH. Proton Bragg Peak FLASH Enables Organ Sparing and Ultra-High Dose-Rate Delivery: Proof of Principle in Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3828. [PMID: 37568644 PMCID: PMC10417542 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15153828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2023] [Revised: 07/21/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 08/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) Bragg peak FLASH combines ultra-high dose rate delivery and organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. This proof-of-principle study compared dosimetry and dose rate coverage between PBS Bragg peak FLASH and PBS transmission FLASH in head and neck reirradiation. PBS Bragg peak FLASH plans were created via the highest beam single energy, range shifter, and range compensator, and were compared to PBS transmission FLASH plans for 6 GyE/fraction and 10 GyE/fraction in eight recurrent head and neck patients originally treated with quad shot reirradiation (14.8/3.7 CGE). The 6 GyE/fraction and 10 GyE/fraction plans were also created using conventional-rate intensity-modulated proton therapy techniques. PBS Bragg peak FLASH, PBS transmission FLASH, and conventional plans were compared for OAR sparing, FLASH dose rate coverage, and target coverage. All FLASH OAR V40 Gy/s dose rate coverage was 90-100% at 6 GyE and 10 GyE for both FLASH modalities. PBS Bragg peak FLASH generated dose volume histograms (DVHs) like those of conventional therapy and demonstrated improved OAR dose sparing over PBS transmission FLASH. All the modalities had similar CTV coverage. PBS Bragg peak FLASH can deliver conformal, ultra-high dose rate FLASH with a two-millisecond delivery of the minimum MU per spot. PBS Bragg peak FLASH demonstrated similar dose rate coverage to PBS transmission FLASH with improved OAR dose-sparing, which was more pronounced in the 10 GyE/fraction than in the 6 GyE/fraction. This feasibility study generates hypotheses for the benefits of FLASH in head and neck reirradiation and developing biological models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Pennock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, New York, NY 10461, USA;
| | - Shouyi Wei
- Department of Physics, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (S.W.); (H.L.); (S.H.); (M.K.)
| | - Chingyun Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA;
| | - Haibo Lin
- Department of Physics, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (S.W.); (H.L.); (S.H.); (M.K.)
| | - Shaakir Hasan
- Department of Physics, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (S.W.); (H.L.); (S.H.); (M.K.)
| | - Arpit M. Chhabra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (C.B.S.II)
| | - J. Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (C.B.S.II)
| | - Richard L. Bakst
- Department of Radiation Oncology—Radiation Oncology Associates, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA;
| | - Rafi Kabarriti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, New York, NY 10461, USA;
| | - Charles B. Simone II
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (A.M.C.); (J.I.C.); (C.B.S.II)
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA;
| | - Minglei Kang
- Department of Physics, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (S.W.); (H.L.); (S.H.); (M.K.)
| | - Robert H. Press
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL 33176, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Liu R, Charyyev S, Wahl N, Liu W, Kang M, Zhou J, Yang X, Baltazar F, Palkowitsch M, Higgins K, Dynan W, Bradley J, Lin L. An Integrated Physical Optimization Framework for Proton Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy FLASH Treatment Planning Allows Dose, Dose Rate, and Linear Energy Transfer Optimization Using Patient-Specific Ridge Filters. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2023:S0360-3016(23)00097-4. [PMID: 36736634 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.01.048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2022] [Revised: 01/04/2023] [Accepted: 01/21/2023] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Patient-specific ridge filters provide a passive means to modulate proton energy to obtain a conformal dose. Here we describe a new framework for optimization of filter design and spot maps to meet the unique demands of ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) radiation therapy. We demonstrate an integrated physical optimization Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) (IPO-IMPT) approach for optimization of dose, dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), and dose-averaged linear energy transfer (LETd). METHODS AND MATERIALS We developed an inverse planning software to design patient-specific ridge filters that spread the Bragg peak from a fixed-energy, 250-MeV beam to a proximal beam-specific planning target volume. The software defines patient-specific ridge filter pin shapes and uses a Monte Carlo calculation engine, based on Geant4, to provide dose and LET influence matrices. Plan optimization, using matRAD, accommodates the IPO-IMPT objective function considering dose, dose rate, and LET simultaneously with minimum monitor unit constraints. The framework enables design of both regularly spaced and sparse-optimized ridge filters, from which some pins are omitted to allow faster delivery and selective LET optimization. To demonstrate the framework, we designed ridge filters for 3 example patients with lung cancer and optimized the plans using IPO-IMPT. RESULTS The IPO-IMPT framework selectively spared the organs at risk by reducing LET and increasing dose rate, relative to IMPT planning. Sparse-optimized ridge filters were superior to regularly spaced ridge filters in dose rate. Depending on which parameter is prioritized, volume distributions and histograms for dose, DADR, and LETd, using evaluation structures specific to heart, lung, and esophagus, show high levels of FLASH dose-rate coverage and/or reduced LETd, while maintaining dose coverage within the beam specific planning target volume. CONCLUSIONS This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the feasibility of using an IPO-IMPT framework to accomplish proton FLASH stereotactic body proton therapy, accounting for dose, DADR, and LETd simultaneously.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruirui Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Serdar Charyyev
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Niklas Wahl
- German Cancer Research Center - DKFZ, Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology - HIRO, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona
| | | | - Jun Zhou
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Xiaofeng Yang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Filipa Baltazar
- German Cancer Research Center - DKFZ, Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; Instituto SuperiorTécnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Martina Palkowitsch
- German Cancer Research Center - DKFZ, Department of Medical Physics in Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg, Germany; Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology - HIRO, Heidelberg, Germany; Atominstitut, TU Wien, Vienna, Austria
| | - Kristin Higgins
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - William Dynan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Jeffrey Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Liyong Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kang M, Choi JI, Souris K, Zhou J, Yu G, Shepherd AF, Ohri N, Lazarev S, Lin L, Lin H, Simone CB. Advances in treatment planning and management for the safety and accuracy of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy using proton pencil beam scanning: Simulation, planning, quality assurance, and delivery recommendations. JOURNAL OF RADIOSURGERY AND SBRT 2023; 9:53-62. [PMID: 38029008 PMCID: PMC10681141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2023] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023]
Abstract
This study presents the clinical experiences of the New York Proton Center in employing proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) for the treatment of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy. It encompasses a comprehensive examination of multiple facets, including patient simulation, delineation of target volumes and organs at risk, treatment planning, plan evaluation, quality assurance, and motion management strategies. By sharing the approaches of the New York Proton Center and providing recommendations across simulation, treatment planning, and treatment delivery, it is anticipated that the valuable experience will be provided to a broader proton therapy community, serving as a useful reference for future clinical practice and research endeavors in the field of stereotactic body proton therapy for lung tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - J. Isabelle Choi
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York NY, USA
| | | | - Jun Zhou
- Emory University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Atlanta, GA, USA|
| | - Gang Yu
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Annemarie F. Shepherd
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York NY, USA
| | - Nitin Ohri
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
- Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Stanislav Lazarev
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY, USA
| | - Liyong Lin
- Emory University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Atlanta, GA, USA|
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York NY, USA
- Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Charles B. Simone
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Simone CB, Lin L. Proton SBRT is ready to move past uncertainties and towards improved clinical outcomes. JOURNAL OF RADIOSURGERY AND SBRT 2023; 9:3-6. [PMID: 38029009 PMCID: PMC10681151] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Liyong Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
McMillan MT, Kang M, Shepherd AF, Liu W, Lin L, Lin H, Simone CB. Stereotactic body proton therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: Clinical indications and recommendations. JOURNAL OF RADIOSURGERY AND SBRT 2023; 9:17-32. [PMID: 38029014 PMCID: PMC10681144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023]
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) has emerged as a standard treatment approach for early-stage lung cancer and intrathoracic oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease. While local control is often excellent with this modality when delivered with photon therapy, toxicities for select patients can be significant. Proton therapy offers a unique opportunity to widen the therapeutic window when treating patients with thoracic malignancies requiring or benefitting from ultra-high doses per fraction. Thoracic proton SBRT may be particularly beneficial in cases requiring dose escalation, for tumors >5 cm, for central or ultra-central tumors, for reirradiation, in patients with interstitial lung diseases, and when combining radiation with immunotherapy. These clinical indications are detailed, along with supporting literature and clinical recommendations. Other considerations, future directions and potential benefits of proton SBRT, including sparing lymphocytes, when delivered as intensity-modulated proton therapy or as FLASH, and for the treatment of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer or in patients with homologous recombination repair deficiencies, are also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew T. McMillan
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Annemarie F. Shepherd
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY, USA
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wei Liu
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Radiation Oncology, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Liyong Lin
- Emory University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Haibo Lin
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY, USA
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, New York, NY, USA
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Franceschini D, Cozzi L, Fogliata A, Marini B, Di Cristina L, Dominici L, Spoto R, Franzese C, Navarria P, Comito T, Reggiori G, Tomatis S, Scorsetti M. Training and validation of a knowledge-based dose-volume histogram predictive model in the optimisation of intensity-modulated proton and volumetric modulated arc photon plans for pleural mesothelioma patients. Radiat Oncol 2022; 17:150. [PMID: 36028862 PMCID: PMC9419376 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-022-02119-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2022] [Accepted: 08/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To investigate the performance of a narrow-scope knowledge-based RapidPlan (RP) model for optimisation of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans applied to patients with pleural mesothelioma. Second, estimate the potential benefit of IMPT versus VMAT for this class of patients. METHODS A cohort of 82 patients was retrospectively selected; 60 were used to "train" a dose-volume histogram predictive model; the remaining 22 provided independent validation. The performance of the RP models was benchmarked, comparing predicted versus achieved mean and near-to-maximum dose for all organs at risk (OARs) in the training set and by quantitative assessment of some dose-volume metrics in the comparison of the validation RP-based data versus the manually optimised training datasets. Treatment plans were designed for a prescription dose of 44 Gy in 22 fractions (proton doses account for a fixed relative biological effectiveness RBE = 1.1). RESULTS Training and validation RP-based plans resulted dosimetrically similar for both VMAT and IMPT groups, and the clinical planning aims were met for all structures. The IMPT plans outperformed the VMAT ones for all OARs for the contra-lateral and the mean and low dose regions for the ipsilateral OARs. Concerning the prediction performance of the RP models, the linear regression for the near-to-maximum dose resulted in Dachieved = 1.03Dpredicted + 0.58 and Dachieved = 1.02Dpredicted + 1.46 for VMAT and IMPT, respectively. For the mean dose it resulted: Dachieved = 0.99Dpredicted + 0.34 and Dachieved = 1.05Dpredicted + 0.27 respectively. In both cases, the linear correlation between prediction and achievement is granted with an angular coefficient deviating from unity for less than 5%. Concerning the dosimetric comparison between manual plans in the training cohort and RP-based plans in the validation cohort, no clinical differences were observed for the target volumes in both the VMAT and IMPT groups. Similar consistency was observed for the dose-volume metrics analysed for the OAR. This proves the possibility of achieving the same quality of plans with manual procedures (the training set) or with automated RP-based methods (the validation set). CONCLUSION Two models were trained and validated for VMAT and IMPT plans for pleural mesothelioma. The RP model performance resulted satisfactory as measured by the agreement between predicted and achieved (after full optimisation) dose-volume metrics. The IMPT plans outperformed the VMAT plans for all the OARs (with different intensities for contra- or ipsilateral structures). RP-based planning enabled the automation of part of the optimisation and the harmonisation of the dose-volume results between training and validation. The IMPT data showed a systematic significant dosimetric advantage over VMAT. In general, using an RP-based approach can simplify the optimisation workflow in these complex treatment indications without impacting the quality of plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Davide Franceschini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Luca Cozzi
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy.
| | - Antonella Fogliata
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Beatrice Marini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Luciana Di Cristina
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Luca Dominici
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Ruggero Spoto
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Pierina Navarria
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Tiziana Comito
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Giacomo Reggiori
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Stefano Tomatis
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Wei S, Lin H, Huang S, Shi C, Xiong W, Zhai H, Hu L, Yu G, Press RH, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Simone CB, Kang M. Dose rate and dose robustness for proton transmission FLASH-RT treatment in lung cancer. Front Oncol 2022; 12:970602. [PMID: 36059710 PMCID: PMC9435957 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.970602] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2022] [Accepted: 07/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Purposes To evaluate the plan quality and robustness of both dose and dose rate of proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) transmission FLASH delivery in lung cancer treatment. Methods and materials An in-house FLASH planning platform was used to optimize 10 lung cancer patients previously consecutively treated with proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to receive 3 and 5 transmission beams (Trx-3fds and Trx-5fds, respectively) to 34 Gy in a single fraction. Perturbation scenarios (n=12) for setup and range uncertainties (5 mm and 3.5%) were introduced, and dose-volume histogram and dose-rate-volume histogram bands were generated. Conventional proton SBRT clinical plans were used as a reference. RTOG 0915 dose metrics and 40 Gy/s dose rate coverage (V40Gy/s) were used to assess the dose and dose rate robustness. Results Trx-5fds yields a comparable iCTV D2% of 105.3%, whereas Trx-3fds resulted in inferior D2% of 111.9% to the clinical SBRT plans with D2% of 105.6% (p<0.05). Both Trx-5fds and Trx-3fds plans had slightly worse dose metrics to organs at risk than SBRT plans. Trx-5fds achieved superior dosimetry robustness for iCTV, esophagus, and spinal cord doses than both Trx-3fds and conventional SBRT plans. There was no significant difference in dose rate robustness for V40Gy/s coverage between Trx-3fds and Trx-5fds. Dose rate distribution has similar distributions to the dose when perturbation exists. Conclusion Transmission plans yield overall modestly inferior plan quality compared to the conventional proton SBRT plans but provide improved robustness and the potential for a toxicity-sparing FLASH effect. By using more beams (5- versus 3-field), both dose and dose rate robustness for transmission plans can be achieved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Sheng Huang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Chengyu Shi
- City of Hope, Orange County, Irvine, CA, United States
| | - Weijun Xiong
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Huifang Zhai
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Lei Hu
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Gang Yu
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
- *Correspondence: Minglei Kang,
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Wei S, Lin H, Isabelle Choi J, Shi C, Simone CB, Kang M. Advanced pencil beam scanning Bragg peak FLASH-RT delivery technique can enhance lung cancer planning treatment outcomes compared to conventional multiple-energy proton PBS techniques. Radiother Oncol 2022; 175:238-247. [PMID: 35961583 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2022] [Revised: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the dosimetric characteristics between an advanced proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) Bragg peak FLASH technique and conventional PBS planning technique in lung tumors. To evaluate the "FLASHness" of single-field in a multiple-field delivery scheme for a hypofractionation regimen and move a step forward to clinical application. METHODS Single-energy PBS Bragg peak FLASH treatment plans were optimized based on a novel Bragg peak tracking technique to enable Bragg peaks to stop at the distal edge of the target. Inverse treatment planning using multiple-field optimization (MFO) can achieve sufficient FLASH dose rate and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT)-equivalent dosimetric quality. The dose rate of organs-at-risk (OARs) and the target were calculated under FLASH machine parameters. A group of 10 consecutive lung SBRT patients was optimized to 34 Gy/fraction using a standard treatment of PBS technique with multiple energy layers as references to the Bragg peak plans. The dosimetric quality was compared between Bragg peak FLASH and conventional plans based on RTOG0915 dose metrics. FLASH dose rate ratios (V40Gy/s) were calculated as a metric of the FLASH-sparing effect. RESULTS For higher dose thresholds, the Bragg peak plans achieved greater V40Gy/s FLASH coverage for all major OARs. The V40Gy/s was close to 100% for all OARs when the dose thresholds were > 5 Gy for full plan and single beam evaluations. The less "FLASHness" region was associated with a low dose distribution, mainly occurring in the PBS field penumbra region. The conventional IMPT treatment plans yielded slightly superior target dose uniformity with a D2%(%) of 108.02% versus that of Bragg peak 300 MU plans of 111.81% (p < 0.01) and that of Bragg peak 1200 MU plans of 115.95% (p < 0.01). No significant difference in dose metrics was found between Bragg peak and IMPT treatment plans for the spinal cord, esophagus, heart, or lung-GTV (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION Hypofractionated lung Bragg peak plans can maintain comparable plan quality to conventional PBS while achieving sufficient FLASH dose rate coverage for major OARs for each field under the multiple-field delivery scheme. The novel Bragg peak FLASH technique has the potential to enhance lung cancer planning treatment outcomes compared to standard PBS treatment techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA.
| | | | - Chengyu Shi
- City of Hope, Orange County, Irvine, CA 92618, USA
| | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Wei S, Lin H, Shi C, Xiong W, Chen CC, Huang S, Press RH, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Simone CB, Kang M. Use of single-energy proton pencil beam scanning Bragg peak for intensity-modulated proton therapy FLASH treatment planning in liver hypofractionated radiation therapy. Med Phys 2022; 49:6560-6574. [PMID: 35929404 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2022] [Revised: 06/09/2022] [Accepted: 07/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The transmission proton FLASH technique delivers high doses to the normal tissue distal to the target, which is less conformal compared to the Bragg peak technique. To investigate FLASH RT planning using single-energy Bragg peak beams with a similar beam arrangement as clinical intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and to characterize the plan quality, dose sparing of organs-at-risk (OARs), and FLASH dose rate percentage. MATERIALS AND METHODS An in-house platform was developed to enable inverse IMPT-FLASH planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. A universal range shifter and range compensators were utilized to effectively align the Bragg peak to the distal edge of the target. Two different minimum MU settings of 400 and 800 MU/spot (Bragg-400MU and Bragg-800MU) plans were investigated on 10 consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients previously treated by IMPT-SBRT to evaluate the FLASH dose and dose rate coverage for OARs. The IMPT-FLASH using single-energy Bragg peaks delivered 50 Gy in 5 fractions with similar or identical beam arrangement to the clinical IMPT-SBRT plans. NRG GI003 dose constraint metrics were used. Three dose rate calculation methods, including average dose rate (ADR), dose threshold dose rate (DTDR), and dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), were all studied. RESULTS The novel spot map optimization can fulfill the inverse planning using single-energy Bragg peaks. All the Bragg peak FLASH plans achieved similar results for the liver-GTV Dmean and heart D0.5cc , compared to SBRT-IMPT. The Bragg-800MU plans resulted in 18.3% higher CTV D2cc compared with SBRT (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was found between Bragg-400MU and SBRT plans. For the CTV Dmax , SBRT plans resulted in 10.3% (p<0.01) less than Bragg-400MU plans and 16.6% (p<0.01) less than Bragg-800MU plans. The Bragg-800MU plans generally achieved higher ADR, DADR, and DTDR dose rates than Bragg-400MU plans, and DADR mostly led to the highest V40Gy/s compared to other dose rate calculation methods, whereas ADR led to the lowest. The lower dose rate portions in certain OARs are related to the lower dose deposited due to the farther distances from targets, especially in the penumbra of the beams. CONCLUSION Single-energy Bragg peak IMPT-FLASH plans eliminate the exit dose in normal tissues, maintaining comparable dose metrics to the conventional IMPT-SBRT plans while achieving a sufficient FLASH dose rate for liver cancers. This study demonstrates the feasibility of and sufficiently high dose rate when applying Bragg peak FLASH treatment for liver cancer hypofractionated FLASH therapy. The advancement of this novel method has the potential to optimize treatment for liver cancer patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Kobeissi JM, Simone CB, Hilal L, Wu AJ, Lin H, Crane CH, Hajj C. Proton Therapy in the Management of Luminal Gastrointestinal Cancers: Esophagus, Stomach, and Anorectum. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:2877. [PMID: 35740544 PMCID: PMC9221464 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14122877] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2022] [Revised: 05/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
While the role of proton therapy in gastric cancer is marginal, its role in esophageal and anorectal cancers is expanding. In esophageal cancer, protons are superior in sparing the organs at risk, as shown by multiple dosimetric studies. Literature is conflicting regarding clinical significance, but the preponderance of evidence suggests that protons yield similar or improved oncologic outcomes to photons at a decreased toxicity cost. Similarly, protons have improved sparing of the organs at risk in anorectal cancers, but clinical data is much more limited to date, and toxicity benefits have not yet been shown clinically. Large, randomized trials are currently underway for both disease sites.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jana M. Kobeissi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut 1007, Lebanon; (J.M.K.); (L.H.)
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (C.B.S.II); (H.L.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| | - Lara Hilal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut 1007, Lebanon; (J.M.K.); (L.H.)
| | - Abraham J. Wu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| | - Haibo Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (C.B.S.II); (H.L.)
| | - Christopher H. Crane
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| | - Carla Hajj
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10027, USA; (A.J.W.); (C.H.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Hoppe BS, Nichols RC, Flampouri S, Pankuch M, Morris CG, Pham DC, Mohindra P, Hartsell WF, Mohammed N, Chon BH, Kestin LL, Simone CB. Chemoradiation with Hypofractionated Proton Therapy in Stage II-III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A YYY Phase 1/2 Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:732-741. [PMID: 35306151 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2021] [Revised: 02/23/2022] [Accepted: 03/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hypofractionated radiotherapy has been safely implemented into the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but not locally advanced (LA-) NSCLC due to prohibitive toxicities with photon therapy. Proton therapy, however, may allow for safe delivery of hypofractionated radiotherapy. We sought to determine whether hypofractionated proton therapy with concurrent chemotherapy improves overall survival. METHODS & MATERIALS The YYY conducted a phase 1/2 single-arm nonrandomized prospective multicenter trial from 2013 through 2018. Thirty-two patients were consented; 28 were eligible for on-study treatment. Patients had AJCCv7 stage II or III unresectable NSCLC and received hypofractionated proton therapy at 2.5-4 Gy per fraction to a total 60 Gy with concurrent platin-based doublet chemotherapy. The primary outcome was 1-year overall survival comparable to that reported for RTOG 9410 of 62%. RESULTS The trial closed early due to slow accrual, in part, from a competing trial, NRG 1308. Median patient age was 70 (range, 50-86) years. Patients were predominantly male (N=20), white (N=23), and prior smokers (N=27). Most had stage III NSCLC (N=22), 50% of whom had adenocarcinoma. After a median follow-up of 31 months, the 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 89% and 49%, and progression-free survival rates were 58% and 32%, respectively. No acute grade 3 or higher esophagitis occurred. Only 14% developed a grade 3 or higher radiation-related pulmonary toxicity. CONCLUSION Hypofractionated proton therapy delivered at 2.5-3.53 Gy per fraction to a total 60 Gy with concurrent chemotherapy provides promising survival and additional examination through larger studies may be warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bradford S Hoppe
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida.
| | - Romaine C Nichols
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Stella Flampouri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Mark Pankuch
- Northwestern Medicine Proton Center, Warrenville, Illinois
| | - Christopher G Morris
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Dat C Pham
- Baptist MD Anderson Cancer Center, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine and Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Baltimore, Maryland
| | | | | | - Brian H Chon
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - Larry L Kestin
- MHP Radiation Oncology Institute/GenesisCare USA, Farmington Hills, Michigan
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and New York Proton Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Popat S, Baas P, Faivre-Finn C, Girard N, Nicholson AG, Nowak AK, Opitz I, Scherpereel A, Reck M. Malignant pleural mesothelioma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up ☆. Ann Oncol 2022; 33:129-142. [PMID: 34861373 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 84] [Impact Index Per Article: 42.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2021] [Revised: 11/09/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- S Popat
- Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Section of Clinical Studies, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; National Centre for Mesothelioma Research, National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - P Baas
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C Faivre-Finn
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - N Girard
- Thorax Institute Curie Montsouris, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - A G Nicholson
- National Centre for Mesothelioma Research, National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK; Department of Histopathology, Royal Brompton & Harefield Hospitals, London, UK
| | - A K Nowak
- National Centre for Asbestos Related Diseases, Centre for Respiratory Health, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Australia; Medical School, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Australia
| | - I Opitz
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - A Scherpereel
- Department of Pulmonary and Thoracic Oncology, University of Lille, CHU Lille, INSERM U1189, OncoThAI, Lille, France
| | - M Reck
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, LungenClinic Airway Research Center North (ARCN), German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
A Universal Range Shifter and Range Compensator Can Enable Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Single-Energy Bragg Peak FLASH-RT Treatment Using Current Commercially Available Proton Systems. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2022; 113:203-213. [PMID: 35101597 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Transmission beams have been proposed for ultra-high dose (or FLASH) proton planning, limiting the organ sparing potentials of proton therapy. By pulling back the ranges of the highest energy proton beams and compensating proton ranges to adapt to the target distally, the exit dose of proton beams can be eliminated to better protect organs at risk while still preserving FLASH dose rate delivery. METHOD AND MATERIALS An inverse planning tool was developed to optimize intensity modulated proton therapy using a single-energy layer for FLASH radiation therapy planning. The range pull-backs were calculated to stop single-energy proton beams at the distal edge of the target. The spot map and weights of each field were optimized to achieve a sufficient dose rate using proton beam Bragg peaks. A C-shape target in phantom, along with 6 consecutive lung cancer patients previously treated using proton stereotactic body radiation therapy were planned using this novel Bragg Peak method and also transmission technique. Dosimetry characteristics and 3-dimensional dose rate were investigated. RESULTS The minimum monitor units (MU) for transmission and Bragg peak plans were 400 MU/spot and 1200 MU/spot, respectively, corresponding to spot peak dose rates of 670 GyRBE (relative biological effectiveness) per second and 1950 GyRBE per second. Bragg peak plans yield a generally comparable target uniformity while significantly reducing dose spillage volume from the low to medium dose level. For all the 6 lung cases delivery of 34 GyRBE in 1 fraction, assessing Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0915 constraints, the lung V7GyRBE volume was reduced by up to 32% (P = .001) for Bragg peak plans. The transmission plans tended to generate 2.4% higher FLASH dose rate coverage (V40GyRBE/s) versus Bragg peak plans over the major organs at risk. However, Bragg peak plans could also reach the FLASH radiation therapy threshold of V40GyRBE/s using a higher MU/spot and sophisticated dose-rate optimization algorithm. CONCLUSIONS This first proof-of-concept study has demonstrated this novel method of combining range pull-back and powerful inverse optimization capable of achieving FLASH dose rate based on currently available machine parameters using a single-energy Bragg peak. Similar target coverage and uniformity can be maintained by Bragg peak FLASH plans while substantially improving the sparing of organs at risk compared with transmission plans.
Collapse
|
19
|
Wei S, Lin H, Choi JI, Press RH, Lazarev S, Kabarriti R, Hajj C, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Simone CB, Kang M. FLASH Radiotherapy Using Single-Energy Proton PBS Transmission Beams for Hypofractionation Liver Cancer: Dose and Dose Rate Quantification. Front Oncol 2022; 11:813063. [PMID: 35096620 PMCID: PMC8794777 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.813063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2021] [Accepted: 12/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This work aims to study the dose and ultra-high-dose rate characteristics of transmission proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) FLASH radiotherapy (RT) for hypofractionation liver cancer based on the parameters of a commercially available proton system operating under FLASH mode. METHODS AND MATERIALS An in-house treatment planning software (TPS) was developed to perform intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) FLASH-RT planning. Single-energy transmission proton PBS plans of 4.5 Gy × 15 fractions were optimized for seven consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients, using 2 and 5 fields combined with 1) the minimum MU/spot chosen between 100 and 400, and minimum spot time (MST) of 2 ms, and 2) the minimum MU/spot of 100, and MST of 0.5 ms, based upon considerations in target uniformities, OAR dose constraints, and OAR FLASH dose rate coverage. Then, the 3D average dose rate distribution was calculated. The dose metrics for the mean dose of Liver-GTV and other major OARs were characterized to evaluate the dose quality for the different combinations of field numbers and minimum spot times compared to that of conventional IMPT plans. Dose rate quality was evaluated using 40 Gy/s volume coverage (V40Gy/s). RESULTS All plans achieved favorable and comparable target uniformities, and target uniformity improved as the number of fields increased. For OARs, no significant dose differences were observed between plans of different field numbers and the same MST. For plans using shorter MST and the same field numbers, better sparing was generally observed in most OARs and was statistically significant for the chest wall. However, the FLASH dose rate coverage V40Gy/s was increased by 20% for 2-field plans compared to 5-field plans in most OARs with 2-ms MST, which was less evident in the 0.5-ms cases. For 2-field plans, dose metrics and V40Gy/s of select OARs have large variations due to the beam angle selection and variable distances to the targets. The transmission plans generally yielded inferior dosimetric quality to the conventional IMPT plans. CONCLUSION This is the first attempt to assess liver FLASH treatment planning and demonstrates that it is challenging for hypofractionation with smaller fractional doses (4.5 Gy/fraction). Using fewer fields can allow higher minimum MU/spot, resulting in higher OAR FLASH dose rate coverages while achieving similar plan quality compared to plans with more fields. Shorter MST can result in better plan quality and comparable or even better FLASH dose rate coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shouyi Wei
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Haibo Lin
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | | | | | - Carla Hajj
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wei S, Lin H, Choi JI, Simone CB, Kang M. A Novel Proton Pencil Beam Scanning FLASH RT Delivery Method Enables Optimal OAR Sparing and Ultra-High Dose Rate Delivery: A Comprehensive Dosimetry Study for Lung Tumors. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:5790. [PMID: 34830946 PMCID: PMC8616118 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13225790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2021] [Revised: 11/13/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE While transmission proton beams have been demonstrated to achieve ultra-high dose rate FLASH therapy delivery, they are unable to spare normal tissues distal to the target. This study aims to compare FLASH treatment planning using single energy Bragg peak proton beams versus transmission proton beams in lung tumors and to evaluate Bragg peak plan optimization, characterize plan quality, and quantify organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing. MATERIALS AND METHODS Both Bragg peak and transmission plans were optimized using an in-house platform for 10 consecutive lung patients previously treated with proton stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). To bring the dose rate up to the FLASH-RT threshold, Bragg peak plans with a minimum MU/spot of 1200 and transmission plans with a minimum MU/spot of 400 were developed. Two common prescriptions, 34 Gy in 1 fraction and 54 Gy in 3 fractions, were studied with the same beam arrangement for both Bragg peak and transmission plans (n = 40 plans). RTOG 0915 dosimetry metrics and dose rate metrics based on different dose rate calculations, including average dose rate (ADR), dose-averaged dose rate (DADR), and dose threshold dose rate (DTDR), were investigated. We then evaluated the effect of beam angular optimization on the Bragg peak plans to explore the potential for superior OAR sparing. RESULTS Bragg peak plans significantly reduced doses to several OAR dose parameters, including lung V7.4Gy and V7Gy by 32.0% (p < 0.01) and 30.4% (p < 0.01) for 34Gy/fx plans, respectively; and by 40.8% (p < 0.01) and 41.2% (p < 0.01) for 18Gy/fx plans, respectively, compared with transmission plans. Bragg peak plans have ~3% less in DADR and ~10% differences in mean OARs in DTDR and DADR relative to transmission plans due to the larger portion of lower dose regions of Bragg peak plans. With angular optimization, optimized Bragg peak plans can further reduce the lung V7Gy by 20.7% (p < 0.01) and V7.4Gy by 19.7% (p < 0.01) compared with Bragg peak plans without angular optimization while achieving a similar 3D dose rate distribution. CONCLUSION The single-energy Bragg peak plans achieve superior dosimetry performances in OARs to transmission plans with comparable dose rate performances for lung cancer FLASH therapy. Beam angle optimization can further improve the OAR dosimetry parameters with similar 3D FLASH dose rate coverage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Minglei Kang
- New York Proton Center, New York, NY 10035, USA; (S.W.); (H.L.); (J.I.C.); (C.B.S.II)
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Paganetti H, Botas P, Sharp GC, Winey B. Adaptive proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66:10.1088/1361-6560/ac344f. [PMID: 34710858 PMCID: PMC8628198 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac344f] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2021] [Accepted: 10/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Radiation therapy treatments are typically planned based on a single image set, assuming that the patient's anatomy and its position relative to the delivery system remains constant during the course of treatment. Similarly, the prescription dose assumes constant biological dose-response over the treatment course. However, variations can and do occur on multiple time scales. For treatment sites with significant intra-fractional motion, geometric changes happen over seconds or minutes, while biological considerations change over days or weeks. At an intermediate timescale, geometric changes occur between daily treatment fractions. Adaptive radiation therapy is applied to consider changes in patient anatomy during the course of fractionated treatment delivery. While traditionally adaptation has been done off-line with replanning based on new CT images, online treatment adaptation based on on-board imaging has gained momentum in recent years due to advanced imaging techniques combined with treatment delivery systems. Adaptation is particularly important in proton therapy where small changes in patient anatomy can lead to significant dose perturbations due to the dose conformality and finite range of proton beams. This review summarizes the current state-of-the-art of on-line adaptive proton therapy and identifies areas requiring further research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Pablo Botas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Foundation 29 of February, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Gregory C Sharp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| | - Brian Winey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Physics Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Lideståhl A, Johansson G, Siegbahn A, Lind PA. Estimated Risk of Radiation-Induced Cancer after Thymoma Treatments with Proton- or X-ray Beams. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13205153. [PMID: 34680302 PMCID: PMC8533682 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13205153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2021] [Revised: 10/11/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Thymic tumors, i.e., thymomas and thymic carcinomas, are rare tumors that derive from the remnant of the thymus gland. Although surgery is the first treatment of choice, some patients will be treated with radiotherapy. For many patients the prognosis is good, hence it is important to avoid treatment related complications such as radiation-induced secondary malignancies. Radiotherapy can be delivered with different techniques and with different particles. In the present study, we compare the calculated (estimated) risks for secondary malignancies after treatment of thymic tumors with two different photon (x-ray) radiotherapy techniques or with proton beam therapy. We use a commonly used radiobiological model to calculate the risks for radiation induced secondary malignancies for each treatment modality. In conclusion, proton beam therapy was shown to provide the potential for reducing the risk of secondary malignancies, compared to photon radiotherapy, after treatment of thymic tumors. Abstract We compared the calculated risks of radiation-induced secondary malignant neoplasms (SMNs) for patients treated for thymic tumors with 3D-CRT, IMRT, or single-field uniform dose (SFUD) proton beam therapy (PBT) using the pencil beam scanning (PBS) technique. A cancer-induction model based on the organ equivalent dose (OED) concept was used. For twelve patients, treated with 3D-CRT for thymic tumors, alternative IMRT and SFUD plans were retrospectively prepared. The resulting DVHs for organs at risk (OARs) were extracted and used to estimate the risk of SMNs. The OED was calculated using a mechanistic model for carcinoma induction. Two limit cases were considered; the linear-exponential model, in which the repopulation/repair of the cells is neglected, and the plateau model, in which full repopulation/repair of the irradiated cells is assumed. The calculated risks for SMNs for the different radiation modalities and dose-relation models were used to calculate relative risks, which were compared pairwise. The risks for developing SMNs were reduced for all OARs, and for both dose-relation models, if SFUD was used, compared to 3D-CRT and IMRT. In conclusion, PBS shows a potential benefit to reduce the risk of SMNs compared to 3D-CRT and IMRT in the treatment of thymic tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anders Lideståhl
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden
- Correspondence:
| | - Gracinda Johansson
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, 11883 Stockholm, Sweden; (G.J.); (A.S.)
| | - Albert Siegbahn
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, 11883 Stockholm, Sweden; (G.J.); (A.S.)
- Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Södersjukhuset, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden;
| | - Pehr A. Lind
- Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Södersjukhuset, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden;
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Ribeiro CO, Visser S, Korevaar EW, Sijtsema NM, Anakotta RM, Dieters M, Both S, Langendijk JA, Wijsman R, Muijs CT, Meijers A, Knopf A. Towards the clinical implementation of intensity-modulated proton therapy for thoracic indications with moderate motion: Robust optimised plan evaluation by means of patient and machine specific information. Radiother Oncol 2021; 157:210-218. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.01.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Revised: 12/09/2020] [Accepted: 01/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
|
24
|
Analytical modeling of depth-dose degradation in heterogeneous lung tissue for intensity-modulated proton therapy planning. PHYSICS & IMAGING IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2021; 14:32-38. [PMID: 33458311 PMCID: PMC7807882 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2020.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2020] [Revised: 05/02/2020] [Accepted: 05/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
Background and purpose Proton therapy may be promising for treating non-small-cell lung cancer due to lower doses to the lung and heart, as compared to photon therapy. A reported challenge is degradation, i.e., a smoothing of the depth-dose distribution due to heterogeneous lung tissue. For pencil beams, this causes a distal falloff widening and a peak-to-plateau ratio decrease, not considered in clinical treatment planning systems. Materials and methods We present a degradation model implemented into an analytical dose calculation, fully integrated into a treatment planning workflow. Degradation effects were investigated on target dose, distal dose falloffs, and mean lung dose for ten patient cases with varying anatomical characteristics. Results For patients with pronounced range straggling (in our study large tumors, or lesions close to the mediastinum), degradation effects were restricted to a maximum decrease in target coverage (D 95 of the planning target volume) of 1.4%. The median broadening of the distal 80-20% dose falloffs was 0.5 mm at the maximum. For small target volumes deep inside lung tissue, however, the target underdose increased considerably by up to 26%. The mean lung dose was not negatively affected by degradation in any of the investigated cases. Conclusion For most cases, dose degradation due to heterogeneous lung tissue did not yield critical organ at risk overdosing or overall target underdosing. However, for small and deep-seated tumors which can only be reached by penetrating lung tissue, we have seen substantial local underdose, which deserves further investigation, also considering other prevalent sources of uncertainty.
Collapse
|
25
|
Lazarev S, Rosenzweig K, Samstein R, Salgado LR, Hasan S, Press RH, Sharma S, Powell CA, Hirsch FR, Simone CB. Where are we with proton beam therapy for thoracic malignancies? Current status and future perspectives. Lung Cancer 2020; 152:157-164. [PMID: 33421922 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2020.12.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Revised: 12/12/2020] [Accepted: 12/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) plays an important role in the curative treatment of a variety of thoracic malignancies. However, delivery of tumoricidal doses with conventional photon-based RT to thoracic tumors often presents unique challenges. Extraneous dose deposited along the entrance and exit paths of the photon beam increases the likelihood of significant acute and delayed toxicities in cardiac, pulmonary, and gastrointestinal structures. Furthermore, safe dose-escalation, delivery of concomitant systemic therapy, or reirradiation of a recurrent disease are frequently not feasible with photon RT. In contrast, protons have distinct physical properties that allow them to deposit a high irradiation dose in the target, while leaving a negligible exit dose in the adjacent organs at risk. Proton beam therapy (PBT), therefore, can reduce toxicities with similar antitumor effect or allow for dose escalation and enhanced antitumor effect with the same or even lower risk of adverse events, thus potentially improving the therapeutic ratio of the treatment. For thoracic malignancies, this favorable dose distribution can translate to decreases in treatment-related morbidities, provide more durable disease control, and potentially prolong survival. This review examines the evolving role of PBT in the treatment of thoracic malignancies and evaluates the data supporting its use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stanislav Lazarev
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States.
| | - Kenneth Rosenzweig
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Robert Samstein
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Lucas Resende Salgado
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | | | | | - Sonam Sharma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Charles A Powell
- Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | - Fred R Hirsch
- Center for Thoracic Oncology, The Tisch Cancer Institute at Mount Sinai, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States
| | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Ribeiro CO, Terpstra J, Janssens G, Langendijk JA, Both S, Muijs CT, Wijsman R, Knopf A, Meijers A. Evaluation of continuous beam rescanning versus pulsed beam in pencil beam scanned proton therapy for lung tumours. Phys Med Biol 2020; 65:23NT01. [PMID: 33120367 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abc5c8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
The treatment of moving targets with pencil beam scanned proton therapy (PBS-PT) may rely on rescanning strategies to smooth out motion induced dosimetric disturbances. PBS-PT machines, such as Proteus®Plus (PPlus) and Proteus®One (POne), deliver a continuous or a pulsed beam, respectively. In PPlus, scaled (or no) rescanning can be applied, while POne implies intrinsic 'rescanning' due to its pulsed delivery. We investigated the efficacy of these PBS-PT delivery types for the treatment of lung tumours. In general, clinically acceptable plans were achieved, and PPlus and POne showed similar effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cássia O Ribeiro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Cozzi L, Comito T, Loi M, Fogliata A, Franzese C, Franceschini D, Clerici E, Reggiori G, Tomatis S, Scorsetti M. The Potential Role of Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy in Hepatic Carcinoma in Mitigating the Risk of Dose De-Escalation. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2020; 19:1533033820980412. [PMID: 33287650 PMCID: PMC7727039 DOI: 10.1177/1533033820980412] [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] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate the role of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients to be treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in a risk-adapted dose prescription regimen. METHODS A cohort of 30 patients was retrospectively selected as "at-risk" of dose de-escalation due to the proximity of the target volumes to dose-limiting healthy structures. IMPT plans were compared to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) RapidArc (RA) plans. The maximum dose prescription foreseen was 75 Gy in 3 fractions. The dosimetric analysis was performed on several quantitative metrics on the target volumes and organs at risk to identify the relative improvement of IMPT over VMAT and to determine if IMPT could mitigate the need of dose reduction and quantify the consequent potential patient accrual rate for protons. RESULTS IMPT and VMAT plans resulted in equivalent target dose distributions: both could ensure the required coverage for CTV and PTV. Systematic and significant improvements were observed with IMPT for all organs at risk and metrics. An average gain of 9.0 ± 11.6, 8.5 ± 7.7, 5.9 ± 7.1, 4.2 ± 6.4, 8.9 ± 7.1, 6.7 ± 7.5 Gy was found in the near-to-maximum doses for the ribs, chest wall, heart, duodenum, stomach and bowel bag respectively. Twenty patients violated one or more binding constraints with RA, while only 2 with IMPT. For all these patients, some dose de-intensification would have been required to respect the constraints. For photons, the maximum allowed dose ranged from 15.0 to 20.63 Gy per fraction while for the 2 proton cases it would have been 18.75 or 20.63 Gy. CONCLUSION The results of this in-silico planning study suggests that IMPT might result in advantages compared to photon-based VMAT for HCC patients to be treated with ablative SBRT. In particular, the dosimetric characteristics of protons may avoid the need for dose de-escalation in a risk-adapted prescription regimen for those patients with lesions located in proximity of dose-limiting healthy structures. Depending on the selection thresholds, the number of patients eligible for treatment at the full dose can be significantly increased with protons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Cozzi
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Tiziana Comito
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Mauro Loi
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Antonella Fogliata
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Ciro Franzese
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Davide Franceschini
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Elena Clerici
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Giacomo Reggiori
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Stefano Tomatis
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCSS, Milan-Rozzano, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan-Rozzano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Four-dimensional carbon-ion pencil beam treatment planning comparison between robust optimization and range-adapted internal target volume for respiratory-gated liver and lung treatment. Phys Med 2020; 80:277-287. [PMID: 33246187 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.11.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2020] [Revised: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 11/07/2020] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
We investigated the dose differences between robust optimization-based treatment planning (4DRO) and range-adapted internal target volume (rITV). We used 4DCT dataset of 20 lung cancer and 20 liver cancer patients, respectively, who had been treated with respiratory-gated carbon-ion pencil beam scanning therapy. 4DRO and rITV plans were created with the same clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OAR) contours. Four-dimensional dose distribution was calculated using deformable image registration. Dose metrics (e.g. D95, V20) were analyzed. Statistical significance was assessed by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. For the lung cases, the mean CTV-D95 value for the rITV plan (=98.5%) was same as that for the 4DRO plan (=98.5%, P = 0.106), while the mean D95 value for the CTV + setup margin contour for the rITV plan (=98.2%) was higher than that for the 4DRO plan (95.2%, P < 0.001). For the liver cases, the mean CTV-D95 value for the rITV plan (=98.1%) was slightly lower than that for the 4DRO plan (=98.5%, P < 0.01), while the mean D95 value for the CTV + setup margin contour for the rITV plan (=98.0%) was higher than that for the 4DRO plan (94.1%, P < 0.001). For the doses to the organs at risk (OARs), the ipsilateral lung-V20/liver-V20 values for the rITV plan (=10.1%/19.7%) was significantly higher than that for the 4DRO plan (=8.6%/17.6, P < 0.001). Although the target coverage for 4DRO plan may be worse than that for rITV plan in the presence of the setup error, the 4DRO plan can improve OAR dose while preserving acceptable target dose coverage.
Collapse
|
29
|
Chang Y, Xiao F, Quan H, Yang Z. Evaluation of OAR dose sparing and plan robustness of beam-specific PTV in lung cancer IMRT treatment. Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:241. [PMID: 33069253 PMCID: PMC7568374 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-020-01686-1] [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: 07/14/2020] [Accepted: 10/07/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Margins are employed in radiotherapy treatment planning to mitigate the dosimetric effects of geometric uncertainties for the clinical target volume (CTV). Here, we proposed a margin concept that takes into consideration the beam direction, thereby generating a beam-specific planning target volume (BSPTV) on a beam entrance view. The total merged BSPTV was considered a target for optimization. We investigated the impact of this novel approach for lung intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment, and compared the treatment plans generated using BSPTV with general PTV. METHODS AND MATERIALS We generated the BSPTV by expanding the CTV perpendicularly to the incident beam direction using the 2D version of van Herk's margin concept. The BSPTV and general PTV margin were analyzed using digital phantom simulation. Fifteen lung cancer patients were used in the planning study. First, all patient targets were performed with the CTV projection area analysis to select the suitable beam angles. Then, BSPTV was generated according to the selected beam angles. IMRT plans were optimized with the general PTV and BSPTV as the target volumes, respectively. The dosimetry metrics were calculated and evaluated between these two plans. The plan robustness of both plans for setup uncertainties was evaluated using worst-case analysis. RESULTS Both general PTV and BSPTV plans satisfied the CTV coverage. In addition, the BSPTV plans improved the sparing of high doses to target-surrounding lung tissues compared to the general PTV plans. Both Dmean of Ring PTV and Ring BSPTV were significantly lower in BSPTV plans (38.89 Gy and 39.43 Gy) compared to the general PTV plans (40.27 Gy and 40.68 Gy). The V20, V5, and mean lung dose of the affected lung were significant lower in BSPTV plans (16.20%, 28.75% and 8.93 Gy) compared to general PTV plans (16.69%, 29.22% and 9.18 Gy). In uncertainty scenarios, about 80% of target coverage was achieved for both general PTV and BSPTV plans. CONCLUSIONS The results suggested that plan robustness can be guaranteed in both the BSPTV and general PTV plans. However, the BSPTV plan spared normal tissues, such as the lungs, significantly better compared to the general PTV plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Chang
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China
| | - Feng Xiao
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China
| | - Hong Quan
- Department of Medical Physics, School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China.
| | - Zhiyong Yang
- Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Jie AW, Marignol L. Pro-con of proton: Dosimetric advantages of intensity-modulation over passive scatter for thoracic malignancies. Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol 2020; 15:37-46. [PMID: 32954018 PMCID: PMC7486544 DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2019.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2019] [Revised: 10/18/2019] [Accepted: 11/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) results in significant reduction of dose to organ at risk. Improving plan robustness mitigates interplay effects. Blanket use of small spots on a group of patients may severely worsen interplay in selected patients. Hypofractionated regimes have fewer interplay effects in both fractional and overall simulations. Randomised control trials are required before any clinical benefit of IMPT can be confirmed.
The use of passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT) or intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) opens the potential for dose escalation or critical structure sparing in thoracic malignancies. While the latter offers greater dose conformality, dose distributions are subjected to greater uncertainties, especially due to interplay effects. Exploration in this area is warranted to determine if there is any dosimetric advantages in using IMPT for thoracic malignancies. This review aims to both compare organs-at-risk sparing and plan robustness between PSPT and IMPT and examine the mitigation strategies for the reduction of interplay effects currently available. Early evidence suggests that IMPT is dosimetrically superior to PSPT in thoracic malignancies. Randomised control trials are required before any clinical benefit of IMPT can be confirmed.
Collapse
Key Words
- BSPTV, Beam Specific Planning Target Volume
- CT, Computed Tomography
- DIBH, Deep Inspiration Breath-Hold
- Dosimetry
- EUD, Equivalent Uniform Dose
- HI, Homogeneity Index
- IMPT, Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy
- IMRT, Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy
- ITV, Internal Target Volume
- Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT)
- Interplay
- MFO, Multi Field Optimisation
- MU, Monitor Unit
- NSCLC, Non-Small-Cell Lung cancer
- OAR, Organ-At-Risk
- Organ at risks
- PSPT, Passively Scattered Proton Therapy
- PTV, Planning Target Volume
- Passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT)
- RT, Radiation Therapy
- SFO, Single Field Optimisation
- SFUD, Single Field Uniform Dose
- Thoracic malignancies
- iCTV, Internal Clinical Target Volume
- iGTV/HU, Internal Gross Tumour Volume/Hounsfield Unit
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ang Wei Jie
- Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore
- Applied Radiation Therapy Trinity, Discipline of Radiation Therapy, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St. James’s Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Laure Marignol
- Applied Radiation Therapy Trinity, Discipline of Radiation Therapy, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St. James’s Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
- Corresponding author.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Simone CB. First Randomized Trial Supporting the Use of Proton Over Photon Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38:2952-2955. [PMID: 32706638 DOI: 10.1200/jco.20.01405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Simone CB, Plastaras JP, Jabbour SK, Lee A, Lee NY, Choi JI, Frank SJ, Chang JY, Bradley J. Proton Reirradiation: Expert Recommendations for Reducing Toxicities and Offering New Chances of Cure in Patients With Challenging Recurrence Malignancies. Semin Radiat Oncol 2020; 30:253-261. [PMID: 32503791 PMCID: PMC10870390 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2020.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Local and regional recurrences are common following an initial course of radiotherapy, yet management of these recurrences remains a challenge. Reirradiation may be an optimal treatment approach for providing durable tumor control and even offering select patients with locoregional recurrences or new primary tumors a chance of cure, but photon reirradiation can be associated with considerable risks of high grade acute and late toxicities. The high conformality and lack of exit dose with proton therapy offer significant advantages for reirradiation. By decreasing dose to adjacent normal tissues, proton therapy can more safely deliver definitive instead of palliative doses of reirradiation, more safely dose escalate reirradiation treatment, and more safely allow for concurrent systemic therapy in the reirradiation setting. In this case-based analysis, renowned experts in the fields of proton therapy and of reirradiation present cases for which they recently employed proton reirradiation. This manuscript focuses on case studies in patients with lung cancer, head and neck malignancies, and pelvic malignancies. Considerations for when to deliver proton therapy in the reirradiation setting and the pros and cons of proton therapy are discussed, and the existing literature supporting the use of proton reirradiation for these disease sites is assessed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
| | - John P Plastaras
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Salma K Jabbour
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - J Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Joe Y Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Jeffrey Bradley
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Assessing Outcomes of Patients Treated With Re-Irradiation Utilizing Proton Pencil-Beam Scanning for Primary or Recurrent Malignancies of the Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction. J Thorac Oncol 2020; 15:1054-1064. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.01.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2019] [Revised: 01/10/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
34
|
Zeng J, Badiyan SN, Garces YI, Wong T, Zhang X, Simone CB, Chang JY, Knopf AC, Mori S, Iwata H, Meijers A, Li H, Bues M, Liu W, Schild SE, Rengan R. Consensus Statement on Proton Therapy in Mesothelioma. Pract Radiat Oncol 2020; 11:119-133. [PMID: 32461036 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2020.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2020] [Revised: 04/26/2020] [Accepted: 05/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Radiation therapy for mesothelioma remains challenging, as normal tissue toxicity limits the amount of radiation that can be safely delivered to the pleural surfaces, especially radiation dose to the contralateral lung. The physical properties of proton therapy result in better sparing of normal tissues when treating the pleura, both in the postpneumonectomy setting and the lung-intact setting. Compared with photon radiation, there are dramatic reductions in dose to the contralateral lung, heart, liver, kidneys, and stomach. However, the tissue heterogeneity in the thorax, organ motion, and potential for changing anatomy during the treatment course all present challenges to optimal irradiation with protons. METHODS The clinical data underlying proton therapy in mesothelioma are reviewed here, including indications, advantages, and limitations. RESULTS The Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Thoracic Subcommittee task group provides specific guidelines for the use of proton therapy for mesothelioma. CONCLUSIONS This consensus report can be used to guide clinical practice, insurance approval, and future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Zeng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
| | - Shahed N Badiyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Yolanda I Garces
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Tony Wong
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Xiaodong Zhang
- Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | | | - Joe Y Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Antje C Knopf
- Division of Radiotherapy, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Shinichiro Mori
- Research Center for Charged Particle Therapy, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, Chiba, Japan
| | - Hiromitsu Iwata
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya Proton Therapy Center, Nagoya City West Medical Center, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Arturs Meijers
- Division of Radiotherapy, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Martin Bues
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Steven E Schild
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, Arizona
| | - Ramesh Rengan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
| | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
He P, Mori S. Perturbation analysis of 4D dose distribution for scanned carbon-ion beam radiotherapy. Phys Med 2020; 74:74-82. [PMID: 32442912 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2020] [Revised: 04/27/2020] [Accepted: 05/05/2020] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the patients' set-up error-induced perturbation effects on 4D dose distributions (4DDD) of range-adapted internal target volume-based (raITV) treatment plan using lung and liver 4DCT data sets. METHODS We enrolled 20 patients with lung and liver cancer treated with respiratory-gated carbon-ion beam scanning therapy. PTVs were generated by adding a 2 mm range-adapted set-up margin on the raITVs. Set-up errors were simulated by shifting the beam isocenter in three translational directions of ±2 mm, ±4 mm, and ±6 mm. 4DDDs were calculated for both nominal and isocenter-shifted situations. Dose metrics of CTV dose coverage (D95) and normal tissue sparing were evaluated. Statistical significance with p < 0.01 was considered by Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS The CTV dose coverage was more sensitive to set-up errors for lung cases than for liver cases, and more serious in superior-inferior direction. The sufficient CTV-D95 > 98% could be achieved with set-up errors less than ±2 mm in all shift directions both for lung and liver cases. With the increase of set-up error, the CTV dose coverage decreased gradually. The clinical criterial of CTV-D95 > 95% could not be fulfilled with set-up error reached to ±4 mm for lung cases, and ±6 mm for liver cases. OAR doses did not have a significant difference with each set-up error for both lung and liver cases. CONCLUSIONS The range-adapted set-up margin successfully prevented dose degradation of 4DDDs in the presence of the same magnitude of set-up error for raITV-based carbon-ion beam scanning therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pengbo He
- Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China; Research Center for Charged Particle Therapy, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, Chiba, Japan; University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China.
| | - Shinichiro Mori
- Research Center for Charged Particle Therapy, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, Chiba, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Press RH, Hasan S, Chhabra AM, Choi JI, Simone CB. Quantifying the Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer Patients: A Technical Report of Patient Experience During the COVID-19 Pandemic at a High-volume Radiation Oncology Proton Center in New York City. Cureus 2020; 12:e7873. [PMID: 32368429 PMCID: PMC7192557 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.7873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2020] [Accepted: 04/28/2020] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly spread across the world and now affects more people within the United States than any other country. New York City has emerged as the epicenter of the outbreak in the United States. Both locally and across the country, there is great concern in our ability to deliver appropriate medical care during this time. Radiation therapy is another essential clinical service that cannot afford to suffer prolonged delays without compromising patient outcomes. Early action and guidance are therefore critical to minimize transmission events and ensure safe and timely delivery of radiation therapy. The New York Proton Center (NYPC) is a high-volume free-standing multi-institutional proton center located in Manhattan. The purpose of this report is to describe the institutional patient experience and quantify the impact of treatment delays and interruptions over the first month of the COVID-19 outbreak. We also quantify the incidence of COVID-19 positive patients on census and provide guidance on proactive institutional policies to mitigate patient risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert H Press
- Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, USA
| | - Shaakir Hasan
- Radiation Oncology, New York Proton Center, New York, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Li XD, Simone CB. The inflammatory response from stereotactic body proton therapy versus stereotactic body radiation therapy: implications from early stage non-small cell lung cancer. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2020; 7:S295. [PMID: 32016014 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.11.41] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Xingzhe D Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.,New York Proton Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Tryggestad EJ, Liu W, Pepin MD, Hallemeier CL, Sio TT. Managing treatment-related uncertainties in proton beam radiotherapy for gastrointestinal cancers. J Gastrointest Oncol 2020; 11:212-224. [PMID: 32175124 DOI: 10.21037/jgo.2019.11.07] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
In recent years, there has been rapid adaption of proton beam radiotherapy (RT) for treatment of various malignancies in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, with increasing number of institutions implementing intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). We review the progress and existing literature regarding the technical aspects of RT planning for IMPT, and the existing tools that can help with the management of uncertainties which may impact the daily delivery of proton therapy. We provide an in-depth discussion regarding range uncertainties, dose calculations, image guidance requirements, organ and body cavity filling consideration, implanted devices and hardware, use of fiducials, breathing motion evaluations and both active and passive motion management methods, interplay effect, general IMPT treatment planning considerations including robustness plan evaluation and optimization, and finally plan monitoring and adaptation. These advances have improved confidence in delivery of IMPT for patients with GI malignancies under various scenarios.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik J Tryggestad
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Mark D Pepin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | - Terence T Sio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Han Y. Current status of proton therapy techniques for lung cancer. Radiat Oncol J 2019; 37:232-248. [PMID: 31918460 PMCID: PMC6952710 DOI: 10.3857/roj.2019.00633] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2019] [Accepted: 12/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton beams have been used for cancer treatment for more than 28 years, and several technological advancements have been made to achieve improved clinical outcomes by delivering more accurate and conformal doses to the target cancer cells while minimizing the dose to normal tissues. The state-of-the-art intensity modulated proton therapy is now prevailing as a major treatment technique in proton facilities worldwide, but still faces many challenges in being applied to the lung. Thus, in this article, the current status of proton therapy technique is reviewed and issues regarding the relevant uncertainty in proton therapy in the lung are summarized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Youngyih Han
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Department of Health Sciences and Technology, SAIHST, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Souris K, Barragan Montero A, Janssens G, Di Perri D, Sterpin E, Lee JA. Technical Note: Monte Carlo methods to comprehensively evaluate the robustness of 4D treatments in proton therapy. Med Phys 2019; 46:4676-4684. [DOI: 10.1002/mp.13749] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2019] [Revised: 07/25/2019] [Accepted: 07/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Souris
- Center for Molecular Imaging and Experimental Radiotherapy, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Université catholique de Louvain 1200Brussels Belgium
| | - Ana Barragan Montero
- Center for Molecular Imaging and Experimental Radiotherapy, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Université catholique de Louvain 1200Brussels Belgium
| | | | - Dario Di Perri
- Center for Molecular Imaging and Experimental Radiotherapy, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Université catholique de Louvain 1200Brussels Belgium
| | - Edmond Sterpin
- Center for Molecular Imaging and Experimental Radiotherapy, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Université catholique de Louvain 1200Brussels Belgium
- Department of Oncology Katholieke Universiteit Leuven 3000Leuven Belgium
| | - John A. Lee
- Center for Molecular Imaging and Experimental Radiotherapy, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique Université catholique de Louvain 1200Brussels Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Ribeiro CO, Meijers A, Korevaar EW, Muijs CT, Both S, Langendijk JA, Knopf A. Comprehensive 4D robustness evaluation for pencil beam scanned proton plans. Radiother Oncol 2019; 136:185-189. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.03.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2018] [Revised: 03/22/2019] [Accepted: 03/29/2019] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
42
|
Badiyan SN, Rutenberg MS, Hoppe BS, Mohindra P, Larson G, Hartsell WF, Tsai H, Zeng J, Rengan R, Glass E, Katz S, Vargas C, Feigenberg SJ, Simone CB. Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Recurrent Lung Cancer Reirradiated With Proton Therapy on the Proton Collaborative Group and University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute Prospective Registry Studies. Pract Radiat Oncol 2019; 9:280-288. [PMID: 30802618 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2019.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2018] [Revised: 02/07/2019] [Accepted: 02/14/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We sought to assess clinical outcomes and toxicities of patients with recurrent lung cancer reirradiated with proton beam therapy (PBT) who were enrolled in 2 prospective registry trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS Seventy-nine consecutive patients were reirradiated with PBT at 8 institutions. Conventionally fractionated radiation therapy was used to treat the previous lung cancer in 68% of patients (median equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions [EQD2], 60.2 Gy) and hypofractionated/stereotactic body radiation therapy in 32% (median EQD2, 83.3 Gy). Nine patients (11%) received ≥2 courses of thoracic irradiation before PBT. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was 2 to 3 in 13%. Median time from prior radiation therapy to PBT was 19.9 months. PBT was delivered with conventional fractionation in 58% (median EQD2, 60 Gy), hyperfractionation in 3% (median EQD2, 62.7 Gy), and hypofractionation in 39% (median EQD2, 60.4 Gy). Twenty-four patients (30%) received chemotherapy concurrently with PBT. RESULTS All patients completed PBT as planned. At a median follow-up of 10.7 months after PBT, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 15.2 months and 10.5 months, respectively. Acute and late grade 3 toxicities occurred in 6% and 1%, respectively. Three patients died after PBT from possible radiation toxicity. On multivariate analysis, ECOG performance status ≤1 was associated with OS (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.80; P = .014) and PFS (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.73; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS This is the largest series to date of PBT reirradiation for recurrent lung cancer and indicates that reirradiation with PBT is well tolerated with acceptable toxicity and encouraging efficacy. ECOG performance status was associated with OS and PFS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shahed N Badiyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | | | - Bradford S Hoppe
- University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Gary Larson
- Oklahoma Procure Proton Therapy Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
| | | | - Henry Tsai
- New Jersey Procure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, New Jersey
| | - Jing Zeng
- University of Washington and Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Ramesh Rengan
- University of Washington and Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Erica Glass
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Sanford Katz
- Willis-Knighton Proton Therapy Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - Carlos Vargas
- Mayo Clinic Arizona Proton Therapy Program, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Steven J Feigenberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Haefner MF, Verma V, Bougatf N, Mielke T, Tonndorf-Martini E, König L, Rwigema JCM, Simone 2nd CB, Uhlmann L, Eichhorn F, Winter H, Grosch H, Haberer T, Herfarth K, Debus J, Rieken S. Dosimetric comparison of advanced radiotherapy approaches using photon techniques and particle therapy in the postoperative management of thymoma. Acta Oncol 2018; 57:1713-1720. [PMID: 30264630 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2018.1502467] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purpose of this study was to compare dosimetric differences related to target volume and organs-at-risk (OAR) using 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), TomoTherapy (Tomo), proton radiotherapy (PRT), and carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) as part of postoperative thymoma irradiation. MATERIAL AND METHODS This single-institutional analysis included 10 consecutive patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy between December 2013 and September 2016. CT-datasets and respective RT-structures were anonymized and plans for all investigated RT modalities (3DCRT, VMAT, Tomo, PRT, CIRT) were optimized for a total dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. Comparisons between target volume and OAR dosimetric parameters were performed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS The best target volume coverage (mean PTV V95% for all patients) was observed for Tomo (97.9%), PRT (97.6%), and CIRT (96.6%) followed by VMAT (85.4%) and 3DCRT (74.7%). PRT and CIRT both significantly reduced mean doses to the lungs, breasts, heart, and esophagus, as well as the spinal cord maximum dose compared with photon modalities. Among photon-based techniques, VMAT showed improved OAR sparing over 3DCRT. Tomo was associated with considerable low-dose exposure to the lungs, breasts, and heart. CONCLUSIONS Particle radiotherapy (PRT, CIRT) showed superior OAR sparing and optimal target volume coverage. The observed dosimetric advantages are expected to reduce toxicity rates. However, their clinical impact must be investigated prospectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Felix Haefner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Vivek Verma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Nina Bougatf
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Mielke
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Eric Tonndorf-Martini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laila König
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Charles B. Simone 2nd
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lorenz Uhlmann
- Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Florian Eichhorn
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hauke Winter
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Heidrun Grosch
- Department of Thoracic Oncology, Thoraxklinik Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Haberer
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Klaus Herfarth
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jürgen Debus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Stefan Rieken
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Ion-Beam Therapy Center (HIT), Heidelberg, Germany
- National Center of Radiation Research in Oncology (NCRO) Heidelberg Institute for Radiation Oncology (HIRO), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Vyfhuis MAL, Rice S, Remick J, Mossahebi S, Badiyan S, Mohindra P, Simone CB. Reirradiation for locoregionally recurrent non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Dis 2018; 10:S2522-S2536. [PMID: 30206496 PMCID: PMC6123190 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2017.12.50] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2017] [Accepted: 12/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Locoregional failure in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains high, and the management for recurrent disease in the setting of prior radiotherapy is difficult. Retreatment options such as surgery or systemic therapy are typically limited or frequently result in suboptimal outcomes. Reirradiation (reRT) of thoracic malignancies may be an optimal strategy for providing definitive local control and offering a new chance of cure. Yet, retreatment with radiation therapy can be challenging for fear of excessive toxicities and the inability to safely deliver definitive (≥60 Gy) doses of reRT. However, with recent improvements in radiation delivery techniques and image-guidance, dose-escalation with reRT is possible and outcomes are encouraging. Here, we present a review of various radiation techniques, clinical outcomes and associated toxicities in patients with locoregionally recurrent NSCLC treated primarily with reRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melissa A L Vyfhuis
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Stephanie Rice
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jill Remick
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Sina Mossahebi
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Shahed Badiyan
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Pranshu Mohindra
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Charles B Simone
- Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Verma V, Lin L, Simone CB. Proton Beam Therapy for Bronchogenic Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma: Dosimetry, Toxicities, and Outcomes. Int J Part Ther 2018; 4:1-9. [PMID: 31773012 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-17-00014.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2017] [Accepted: 04/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Bronchogenicadenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) is a rare malignancy particularly challenging to irradiate, largely owing to anatomic location and associated toxicities. Proton beam therapy (PBT) can reduce doses to nearby organs at risk, but only one case report has been published detailing PBT for this neoplasm. Patients and Methods This study was an institutional review board-approved retrospective chart review of all patients at one institution with bronchogenic ACC treated with PBT. Toxicities were assessed per Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Results Five patients, median age 67 years (range = 40-97 years), were all symptomatic before PBT. Two patients were debulked before PBT, which was delivered at a median 66.6 Gy (RBE) (range, 57.5-80 Gy (RBE)). Two patients received concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy. Symptoms improved in all patients. Acute toxicities included the following: grade 1 fatigue (n = 3), grade 1 dermatitis (n = 2), grade 1 esophagitis (n = 1), grade 2 fatigue (n = 1), grade 2 dermatitis (n = 1), grade 2 esophagitis (n = 2). There was one case of late radiation fibrosis causing bronchial stenosis and requiring a stent, and another of late grade 1 dysphagia. All grade 2 toxicities occurred in patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy. At median follow-up of 10 months (range = 5-47 months), no patient experienced tumor recurrence and none had symptoms impairing daily functioning or quality of life. Although statistically nonsignificant owing to low sample sizes, dosimetric data revealed that PBT numerically reduced doses, most notably to the heart and to low-dose volumes of the lung. Conclusions This is the largest series to date evaluating PBT for bronchogenic ACC. PBT is associated with low rates of acute and late toxicities and excellent early local control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivek Verma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA
| | - Liyong Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Wink KC, Roelofs E, Simone CB, Dechambre D, Santiago A, van der Stoep J, Dries W, Smits J, Avery S, Ammazzalorso F, Jansen N, Jelen U, Solberg T, de Ruysscher D, Troost EG. Photons, protons or carbon ions for stage I non-small cell lung cancer – Results of the multicentric ROCOCO in silico study. Radiother Oncol 2018; 128:139-146. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.02.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2017] [Revised: 02/21/2018] [Accepted: 02/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
|
47
|
Ribeiro CO, Knopf A, Langendijk JA, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Zhang Y. Assessment of dosimetric errors induced by deformable image registration methods in 4D pencil beam scanned proton treatment planning for liver tumours. Radiother Oncol 2018; 128:174-181. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2017] [Revised: 02/16/2018] [Accepted: 03/06/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
48
|
Simone CB, Sawant A. Margins and Uncertainties in Radiation Oncology. Semin Radiat Oncol 2018; 28:169-170. [PMID: 29933875 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2018.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology University of Maryland, School of Medicine Baltimore, MD.
| | - Amit Sawant
- Department of Radiation Oncology University of Maryland, School of Medicine Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Verma V, Choi JI, Simone CB. Proton therapy for small cell lung cancer. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2018; 7:134-140. [PMID: 29876312 PMCID: PMC5960657 DOI: 10.21037/tlcr.2018.04.02] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2017] [Accepted: 03/28/2018] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The prognosis of limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) continues to improve and is now roughly comparable to that of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This shift, taken together with the decreased toxicities of modern radiotherapy (RT) for LS-SCLC compared with those reported in historical trials, necessitates further evaluation of whether proton beam therapy (PBT) could further reduce both acute and late toxicities for patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy for LS-SCLC. These notions are discussed theoretically, with an emphasis on cardiac events. This is followed by a review of the published evidence to date demonstrating improved dosimetry with PBT over intensity-modulated RT and encouraging safety and efficacy profiles seen in early clinical reports. In addition to covering technical aspects of PBT for LS-SCLC such as intensity-modulated PBT, image-guidance for PBT, and adaptive planning, this review also discusses the need for increased data on intensity-modulated PBT for LS-SCLC, economic and quality of life analyses for future PBT SCLC studies, careful categorization of cardiac events in these patients, and the role for immunotherapy combined with photon- or proton-based RT for LS-SCLC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivek Verma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
| | - J. Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Charles B. Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Choi JI, Simone CB. Breaking the dose ceiling: proton therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Dis 2018; 10:130-134. [PMID: 29600039 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2017.12.79] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- J Isabelle Choi
- California Protons Cancer Therapy Center, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|