1
|
Hedrick SG, Buchanan L, Mahan S, Ramsey C. Reducing Radiation Dermatitis for PBS Proton Therapy Breast Cancer Patients Using SpotDelete. Int J Part Ther 2024; 13:100628. [PMID: 39296494 PMCID: PMC11408802 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100628] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2024] [Revised: 06/20/2024] [Accepted: 08/19/2024] [Indexed: 09/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this work was to reduce the severity of radiation dermatitis for breast cancer patients receiving pencil beam scanning proton therapy. The hypothesis was that eliminating proton spots (SpotDelete) in the 0.5 cm skin rind would reduce the potentially higher relative biological effectiveness (RBE) known to occur at the Bragg Peak. Patients and Methods Our center has been using an in-house developed Python script in RayStation since 2021 to remove spots from the skin rind of breast patients. In this work, we retrospectively reviewed the on-treatment visit data from a cohort of breast patients treated with hypofractionation (16 fractions) before this technique (MinDepth) and after (SpotDelete) to acquire the physician-reported radiation dermatitis scores. We evaluated the delivered treatment plans, calculating the linear energy transfer (LET) and applying 3 variable RBE models, Carabe-Fernandez, Wedenberg, and McNamara. An α/β of 10 was assumed for the skin. Results In the MinDepth cohort (n = 28), grade 1, 2, and 3 dermatitis accounted for 57%, 36%, and 7% of the cases, respectively. For SpotDelete (n = 27), the incidence rate of grade 1 and 2 acute radiation dermatitis was 67% and 37%, respectively. There were 0 instances of grade 3 dermatitis observed in the SpotDelete cohort. The onset of radiation dermatitis in the SpotDelete cohort was delayed compared to MinDepth, occurring 1 week later in the course of treatment. There was no significant difference in LET or in any of the variable RBE models when analyzing the 0.5 cm skin rind between the cohorts. Conclusion Despite the lack of correlation in LET or RBE, SpotDelete has been shown to reduce the severity and onset of radiation dermatitis. Possibly, more research into the α/β for skin and RBE models based on skin cell lines could provide insight into the efficacy of the SpotDelete technique.
Collapse
|
2
|
Liu CW, Kolano AM, Gray T, Stephans KL, Videtic GMM, Farr JB, Xia P. Cyclotron and linear accelerator generated scanning proton beams for lung cancer SBRT: Interplay effects and mitigations. Med Phys 2024; 51:3985-3994. [PMID: 38683935 DOI: 10.1002/mp.17082] [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: 02/15/2024] [Accepted: 03/23/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy for moving targets is known to be impacted by interplay effects between the scanning beam and organ motion. While respiratory motion in the thoracic region is the major cause for organ motion, interplay effects depend on the delivery characteristics of proton accelerators. PURPOSE To evaluate the impact of different types of PBS proton accelerators and spot sizes on interplay effects, mitigations, and plan quality for Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS Twenty NSCLC patients treated with photon SBRT were selected to represent varying tumor volumes and respiratory motion amplitudes (median: 0.6 cm with abdominal compression) for this retrospective study. For each patient, plans were created using: (1) cyclotron-generated proton beams (CPB) with spot sizes of σ = 2.7-7.0 mm; (2) linear accelerator proton beams (LPB) (σ = 2.9-5.5 mm); and (3) linear accelerator proton minibeams (LPMB) (σ = 0.9-3.9 mm). The energy switching time is one second for CPB, and 0.005 s for LPMB and LPB. Plans were robustly optimized on the gross tumor volume (GTV) using each individual phase of four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scans. Initially, single-field optimization (SFO) plans were evaluated; if the plan quality did not meet the dosimetric requirement, multi-field optimization (MFO) was used. MFO plans were created for all patients for comparisons. For each patient, all plans were normalized to have the same dose received by 99% of the GTV. Interplay effects were evaluated by computing the dose on 10 breathing phases, based on the spot distribution. Volumetric repainting (VR) was performed 2-6 times for each plan. We compared volume receiving 100% of the prescribed dose (V100%RX) of the GTV, and normal lung V20Gy. RESULTS Twelve of 20 plans can be optimized sufficiently with SFO. SFO plans were less sensitive to the interplay effect compared to MFO plans in terms of target coverage for both LPB and LPMB. The following comparisons showed results utilizing the MFO technique. In the interplay evaluation without repainting, the mean V100%RX of the GTV were 99.42 ± 0.6%, 97.52 ± 3.9%, and 94.49 ± 7.3% for CPB, LPB, and LPMB plans, respectively. Following VR (2 × for CPB; 3 × for LPB; 5 × for LPMB), V100%RX of the GTV were improved (on average) by 0.13%, 1.84%, and 4.63%, respectively, achieving the acceptance criteria of V100%RX > 95%. Because of fast energy switch in linear accelerator proton machines, the delivery time for VR plans was the lowest for LPB plans, while delivery time for LPMB was on average 1 min longer than CPB plans. The advantage of small spot machines was better sparing in normal lung V20Gy, even when VR was applied. CONCLUSION In the absence of repainting, proton machines with large spot sizes generated more robust plans against interplay effects. The number of VR increased with decreasing spot sizes to achieve the acceptance criteria. VR improved the plan robustness against interplay effects for modalities with small spot sizes and fast energy changes, preserving the low dose sparing aspect of the LPMB, even when motion is included.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chieh-Wen Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Anna M Kolano
- Applications of Detectors and Accelerators to Medicine (ADAM) SA, Meyrin, Switzerland
- Advanced Oncotherapy (AVO) plc, London, UK
| | - Tara Gray
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Kevin L Stephans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Gregory M M Videtic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Jonathan B Farr
- Applications of Detectors and Accelerators to Medicine (ADAM) SA, Meyrin, Switzerland
- Advanced Oncotherapy (AVO) plc, London, UK
| | - Ping Xia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Liang X, Beltran CJ, Liu C, Shen J, Li H, Furutani KM. Technical note: Delivery benefit and dosimetric implication of synchrotron-based proton pencil beam scanning using continuous scanning mode. Med Phys 2023; 50:5252-5261. [PMID: 37115647 DOI: 10.1002/mp.16434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2022] [Revised: 03/03/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Discrete spot scanning (DSS) is the commonly used method for proton pencil beam scanning (PBS). There is lack of data on the dose-driven continuous scanning (DDCS). PURPOSE To investigate delivery benefits and dosimetric implications of DDCS versus DSS for PBS systems. METHODS The irradiation duty factor, beam delivery time (BDT), and dose deviation were simulated for eight treatment plans in prostate, head and neck, liver, and lung, with both conventional fractionation and hypofractionation schemes. DDCS results were compared with those of DSS. RESULTS The DDCS irradiation duty factor (range, 11%-41%) was appreciably improved compared to DSS delivery (range, 4%-14%), within which, hypofractionation schemes had greater improvement than conventional fractionation. With decreasing stop ratio constraints, the DDCS BDT reduction was greater, but dose deviation also increased. With stop ratio constraints of 2, 1, 0.5, and 0, DDCS BDT reduction reached to 6%, 10%, 12%, and 15%, respectively, and dose deviation reached to 0.6%, 1.7%, 3.0%, and 5.2% root mean square error in PTV DVH, respectively. The 3%/2-mm gamma passing rate was greater than 99% with stop ratio constraints of 2 and 1, and greater than 95% with a stop ratio of 0.5. When the stop ratio constraint was removed, five of the eight treatment plans had a 3%/2-mm gamma passing rate greater than 95%, and the other three plans had a 3%/2-mm gamma passing rate between 90% and 95%. CONCLUSIONS The irradiation duty factor was considerably improved with DDCS. Smaller stop ratio constraints led to shorter BDTs, but with the cost of larger dose deviations. Our finding suggested that a stop ratio of 1 constraint seems to yield acceptable DDCS dose deviation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaoying Liang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Chunbo Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China
| | - Jiajian Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Keith M Furutani
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Feng SQ, Brouwer CL, Korevaar EW, Vapiwala N, Kang-Hsin Wang K, Deville C, Langendijk JA, Both S, Aluwini S. Dose evaluation of inter- and intra-fraction prostate motion in extremely hypofractionated intensity-modulated proton therapy for prostate cancer. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol 2023; 27:100474. [PMID: 37560512 PMCID: PMC10407426 DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2023] [Revised: 07/11/2023] [Accepted: 07/12/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Inter- and intra-fractional prostate motion can deteriorate the dose distribution in extremely hypofractionated intensity-modulated proton therapy. We used verification CTs and prostate motion data calculated from 1024 intra-fractional prostate motion records to develop a voxel-wise based 4-dimensional method, which had a time resolution of 1 s, to assess the dose impact of prostate motion. An example of 100 fractional simulations revealed that motion had minimal impact on planning dose, the accumulated dose in 95 % of the scenarios fulfilled the clinical goals for target coverage (D95 > 37.5 Gy). This method can serve as a complementary measure in clinical setting to guarantee plan quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sen-Quan Feng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Charlotte L. Brouwer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Erik W. Korevaar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Neha Vapiwala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Ken Kang-Hsin Wang
- Biomedical Imaging and Radiation Technology Laboratory (BIRTLab), Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Johannes A. Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Stefan Both
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Shafak Aluwini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tattenberg S, Madden TM, Bortfeld T, Parodi K, Verburg J. Range uncertainty reductions in proton therapy may lead to the feasibility of novel beam arrangements which improve organ-at-risk sparing. Med Phys 2022; 49:4693-4704. [PMID: 35362163 DOI: 10.1002/mp.15644] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 03/09/2022] [Accepted: 03/24/2022] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In proton therapy, dose distributions are currently often conformed to organs at risk (OARs) using the less sharp dose fall-off at the lateral beam edge to reduce the effects of uncertainties in the in vivo proton range. However, range uncertainty reductions may make greater use of the sharper dose fall-off at the distal beam edge feasible, potentially improving OAR sparing. We quantified the benefits of such novel beam arrangements. METHODS For each of 10 brain or skull base cases, five treatment plans robust to 2 mm setup and 0%-4% range uncertainty were created for the traditional clinical beam arrangement and a novel beam arrangement making greater use of the distal beam edge to conform the dose distribution to the brainstem. Metrics including the brainstem normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) with the endpoint of necrosis were determined for all plans and all setup and range uncertainty scenarios. RESULTS For the traditional beam arrangement, reducing the range uncertainty from the current level of approximately 4% to a potentially achievable level of 1% reduced the brainstem NTCP by up to 0.9 percentage points in the nominal and up to 1.5 percentage points in the worst-case scenario. Switching to the novel beam arrangement at 1% range uncertainty improved these values by a factor of 2, that is, to 1.8 percentage points and 3.2 percentage points, respectively. The novel beam arrangement achieved a lower brainstem NTCP in all cases starting at a range uncertainty of 2%. CONCLUSION The benefits of novel beam arrangements may be of the same magnitude or even exceed the direct benefits of range uncertainty reductions. Indirect effects may therefore contribute markedly to the benefits of reducing proton range uncertainties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastian Tattenberg
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Garching, Germany
- Division of Radiation Biophysics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Thomas M Madden
- Division of Radiation Biophysics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Thomas Bortfeld
- Division of Radiation Biophysics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Katia Parodi
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Garching, Germany
| | - Joost Verburg
- Division of Radiation Biophysics, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Su B, Yu S, Li X, Gong Y, Li H, Ren Z, Xia Y, Wang H, Zhang Y, Yao W, Wang J, Tang J. Autonomous Robot for Removing Superficial Traumatic Blood. IEEE JOURNAL OF TRANSLATIONAL ENGINEERING IN HEALTH AND MEDICINE-JTEHM 2021; 9:2600109. [PMID: 33598368 PMCID: PMC7880304 DOI: 10.1109/jtehm.2021.3056618] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2020] [Revised: 01/16/2021] [Accepted: 01/29/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Objective: To remove blood from an incision and find the incision spot is a key task during surgery, or else over discharge of blood will endanger a patient's life. However, the repetitive manual blood removal involves plenty of workload contributing fatigue of surgeons. Thus, it is valuable to design a robotic system which can automatically remove blood on the incision surface. Methods: In this paper, we design a robotic system to fulfill the surgical task of the blood removal. The system consists of a pair of dual cameras, a 6-DoF robotic arm, an aspirator whose handle is fixed to a robotic arm, and a pump connected to the aspirator. Further, a path-planning algorithm is designed to generate a path, which the aspirator tip should follow to remove blood. Results: In a group of simulating bleeding experiments on ex vivo porcine tissue, the contour of the blood region is detected, and the reconstructed spatial coordinates of the detected blood contour is obtained afterward. The BRR robot cleans thoroughly the blood running out the incision. Conclusions: This study contributes the first result on designing an autonomous blood removal medical robot. The skill of the surgical blood removal operation, which is manually operated by surgeons nowadays, is alternatively grasped by the proposed BRR medical robot.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Baiquan Su
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Shi Yu
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Xintong Li
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Yi Gong
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Han Li
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Zifeng Ren
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Yijing Xia
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - He Wang
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Yucheng Zhang
- Medical Robotics Laboratory, School of AutomationBeijing University of Posts and TelecommunicationsBeijing100876China
| | - Wei Yao
- Department of GastroenterologyPeking University Third HospitalBeijing100191China
| | - Junchen Wang
- School of Mechanical Engineering and AutomationBeihang UniversityBeijing100191China.,Beijing Advanced Innovation Center, Biomedical EngineeringBeihang UniversityBeijing100086China
| | - Jie Tang
- Department of NeurosurgeryXuanwu HospitalCapital Medical UniversityBeijing100053China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Combs SE, Baumert BG, Bendszus M, Bozzao A, Brada M, Fariselli L, Fiorentino A, Ganswindt U, Grosu AL, Lagerwaard FL, Niyazi M, Nyholm T, Paddick I, Weber DC, Belka C, Minniti G. ESTRO ACROP guideline for target volume delineation of skull base tumors. Radiother Oncol 2020; 156:80-94. [PMID: 33309848 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.11.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2020] [Accepted: 11/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE For skull base tumors, target definition is the key to safe high-dose treatments because surrounding normal tissues are very sensitive to radiation. In the present work we established a joint ESTRO ACROP guideline for the target volume definition of skull base tumors. MATERIAL AND METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed using various combinations of the following medical subjects headings (MeSH) and free-text words: "radiation therapy" or "stereotactic radiosurgery" or "proton therapy" or "particle beam therapy" and "skull base neoplasms" "pituitary neoplasms", "meningioma", "craniopharyngioma", "chordoma", "chondrosarcoma", "acoustic neuroma/vestibular schwannoma", "organs at risk", "gross tumor volume", "clinical tumor volume", "planning tumor volume", "target volume", "target delineation", "dose constraints". The ACROP committee identified sixteen European experts in close interaction with the ESTRO clinical committee who analyzed and discussed the body of evidence concerning target delineation. RESULTS All experts agree that magnetic resonance (MR) images with high three-dimensional spatial accuracy and tissue-contrast definition, both T2-weighted and volumetric T1-weighted sequences, are required to improve target delineation. In detail, several key issues were identified and discussed: i) radiation techniques and immobilization, ii) imaging techniques and target delineation, and iii) technical aspects of radiation treatments including planning techniques and dose-fractionation schedules. Specific target delineation issues with regard to different skull base tumors, including pituitary adenomas, meningiomas, craniopharyngiomas, acoustic neuromas, chordomas and chondrosarcomas are presented. CONCLUSIONS This ESTRO ACROP guideline achieved detailed recommendations on target volume definition for skull base tumors, as well as comprehensive advice about imaging modalities and radiation techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie E Combs
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Munich, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site (DKTK), Munich, Germany
| | - Brigitta G Baumert
- Institute of Radiation Oncology, Cantonal Hospital Graubuenden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - Martin Bendszus
- Department of Neuroradiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Alessandro Bozzao
- Dipartimento NESMOS, Università Sapienza Roma, Azienda Ospedaliera Sant'Andrea, Rome, Italy
| | - Michael Brada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Bebington, United Kingdom
| | - Laura Fariselli
- Radiotherapy Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy
| | - Alba Fiorentino
- Radiation Oncology Department, General Regional Hospital F. Miulli, Acquaviva delle fonti, Italy
| | - Ute Ganswindt
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Anca L Grosu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site Freiburg, Germany
| | - Frank L Lagerwaard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location VUmc, The Netherlands
| | - Maximilian Niyazi
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) Partner Site (DKTK), Munich, Germany; Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Tufve Nyholm
- Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation Physics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Ian Paddick
- Queen Square Radiosurgery Centre, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Giuseppe Minniti
- Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy; IRCCS Neuromed, Pozzilli, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
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
|
9
|
Ioakeim-Ioannidou M, MacDonald SM. Evolution of Care of Orbital Tumors with Radiation Therapy. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2020; 81:480-496. [PMID: 33072488 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1713894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Orbital tumors are rare lesions comprising 0.1% of all tumors and less than 20% of all ocular diseases. These lesions in children and adults differ significantly in their incidence, tumor type, and treatment management. Although surgery and systemic therapies are commonly used in the management of these diseases, radiation therapy has become a widely used treatment for both benign and malignant tumors of the orbit. Radiotherapy is used as a definitive treatment to provide local control while avoiding morbidity associated with surgery for some tumors while it is used as an adjuvant treatment following surgical resection for others. For many tumors, radiation provides excellent tumor control with preservation of visual function. This article is dedicated for presenting the most common applications of orbital radiotherapy. A brief overview of the commonly available radiation therapy modalities is given. Dose constraint goals are reviewed and acute and long-term side effects are discussed. Orbital tumors covered in this article include optic glioma, ocular melanoma, retinoblastoma, orbital rhabdomyosarcoma, orbital lymphoma, and lacrimal gland tumors. Background information, indications for radiotherapy, and goals of treatment for each case example are described.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Myrsini Ioakeim-Ioannidou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
| | - Shannon M MacDonald
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Alshaikhi J, Doolan PJ, D'Souza D, Holloway SM, Amos RA, Royle G. Impact of varying planning parameters on proton pencil beam scanning dose distributions in four commercial treatment planning systems. Med Phys 2019; 46:1150-1162. [PMID: 30632173 DOI: 10.1002/mp.13382] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2018] [Revised: 11/27/2018] [Accepted: 12/23/2018] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In pencil beam scanning proton therapy, target coverage is achieved by scanning the pencil beam laterally in the x- and y-directions and delivering spots of dose to positions at a given radiological depth (layer). Dose is delivered to the spots on different layers by pencil beams of different energy until the entire volume has been irradiated. The aim of this study is to investigate the implementation of proton planning parameters (spot spacing, layer spacing and margins) in four commercial proton treatment planning systems (TPSs): Eclipse, Pinnacle3 , RayStation and XiO. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using identical beam data in each TPS, plans were created on uniform material synthetic phantoms with cubic targets. The following parameters were systematically varied in each TPS to observe their different implementations: spot spacing, layer spacing and margin. Additionally, plans were created in Eclipse to investigate the impact of these parameters on plan delivery and optimal values are suggested. RESULTS It was found that all systems except Eclipse use a variable layer spacing per beam, based on the Bragg peak width of each energy layer. It is recommended that if this cannot be used, then a constant value of 5 mm will ensure good dose homogeneity. Only RayStation varies the spot spacing according to the variable spot size with depth. If a constant spot spacing is to be used, a value of 5 mm is recommended as a good compromise between dose homogeneity, plan robustness and planning time. It was found that both Pinnacle3 and RayStation position spots outside of the defined volume (target plus margin). CONCLUSIONS All four systems are capable of delivering uniform dose distributions to simple targets, but their implementation of the various planning parameters is different. In this paper comparisons are made between the four systems and recommendations are made as to the values that will provide the best compromise in dose homogeneity and planning time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jailan Alshaikhi
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK
- Department of Radiotherapy Physics, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Saudi Particle Therapy Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Paul J Doolan
- Department of Medical Physics, German Oncology Center, Limassol, Cyprus
| | - Derek D'Souza
- Department of Radiotherapy Physics, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Stacey McGowan Holloway
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK
- NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK
| | - Richard A Amos
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK
| | - Gary Royle
- Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Mohan R, Das IJ, Ling CC. Empowering Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Through Physics and Technology: An Overview. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017; 99:304-316. [PMID: 28871980 PMCID: PMC5651132 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2017] [Revised: 04/11/2017] [Accepted: 05/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
Considering the clinical potential of protons attributable to their physical characteristics, interest in proton therapy has increased greatly in this century, as has the number of proton therapy installations. Until recently, passively scattered proton therapy was used almost entirely. Notably, the overall clinical results to date have not shown a convincing benefit of protons over photons. A rapid transition is now occurring with the implementation of the most advanced form of proton therapy, intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). IMPT is superior to passively scattered proton therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) dosimetrically. However, numerous limitations exist in the present IMPT methods. In particular, compared with IMRT, IMPT is highly vulnerable to various uncertainties. In this overview we identify three major areas of current limitations of IMPT: treatment planning, treatment delivery, and motion management, and discuss current and future efforts for improvement. For treatment planning, we need to reduce uncertainties in proton range and in computed dose distributions, improve robust planning and optimization, enhance adaptive treatment planning and delivery, and consider how to exploit the variability in the relative biological effectiveness of protons for clinical benefit. The quality of proton therapy also depends on the characteristics of the IMPT delivery systems and image guidance. Efforts are needed to optimize the beamlet spot size for both improved dose conformality and faster delivery. For the latter, faster energy switching time and increased dose rate are also needed. Real-time in-room volumetric imaging for guiding IMPT is in its early stages with cone beam computed tomography (CT) and CT-on-rails, and continued improvements are anticipated. In addition, imaging of the proton beams themselves, using, for instance, prompt γ emissions, is being developed to determine the proton range and to reduce range uncertainty. With the realization of the advances described above, we posit that IMPT, thus empowered, will lead to substantially improved clinical results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Radhe Mohan
- Department of Radiation Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| | - Indra J Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Clifton C Ling
- Varian Medical Systems and Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Cao W, Lim G, Liao L, Li Y, Jiang S, Li X, Li H, Suzuki K, Zhu XR, Gomez D, Zhang X. Proton energy optimization and reduction for intensity-modulated proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2014; 59:6341-54. [PMID: 25295881 DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/21/6341] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is commonly delivered via the spot-scanning technique. To 'scan' the target volume, the proton beam is controlled by varying its energy to penetrate the patient's body at different depths. Although scanning the proton beamlets or spots with the same energy can be as fast as 10-20 m s(-1), changing from one proton energy to another requires approximately two additional seconds. The total IMPT delivery time thus depends mainly on the number of proton energies used in a treatment. Current treatment planning systems typically use all proton energies that are required for the proton beam to penetrate in a range from the distal edge to the proximal edge of the target. The optimal selection of proton energies has not been well studied. In this study, we sought to determine the feasibility of optimizing and reducing the number of proton energies in IMPT planning. We proposed an iterative mixed-integer programming optimization method to select a subset of all available proton energies while satisfying dosimetric criteria. We applied our proposed method to six patient datasets: four cases of prostate cancer, one case of lung cancer, and one case of mesothelioma. The numbers of energies were reduced by 14.3%-18.9% for the prostate cancer cases, 11.0% for the lung cancer cases and 26.5% for the mesothelioma case. The results indicate that the number of proton energies used in conventionally designed IMPT plans can be reduced without degrading dosimetric performance. The IMPT delivery efficiency could be improved by energy layer optimization leading to increased throughput for a busy proton center in which a delivery system with slow energy switch is employed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wenhua Cao
- Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Paganetti H, van Luijk P. Biological considerations when comparing proton therapy with photon therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 2013; 23:77-87. [PMID: 23473684 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2012.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Owing to the limited availability of data on the outcome of proton therapy, treatments are generally optimized based on broadly available data on photon-based treatments. However, the microscopic pattern of energy deposition of protons differs from that of photons, leading to a different biological effect. Consequently, proton therapy needs a correction factor (relative biological effectiveness) to relate proton doses to photon doses, and currently, a generic value is used. Moreover, the macroscopic distribution of dose in proton therapy differs compared with photon treatments. Although this may offer new opportunities to reduce dose to normal tissues, it raises the question whether data obtained from photon-based treatments offer sufficient information on dose-volume effects to optimally use unique features of protons. In addition, there are potential differences in late effects due to low doses of secondary radiation outside the volume irradiated by the primary beam. This article discusses the controversies associated with these 3 issues when comparing proton and photon therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Safai S, Trofimov A, Adams JA, Engelsman M, Bortfeld T. The rationale for intensity-modulated proton therapy in geometrically challenging cases. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58:6337-53. [PMID: 23965339 DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/58/18/6337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) delivered with beam scanning is currently available at a limited number of proton centers. However, a simplified form of IMPT, the technique of field 'patching', has long been a standard practice in proton therapy centers. In field patching, different parts of the target volume are treated from different directions, i.e., a part of the tumor gets either full dose from a radiation field, or almost no dose. Thus, patching represents a form of binary intensity modulation. This study explores the limitations of the standard binary field patching technique, and evaluates possible dosimetric advantages of continuous dose modulations in IMPT. Specifics of the beam delivery technology, i.e., pencil beam scanning versus passive scattering and modulation, are not investigated. We have identified two geometries of target volumes and organs at risk (OAR) in which the use of field patching is severely challenged. We focused our investigations on two patient cases that exhibit these geometries: a paraspinal tumor case and a skull-base case. For those cases we performed treatment planning comparisons of three-dimensional conformal proton therapy (3DCPT) with field patching versus IMPT, using commercial and in-house software, respectively. We also analyzed the robustness of the resulting plans with respect to systematic setup errors of ±1 mm and range errors of ±2.5 mm. IMPT is able to better spare OAR while providing superior dose coverage for the challenging cases identified above. Both 3DCPT and IMPT are sensitive to setup errors and range uncertainties, with IMPT showing the largest effect. Nevertheless, when delivery uncertainties are taken into account IMPT plans remain superior regarding target coverage and OAR sparing. On the other hand, some clinical goals, such as the maximum dose to OAR, are more likely to be unmet with IMPT under large range errors. IMPT can potentially improve target coverage and OAR sparing in challenging cases, even when compared with the relatively complicated and time consuming field patching technique. While IMPT plans tend to be more sensitive to delivery uncertainties, their dosimetric advantage generally holds. Robust treatment planning techniques may further reduce the sensitivity of IMPT plans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Safai
- Francis H Burr Proton Therapy Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Trofimov A, Unkelbach J, DeLaney TF, Bortfeld T. Visualization of a variety of possible dosimetric outcomes in radiation therapy using dose-volume histogram bands. Pract Radiat Oncol 2011; 2:164-171. [PMID: 22773939 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2011.08.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2011] [Revised: 07/30/2011] [Accepted: 08/05/2011] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Dose-volume histograms (DVH) are the most common tool used in the appraisal of the quality of a clinical treatment plan. However, when delivery uncertainties are present, the DVH may not always accurately describe the dose distribution actually delivered to the patient. We present a method, based on DVH formalism, to visualize the variability in the expected dosimetric outcome of a treatment plan. METHODS For a case of chordoma of the cervical spine, we compared 2 intensity modulated proton therapy plans. Treatment plan A was optimized based on dosimetric objectives alone (ie, desired target coverage, normal tissue tolerance). Plan B was created employing a published probabilistic optimization method that considered the uncertainties in patient setup and proton range in tissue. Dose distributions and DVH for both plans were calculated for the nominal delivery scenario, as well as for scenarios representing deviations from the nominal setup, and a systematic error in the estimate of range in tissue. The histograms from various scenarios were combined to create DVH bands to illustrate possible deviations from the nominal plan for the expected magnitude of setup and range errors. RESULTS In the nominal scenario, the DVH from plan A showed superior dose coverage, higher dose homogeneity within the target, and improved sparing of the adjacent critical structure. However, when the dose distributions and DVH from plans A and B were recalculated for different error scenarios (eg, proton range underestimation by 3 mm), the plan quality, reflected by DVH, deteriorated significantly for plan A, while plan B was only minimally affected. In the DVH-band representation, plan A produced wider bands, reflecting its higher vulnerability to delivery errors, and uncertainty in the dosimetric outcome. CONCLUSIONS The results illustrate that comparison of DVH for the nominal scenario alone does not provide any information about the relative sensitivity of dosimetric outcome to delivery uncertainties. Thus, such comparison may be misleading and may result in the selection of an inferior plan for delivery to a patient. A better-informed decision can be made if additional information about possible dosimetric variability is presented; for example, in the form of DVH bands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexei Trofimov
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
| | - Jan Unkelbach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Thomas F DeLaney
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Thomas Bortfeld
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Mori S, Yamamoto N, Nakajima M, Baba M. Changes in chest wall thickness during four-dimensional CT in particle lung treatment planning. Br J Radiol 2011; 84:e158-60. [PMID: 21750132 DOI: 10.1259/bjr/50429882] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Four-dimensional (4D) CT images for charged particle lung therapy were acquired using a 256 multislice CT without couch movement. The thickness of the posterior right chest wall changed with respiration with a water equivalent path length (WEL) of more than 5 mm over the mid-exhalation phase but the thickness of the left chest wall did not vary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Mori
- Research Centre for Charged Particle Therapy, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, Chiba, Japan.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
MacDonald SM, Trofimov A, Safai S, Adams J, Fullerton B, Ebb D, Tarbell NJ, Yock TI. Proton Radiotherapy for Pediatric Central Nervous System Germ Cell Tumors: Early Clinical Outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 79:121-9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.10.069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 97] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2009] [Revised: 10/27/2009] [Accepted: 10/27/2009] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
18
|
Gridley DS, Grover RS, Loredo LN, Wroe AJ, Slater JD. Proton-beam therapy for tumors of the CNS. Expert Rev Neurother 2010; 10:319-30. [PMID: 20136386 DOI: 10.1586/ern.09.150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
The focus of this review is proton radiotherapy for primary neoplasms of the brain. Although glial cells are among the most radioresistant in the body, the presence of sensitive critical structures and the high doses needed to control CNS tumors present a formidable challenge to the treating radiation oncologist. Treatment with conventional photon radiation at doses required to control disease progression all too often results in unacceptable toxicity. Protons have intrinsic properties that often allow radiation oncologists to deliver a higher dose to the tumor compared with photons, while at the same time offering better sparing of normal tissues. Recognition of these advantages has resulted in development of many new proton treatment facilities worldwide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daila S Gridley
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Chan Shun Pavilion, 11175 Campus Street, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92354, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Proton beam therapy following resection for childhood ependymoma. Childs Nerv Syst 2010; 26:285-91. [PMID: 20024657 DOI: 10.1007/s00381-009-1059-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2009] [Accepted: 11/17/2009] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Proton radiation therapy is a form of radiation with physical properties that can provide an advantage in normal tissue sparing compared to the more commonly used photon therapy. DISCUSSION The greatest benefit may be for young patients with tumors requiring relatively high doses of radiation and adjacent to critical structures. Children with central nervous system ependymomas meet these criteria and have a very high likelihood of benefit from proton radiation. At present, proton radiation is limited to select centers. However, knowledge of many of the physical advantages of proton therapy has spread rapidly over the past several years, and its availability is becoming more widespread.
Collapse
|
20
|
Kooy HM, Clasie BM, Lu HM, Madden TM, Bentefour H, Depauw N, Adams JA, Trofimov AV, Demaret D, Delaney TF, Flanz JB. A case study in proton pencil-beam scanning delivery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010; 76:624-30. [PMID: 20117294 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.06.065] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2009] [Revised: 06/18/2009] [Accepted: 06/18/2009] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE We completed an implementation of pencil-beam scanning (PBS), a technology whereby a focused beam of protons, of variable intensity and energy, is scanned over a plane perpendicular to the beam axis and in depth. The aim of radiotherapy is to improve the target to healthy tissue dose differential. We illustrate how PBS achieves this aim in a patient with a bulky tumor. METHODS AND MATERIALS Our first deployment of PBS uses "broad" pencil-beams ranging from 20 to 35 mm (full-width-half-maximum) over the range interval from 32 to 7 g/cm(2). Such beam-brushes offer a unique opportunity for treating bulky tumors. We present a case study of a large (4,295 cc clinical target volume) retroperitoneal sarcoma treated to 50.4 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) (presurgery) using a course of photons and protons to the clinical target volume and a course of protons to the gross target volume. RESULTS We describe our system and present the dosimetry for all courses and provide an interdosimetric comparison. DISCUSSION The use of PBS for bulky targets reduces the complexity of treatment planning and delivery compared with collimated proton fields. In addition, PBS obviates, especially for cases as presented here, the significant cost incurred in the construction of field-specific hardware. PBS offers improved dose distributions, reduced treatment time, and reduced cost of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanne M Kooy
- F. H. Burr Proton Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
|
22
|
Daartz J, Bangert M, Bussière MR, Engelsman M, Kooy HM. Characterization of a mini-multileaf collimator in a proton beamline. Med Phys 2009; 36:1886-94. [PMID: 19544808 DOI: 10.1118/1.3116382] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
A mini-multileaf collimator (MMLC) was mounted as a field shaping collimator in a proton beamline at the Massachusetts General Hospital. The purpose is to evaluate the device's dosimetric and mechanical properties for the use in a proton beamline. For this evaluation, the authors compared MMLC and brass aperture shaped dose distributions with regard to lateral and depth dose properties. The lateral fall off is generally broader with the MMLC, with difference varying with proton range from 0.2 to 1.2 mm. Central axis depth dose curves did not show a difference in peak-to-entrance ratio, peak width, distal fall off, or range. Two-dimensional dose distributions to investigate the conformity of MMLC shaped doses show that the physical leaf width of approximately 2.5 mm does not have a significant impact. All differences seen in dose distribution shaped by the MMLC versus brass apertures were shown to be clinically insignificant. Measured neutron doses of 0.03-0.13 mSv/Gy for a closed brass beam block (depending on range) are very low compared to the previously published data. Irradiation of the tungsten MMLC, however, produced 1.5-1.8 times more neutrons than brass apertures. Exposure of the staff resulting from activation of the device is below regulatory limits. The measurements established an equivalency between aperture and MMLC shaped dose distributions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Daartz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Francis H. Burr Proton Therapy Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
MacDonald SM, Safai S, Trofimov A, Wolfgang J, Fullerton B, Yeap BY, Bortfeld T, Tarbell NJ, Yock T. Proton radiotherapy for childhood ependymoma: initial clinical outcomes and dose comparisons. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 71:979-86. [PMID: 18325681 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.11.065] [Citation(s) in RCA: 167] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2007] [Revised: 11/13/2007] [Accepted: 11/23/2007] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To report preliminary clinical outcomes for pediatric patients treated with proton beam radiation for intracranial ependymoma and compare the dose distributions of intensity-modulated radiation therapy with photons (IMRT), three-dimensional conformal proton radiation, and intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT) for representative patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS All children with intracranial ependymoma confined to the supratentorial or infratentorial brain treated at the Francis H. Burr Proton Facility and Harvard Cyclotron between November 2000 and March 2006 were included in this study. Seventeen patients were treated with protons. Proton, IMRT, and IMPT plans were generated with similar clinical constraints for representative infratentorial and supratentorial ependymoma cases. Tumor and normal tissue dose-volume histograms were calculated and compared. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 26 months from the start date of radiation therapy, local control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 86%, 80%, and 89%, respectively. Subtotal resection was significantly associated with decreased local control (p = 0.016). Similar tumor volume coverage was achieved with IMPT, proton therapy, and IMRT. Substantial normal tissue sparing was seen with proton therapy compared with IMRT. Use of IMPT will allow for additional sparing of some critical structures. CONCLUSIONS Preliminary disease control with proton therapy compares favorably with the literature. Dosimetric comparisons show the advantage of proton radiation compared with IMRT in the treatment of ependymoma. Further sparing of normal structures appears possible with IMPT. Superior dose distributions were accomplished with fewer beam angles with the use of protons and IMPT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shannon M MacDonald
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Albertini F, Lomax AJ, Hug EB. In Regard to Trofimov et al.: Radiotherapy Treatment of Early-Stage Prostate Cancer With IMRT and Protons: A Treatment Planning Comparison (Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;69:444–453). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69:1333-4; author reply 1334-5. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2007] [Accepted: 06/30/2007] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
25
|
Trofimov A, Nguyen PL, Coen JJ, Doppke KP, Schneider RJ, Adams JA, Bortfeld TR, Zietman AL, Delaney TF, Shipley WU. Radiotherapy treatment of early-stage prostate cancer with IMRT and protons: a treatment planning comparison. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 69:444-53. [PMID: 17513063 PMCID: PMC2695934 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.03.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 152] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2006] [Revised: 03/12/2007] [Accepted: 03/15/2007] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To compare intensity-modulated photon radiotherapy (IMRT) with three-dimensional conformal proton therapy (3D-CPT) for early-stage prostate cancer, and explore the potential utility of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). METHODS AND MATERIALS Ten patients were planned with both 3D-CPT (two parallel-opposed lateral fields) and IMRT (seven equally spaced coplanar fields). Prescribed dose was 79.2 Gy (or cobalt Gray-equivalent, [CGE] for protons) to the prostate gland. Dose-volume histograms, dose conformity, and equivalent uniform dose (EUD) were compared. Additionally, plans were optimized for 3D-CPT with nonstandard beam configuration, and for IMPT assuming delivery with beam scanning. RESULTS At least 98% of the planning target volume received the prescription dose. IMRT plans yielded better dose conformity to the target, whereas proton plans achieved higher dose homogeneity and better sparing of rectum and bladder in the range below 30 Gy/CGE. Bladder volumes receiving more than 70 Gy/CGE (V70) were reduced, on average, by 34% with IMRT vs. 3D-CPT, whereas rectal V70 were equivalent. EUD from 3D-CPT and IMRT plans were indistinguishable within uncertainties for both bladder and rectum. With the use of small-angle lateral-oblique fields in 3D-CPT and IMPT, the rectal V70 was reduced by up to 35% compared with the standard lateral configuration, whereas the bladder V70 increased by less than 10%. CONCLUSIONS In the range higher than 60 Gy/CGE, IMRT achieved significantly better sparing of the bladder, whereas rectal sparing was similar with 3D-CPT and IMRT. Dose to healthy tissues in the range lower than 50% of the target prescription was substantially lower with proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexei Trofimov
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Censor Y, Bortfeld T, Martin B, Trofimov A. A unified approach for inversion problems in intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51:2353-65. [PMID: 16675857 DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/51/10/001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 487] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
We propose and study a unified model for handling dose constraints (physical dose, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), etc) and radiation source constraints in a single mathematical framework based on the split feasibility problem. The model does not impose on the constraints an exogenous objective (merit) function. The optimization algorithm minimizes a weighted proximity function that measures the sum of the squares of the distances to the constraint sets. This guarantees convergence to a feasible solution point if the split feasibility problem is consistent (i.e., has a solution), or, otherwise, convergence to a solution that minimally violates the physical dose constraints and EUD constraints. We present computational results that demonstrate the validity of the model and the power of the proposed algorithmic scheme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yair Censor
- Department of Mathematics, University of Haifa, Mt Carmel, Haifa 31905, Israel.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Lomax AJ, Pedroni E, Rutz H, Goitein G. The clinical potential of intensity modulated proton therapy. Z Med Phys 2004; 14:147-52. [PMID: 15462415 DOI: 10.1078/0939-3889-00217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 119] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) differs from conventional proton therapy in its ability to deliver depth-shifted, arbitrarily complex proton fluence maps from each incident field direction. As the individual Bragg peaks delivered from any field can be distributed in three-dimensions throughout the target volume, IMPT provides many more degrees of freedom for designing dose distributions than IMRT or conventional proton therapy techniques. So how can the flexibility of IMPT best be exploited? Here we argue that IMPT has two main advantages over photon IMRT and conventional proton therapy: the ability to better 'sculpt' the dose to the target and around neighbouring critical structures, and the ability to find clinically acceptable solutions whilst simultaneously reducing the sensitivity of the treatments to potential delivery errors. The concept of IMPT as a tool for generating 'safer' plans opens an interesting new avenue of research from the point of view of plan optimisation, the potential of which is only just beginning to be explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antony J Lomax
- Division of Radiation Medicine, Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|