A treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton therapy for a sample of breast cancer patients treated with post-mastectomy radiotherapy

Evaluation of conventional IMRT and VMAT strategies for postmastectomy radiation therapy after immediate implant-based reconstruction using the new ESTRO-ACROP contouring guidelines

This study evaluated the usability of conventional templates based on the new contour guidelines of the European Society of Radiation and Oncology and Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice (ESTRO-ACROP) for treatment plans of postmastectomy radiotherapy after immediate implant-based reconstruction. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans generated with two different treatment planning systems (TPSs, Eclipse and Monaco) were examined. Six computed tomography scans of patients aged 35-54 years were retrospectively analysed who had undergone mastectomy and breast reconstruction using silicone implants after being diagnosed with left breast cancer. Six radiation oncologists participated in this study, and each of them contoured the target volume of one left breast using conventional contour (CTV-CONV) and new contour (CTV-ESTRO) methods. This study showed that compared with CTV-CONV, using CTV-ESTRO with objectives and cost functions similar to those of TPSs worsened the target volume coverage and increased the total number of monitor units. Considering the organs at risk, CTV-ESTRO tended to increase the mean dose delivered to the contralateral lung. It is concluded that the approach used for the new ESTRO-ACROP contour method cannot be applied in a manner similar to that for the conventional breast contour method, implying that the new ESTRO-ACROP contour method may require more time for improving plans for a given treatment.

The Role of Post-Mastectomy Radiotherapy in T1-2N1 Breast Cancer Patients: Propensity Score Matched Analysis

This study aimed to evaluate the role of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in T1-2N1 breast cancer. Between 2006 and 2014, a total of 504 patients with T1-2N1 breast cancer were analyzed. PMRT was administered to 71 patients, and 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed between the PMRT and non-PMRT groups. Loco-regional control (LRC), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were compared according to PMRT status. Thirteen and one loco-regional recurrences were observed in the PMRT and non-PMRT groups, respectively. Before PSM, the 8-year LRC, DFS, and OS rates in the non-PMRT and PMRT groups were 98.5% and 96.5% (p = 0.426), 89.7% and 91.2% (p = 0.700), and 91.5% and 92.1% (p = 0.679), respectively. Corresponding rates were 95.6% and 96.5% (p = 0.365), 84.1% and 91.2% (p = 0.185), and 88.4% and 92.1% (p = 0.276), respectively, after PSM. Multivariate analysis showed that three lymph node metastases were prognostic for LRC and DFS rates and LVI for OS rate. Arm lymphedema developed in 32.4% of patients who received PMRT, which was significantly higher than the non-PMRT group (p < 0.001). Contributions of PMRT for improvement of treatments outcomes in T1-2N1 breast cancer patients were not evident, while the incidence of arm lymphedema significantly increased after PMRT. Further prospective trials are required to re-evaluate the role of PMRT.

Proton therapy for isolated local regional recurrence of breast cancer after mastectomy alone

Purpose/Objectives

To assess adverse events (AEs) and disease-specific outcomes after proton therapy for isolated local-regional recurrence (LRR) of breast cancer after mastectomy without prior radiotherapy (RT).

Materials/Methods

Patients were identified from a multi-institutional prospective registry and included if diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, initially underwent mastectomy without adjuvant RT, experienced an LRR, and subsequently underwent salvage treatment, including proton therapy. Follow-up and cancer outcomes were measured from the date of RT completion.

Results

Nineteen patients were included. Seventeen patients were treated with proton therapy to the chest wall and comprehensive regional lymphatics (17/19, 90%). Maximum grade AE was grade 2 in 13 (69%) patients and grade 3 in 4 (21%) patients. All patients with grade 3 AE received &gt; 60 GyE (p=0.04, Spearman correlation coefficient=0.5). At the last follow-up, 90% of patients were alive with no LRR or distant recurrence.

Conclusions

For breast cancer patients with isolated LRR after initial mastectomy without adjuvant RT, proton therapy is well-tolerated in the salvage setting with excellent loco-regional control. All grade 3 AEs occurred in patients receiving &gt; 60 GyE.

Outcomes and toxicities after proton partial breast radiotherapy for early stage, hormone receptor positive breast cancer: 3-Year results of a phase II multi-center trial

•

Proton therapy is a good treatment option for partial breast irradiation.

•

Proton PBI results in excellent local tumor control and OAR sparing.

•

Cosmesis and quality of life with PBT are comparable to other PBI modalities.

Purpose

Proton therapy (PT) for partial breast irradiation (PBI) in early-stage breast cancer can decrease morbidity versus photon PBI with superior organs-at-risk sparing. We report 3-year outcomes of the first prospective, multicenter, phase II trial of proton PBI.

Methods and Materials

This Proton Collaborative Group phase II trial (PCG BRE007-12) recruited women ≥ 50 years with node-negative, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, ≤3cm, invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) or ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing breast conserving surgery followed by proton PBI (40 Gy(RBE), 10 daily fractions). Primary endpoint was freedom from ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence. Adverse events were prospectively graded using CTCAEv4.0. Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale (BCTOS) assessed patient-reported quality of life (PRQOL).

Results

Thirty-eight evaluable patients enrolled between 2/2013–11/2016. Median age was 67 years (range 50–79); 55 % had left-sided disease, and median tumor size was 0.9 cm. Treatment was delivered in ≥ 2 fields predominantly with uniform scanning PT (n = 37). At 35-month median follow-up (12–62), all patients were alive, and none had local, regional or distant disease progression. One patient developed an ER-negative contralateral IDC. Seven grade 2 adverse events occurred; no radiotherapy-related grade ≥ 3 toxicities occurred. Changes in BCTOS subdomain mean scores were maximum 0.36, indicating no meaningful change in PRQOL. Median heart volume receiving 5 Gy (V5Gy), lung V20Gy, and lung V10Gy were 0 %, 0 % and 0.19 %, respectively.

Conclusion

At 3 years, proton PBI provided 100 % cancer control for early-stage, ER-positive breast cancer. Toxicities are minimal, and PRQOL remains acceptable with continued follow-up. These findings support PT as a safe and effective PBI delivery option.

Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Bilateral Breast or Chest Wall and Comprehensive Nodal Irradiation for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer: Initial Clinical Experience and Dosimetric Comparison

Purpose

Synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) poses distinct challenges for radiation therapy planning. We report our proton therapy experience in treating patients with SBBC. We also provide a dosimetric comparison of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) versus photon therapy.

Methods and Materials

Patients with SBBC who received IMPT at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The clinical target volume (CTV) included the breast or chest wall and comprehensive regional lymph nodes, including axilla, supraclavicular fossa, and the internal mammary chain. Intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were generated with the goal that 90% of the CTV would recieve at least 90% of the prescription dose (D90>=90%). Comparisons between modalities were made using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Physician-reported acute toxic effects and photography were collected at baseline, end of treatment, and each follow-up visit.

Results

Between 2015 and 2018, 11 patients with SBBC were treated with IMPT. The prescription was 50 Gy in 25 fractions. The median CTV D90 was 99.9% for IMPT and 97.6% for VMAT (P = .001). The mean heart dose was 0.7 Gy versus 7.2 Gy (P = .001), the total lung mean dose was 7.8 Gy versus 17.3 Gy (P = .001), and the total lung volume recieving 20 Gy was 13.0% versus 27.4% (P = .001). The most common acute toxic effects were dermatitis (mostly grade 1-2 with 1 case of grade 3) and grade 1 to 2 fatigue. The most common toxic effects at the last-follow up (median, 32 months) were grade 1 skin hyperpigmentation, superficial fibrosis, and extremity lymphedema. No nondermatologic or nonfatigue adverse events of grade >1 were recorded.

Conclusions

Bilateral breast and/or chest wall and comprehensive nodal IMPT is technically feasible and associated with low rates of severe acute toxic effects. Treatment with IMPT offered improved target coverage and normal-tissue sparing compared with photon therapy. Long-term follow-up is ongoing to assess efficacy and toxic effects.

Dosimetric evaluation of photons versus protons in postmastectomy planning for ultrahypofractionated breast radiotherapy

Background

Ultrahypofractionation can shorten the irradiation period. This study is the first dosimetric investigation comparing ultrahypofractionation using volumetric arc radiation therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT) techniques in postmastectomy treatment planning.

Materials and methods

Twenty postmastectomy patients (10-left and 10-right sided) were replanned with both VMAT and IMPT techniques. There were four scenarios: left chest wall, left chest wall including regional nodes, right chest wall, and right chest wall including regional nodes. The prescribed dose was 26 Gy(RBE) in 5 fractions. For VMAT, a 1-cm bolus was added for 2 in 5 fractions. For IMPT, robust optimization was performed on the CTV structure with a 3-mm setup uncertainty and a 3.5% range uncertainty. This study aimed to compare the dosimetric parameters of the PTV, ipsilateral lung, contralateral lung, heart, skin, esophageal, and thyroid doses.

Results

The PTV-D95 was kept above 24.7 Gy(RBE) in both VMAT and IMPT plans. The ipsilateral lung mean dose of the IMPT plans was comparable to that of the VMAT plans. In three of four scenarios, the V5 of the ipsilateral lung in IMPT plans was lower than in VMAT plans. The Dmean and V5 of heart dose were reduced by a factor of 4 in the IMPT plans of the left side. For the right side, the Dmean of the heart was less than 1 Gy(RBE) for IMPT, while the VMAT delivered approximately 3 Gy(RBE). The IMPT plans showed a significantly higher skin dose owing to the lack of a skin-sparing effect in the proton beam. The IMPT plans provided lower esophageal and thyroid mean dose.

Conclusion

Despite the higher skin dose with the proton plan, IMPT significantly reduced the dose to adjacent organs at risk, which might translate into the reduction of late toxicities when compared with the photon plan.

Target coverage and cardiopulmonary sparing with the updated ESTRO-ACROP contouring guidelines for postmastectomy radiation therapy after breast reconstruction: a treatment planning study using VMAT and proton PBS techniques

BACKGROUND

The European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice (ESTRO-ACROP) recently released new contouring guidelines for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after implant-based reconstruction (IBR). As compared to prior ESTRO guidelines, the new guidelines primarily redefined the chest wall (CW) target to exclude the breast prosthesis. In this study, we assessed the impact of these changes on treatment planning and dosimetric outcomes using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) therapy.

METHODS

We performed a treatment planning study of 10 women with left-sided breast cancer who underwent PMRT after IBR. All target structures were delineated first using standard (ESTRO) breast contouring guidelines and then separately using the new (ESTRO-ACROP) guidelines. Standard organs-at-risk (OARs) and cardiac substructures were contoured. Four sets of plans were generated: (1) VMAT using standard ESTRO contours, (2) VMAT using new ESTRO-ACROP contours, (3) PBS using standard contours, and (4) PBS using new contours.

RESULTS

VMAT plans using the new ESTRO-ACROP guidelines resulted in modest sparing of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) (mean dose: 6.99 Gy standard ESTRO vs. 6.08 Gy new ESTRO-ACROP, p = 0.010) and ipsilateral lung (V₂₀: 21.66% vs 19.45%, p = 0.017), but similar exposure to the heart (mean dose: 4.6 Gy vs. 4.3 Gy, p = 0.513), with a trend toward higher contralateral lung (V₅: 31.0% vs 35.3%, p = 0.331) and CW doses (V₅: 31.9% vs 35.4%, p = 0.599). PBS plans using the new guidelines resulted in further sparing of the heart (mean dose: 1.05 Gy(RBE) vs. 0.54 Gy(RBE), p < 0.001), nearly all cardiac substructures (LAD mean dose: 2.01 Gy(RBE) vs. 0.66 Gy(RBE), p < 0.001), and ipsilateral lung (V₂₀: 16.22% vs 6.02%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PMRT after IBR using the new ESTRO-ACROP contouring guidelines with both VMAT and PBS therapy is associated with significant changes in exposure to several cardiopulmonary structures.

Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Consensus Statement From the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Breast Cancer Subcommittee

Radiation therapy plays an important role in the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer. Recent years have seen improvements in breast cancer survival and a greater appreciation of potential long-term morbidity associated with the dose and volume of irradiated organs. Proton therapy reduces the dose to nontarget structures while optimizing target coverage. However, there remain additional financial costs associated with proton therapy, despite reductions over time, and studies have yet to demonstrate that protons improve upon the treatment outcomes achieved with photon radiation therapy. There remains considerable heterogeneity in proton patient selection and techniques, and the rapid technological advances in the field have the potential to affect evidence evaluation, given the long latency period for breast cancer radiation therapy recurrence and late effects. In this consensus statement, we assess the data available to the radiation oncology community of proton therapy for breast cancer, provide expert consensus recommendations on indications and technique, and highlight ongoing trials' cost-effectiveness analyses and key areas for future research.

Cardiac substructure exposure in breast radiotherapy: a comparison between intensity modulated proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy

INTRODUCTION

Proton therapy for breast cancer treatment reduces cardiac radiation exposure. Left-sided breast cancer patients with indication for internal mammary chain (IMC) irradiation are most at risk of radiation-induced cardiotoxicity. This study aims to evaluate in this situation the potential dosimetric benefit of intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) over volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) at the cardiac substructure level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cardiac substructures were retrospectively delineated according to ESTRO guidelines on the simulation CT scans of fourteen left-sided breast cancer patients having undergone conserving surgery and adjuvant locoregional free-breathing (FB-) or deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH-) VMAT with internal mammary chain irradiation. IMPT treatment was re-planned on the simulation CT scans. Mean doses to cardiac substructures were retrieved and compared between VMAT treatment plans and IMPT simulation plans. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between mean doses delivered to cardiac substructures using these two techniques.

RESULTS

Mean doses to all cardiac substructures were significantly lower with IMPT than with VMAT. Regardless of the irradiation technique, the most exposed cardiac substructure was the mid segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LADCA). Pearson correlation coefficients between mean doses to cardiac substructures were usually weak and statistically non-significant for IMPT; mean heart dose (MHD) only correlated with mean doses delivered to the right ventricle, to the mid segment of the right coronary artery (RCA) and, to a lesser extent, to the LADCA.

CONCLUSION

The dosimetric benefit of IMPT over conformal photon therapy was consistently observed for all cardiac substructures. MHD may not be a reliable dosimetric parameter for precise cardiac exposure evaluation when planning IMPT.

Cardiotoxicity of Radiation Therapy: Mechanisms, Management, and Mitigation

OPINION STATEMENT

Radiation therapy is a key component of modern-day cancer therapy and can reduce the rates of recurrence and death from cancer. However, it can increase risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, and our understanding of the timeline associated with that risk is shorter than previously thought. Risk mitigation strategies, such as different positioning techniques, and breath hold acquisitions as well as baseline cardiovascular risk stratification that can be undertaken at the time of radiotherapy planning should be implemented, particularly for patients receiving chest radiation therapy. Primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), as appropriate, should be used before, during, and after radiation treatment in order to minimize the risks. Opportunistic screening for subclinical coronary disease provides an attractive possibility for primary/secondary CVD prevention and thus mitigation of long-term CV risk. More data on long-term clinical usefulness of this strategy and development of appropriate management pathways would further strengthen the evidence for the implementation of such screening. Clear guidelines in initial cardiovascular screening and cardiac aftercare following radiotherapy need to be formulated in order to integrate these measures into everyday clinical practice and policy and subsequently improve post-treatment morbidity and mortality for these patients.

The impact of variable relative biological effectiveness in proton therapy for left-sided breast cancer when estimating normal tissue complications in the heart and lung

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of relative biological effectiveness (RBE) variations in proton beam scanning treatment (PBS) for left-sided breast cancer versus the assumption of a fixed RBE of 1.1, particularly in the context of comparisons with photon-based three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Ten patients receiving radiation treatment to the whole breast/chest wall and regional lymph nodes were selected for each modality. For PBS, the dose distributions were re-calculated with both a fixed RBE and a variable RBE using an empirical RBE model. Dosimetric indices based on dose-volume histogram analysis were calculated for the entire heart wall, left anterior descending artery (LAD) and left lung. Furthermore, normal tissue toxicity probabilities for different endpoints were evaluated. The results show that applying a variable RBE significantly increases the RBE-weighted dose and consequently the calculated dosimetric indices increases for all organs compared to a fixed RBE. The mean dose to the heart and the maximum dose to the LAD and the left lung are significantly lower for PBS assuming a fixed RBE compared to 3DCRT. However, no statistically significant difference is seen when a variable RBE is applied. For a fixed RBE, lung toxicities are significantly lower compared to 3DCRT but when applying a variable RBE, no statistically significant differences are noted. A disadvantage is seen for VMAT over both PBS and 3DCRT. One-to-one plan comparison on 8 patients between PBS and 3DCRT shows similar results. We conclude that dosimetric analysis for all organs and toxicity estimation for the left lung might be underestimated when applying a fixed RBE for protons. Potential RBE variations should therefore be considered as uncertainty bands in outcome analysis.

Cardiotoxicity in breast cancer patients treated with radiation therapy: From evidences to controversies

Radiation therapy has a prime importance for breast cancer management. However, first-generation techniques delivered significant radiation dose to the heart, which substantially increased cardiac mortality. Breast radiation therapy has fortunately evolved, and state-of-the-art radiation therapy techniques currently efficiently spare the heart without altering local control or overall survival. However, at the present time, potential cardiotoxicity risk is still a matter of concern and controversies exist concerning how to precisely evaluate cardiac radiation exposure, how to predict radiation-induced cardiac adverse events and which dosimetric constraints are clinically relevant. Based on current literature, this paper aims to review the present understanding of cardiotoxicity associated with breast cancer irradiation and to discuss controversies and perspectives about cardiac sparing improvement.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of advanced radiotherapy techniques for post-mastectomy breast cancer patients

Background

Prior cost-effectiveness studies of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) only compared conventional radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy and only considered tumor control. The goal of this study was to perform cost-effectiveness analyses of standard of care (SOC) and advanced PMRT techniques including intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), standard volumetric modulated arc therapy (STD-VMAT), non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT), multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT), Tomotherapy (TOMO), mixed beam therapy (MIXED), and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

Methods

Using a Markov model, we estimated the cost-effectiveness of various techniques over 15 years. A cohort of women (55-year-old) was simulated in the model, and radiogenic side effects were considered. Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs for each health state were obtained from literature and Medicare data. Model outcomes include quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

For the patient cohort, STD-VMAT has an ICER of $32,617/QALY relative to SOC; TOMO is dominated by STD-VMAT; IMRT has an ICER of $19,081/QALY relative to STD-VMAT; NC-VMAT, MA-VMAT, MIXED are dominated by IMRT; IMPT has an ICER of $151,741/QALY relative to IMRT. One-way analysis shows that the probability of cardiac toxicity has the most significant impact on the model outcomes. The probability sensitivity analyses show that all advanced PMRT techniques are more cost-effective than SOC at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000/QALY, while almost none of the advanced techniques is more cost-effective than SOC at a WTP threshold of $50,000/QALY.

Conclusion

Advanced PMRT techniques are more cost-effective for breast cancer patients at a WTP threshold of $100,000/QALY, and IMRT might be a cost-effective option for PMRT patients.

Reirradiation of recurrent breast cancer with proton beam therapy: A case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Locoregional recurrence of breast cancer is challenging for clinicians, due to the various former treatments patients have undergone. However, treatment of the recurrence with systemic therapy and subsequent reirradiation of chest wall is accompanied by increased toxicities, particularly radiation-induced cardiovascular disease. Reirradiation by proton beam therapy (PBT) enables superior preservation of adjacent organs at risk as well as concurrent dose escalation for delivery to the gross tumor. This technology is expected to improve the overall outcome of recurrent breast cancer.

CASE SUMMARY

A 47-year-old female presented with an extensive locoregional recurrence at 10 yr after primary treatment of a luminal A breast cancer. Because of tumor progression despite having undergone bilateral ovarectomy and systemic therapy, the patient was treated with PBT BE total dose of 64.40 Gy to each gross tumor and 56.00 Gy to the upper mediastinal and retrosternal lymphatics including the entire sternum in 28 fractions. Follow-up computed tomography showed a partial remission, without evidence of newly emerging metastasis. At 19 mo after the PBT, the patient developed a radiation-induced pericardial disease and pleural effusions with clinical burden of dyspnea, which were successfully treated by drainage and corticosteroid. Cytological analysis of the puncture fluid showed no malignancy, and the subsequent computed tomography scan indicated stable disease as well as significantly decreased pericardial and pleural effusions. The patient remains free of progression to date.

CONCLUSION

PBT was a safe and effective method of reirradiation for locoregionally recurrent breast cancer in our patient.

Postmastectomy radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer patients: Comparison of advanced techniques

Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been shown to improve the overall survival for invasive breast cancer patients, and many advanced radiotherapy technologies were adopted for PMRT. The purpose of our study is to compare various advanced PMRT techniques including fixed-beam intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), non-coplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy (NC-VMAT), multiple arc VMAT (MA-VMAT), and tomotherapy (TOMO). Results of standard VMAT and mixed beam therapy that were published by our group previously were also included in the plan comparisons. Treatment plans were produced for nine PMRT patients previously treated in our clinic. The plans were evaluated based on planning target volume (PTV) coverage, dose homogeneity index (DHI), conformity index (CI), dose to organs at risk (OARs), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of pneumonitis, lifetime attributable risk (LAR) of second cancers, and risk of coronary events (RCE). All techniques produced clinically acceptable PMRT plans. Overall, fixed-beam IMRT delivered the lowest mean dose to contralateral breast (1.56 ± 0.4 Gy) and exhibited lowest LAR (0.6 ± 0.2%) of secondary contralateral breast cancer; NC-VMAT delivered the lowest mean dose to lungs (7.5 ± 0.8 Gy), exhibited lowest LAR (5.4 ± 2.8%) of secondary lung cancer and lowest NTCP (2.1 ± 0.4%) of pneumonitis; mixed beam therapy delivered the lowest mean dose to heart (7.1 ± 1.3 Gy) and exhibited lowest RCE (8.6 ± 7.1%); TOMO plans provided the most optimal target coverage while delivering higher dose to OARs than other techniques. Both NC-VMAT and MA-VMAT exhibited lower values of all OARs evaluation metrics compare to standard VMAT. Fixed-beam IMRT, NC-VMAT, and mixed beam therapy could be the optimal radiation technique for certain breast cancer patients after mastectomy.

Asymptomatic Late-phase Radiographic Changes Among Chest-Wall Patients Are Associated With a Proton RBE Exceeding 1.1

PURPOSE

Clinical practice assumes a fixed proton relative biological effectiveness (RBE) of 1.1, but in vitro experiments demonstrate higher RBEs at the distal edge of the proton spread-out Bragg peak, that is, in a region that falls within the lung for chest-wall patients. We performed retrospective qualitative and quantitative analyses of lung-density changes-indicative of asymptomatic fibrosis-for chest-wall patients treated with protons or photons. Our null hypothesis was that, assuming a fixed RBE of 1.1, these changes would be the same for the 2 cohorts, supporting current RBE practice. Our alternative hypothesis was that radiographic abnormalities would be greater for the proton cohort, suggesting an RBE > 1.1.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We analyzed follow-up computed tomography (CT) scans for 20 proton and photon patients. All were prescribed 50.4 Gy (RBE) in 28 fractions, assuming a fixed RBE of 1.1 for protons and 1 for photons. Deformable registrations enabled us to calculate density changes in the normal lung, specifically (1) median Hounsfield unit (HU) values among posttreatment CT scans and (2) changes in median HU values between pretreatment and posttreatment CT scans, both as a function of grays (RBE). In addition, qualitative abnormality grading was performed by a radiologist.

RESULTS

Proton patients exhibited higher values of HU/Gy (RBE) (endpoint 1) and ΔHU/Gy (RBE) (endpoint 2): P = .049 and P = .00019, respectively, were obtained (likelihood ratio tests of full linear mixed-effects models against models without "modality"). Furthermore, qualitative radiologic scoring indicated a significant difference between the cohorts (Wilcoxon P = .018; median score, 3 of 9 for protons and 1.5 of 9 for photons).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support the hypothesis that the proton RBE for lung-density changes exceeds 1.1. This RBE elevation could be attributable to (1) the late, normal tissue endpoint that we consider or (2) end-of-range proton linear energy transfer elevation-or a combination of the two. Regardless, our results suggest that variations in proton RBE prove important in vivo as well as in vitro.

Proton therapy for breast cancer: progress & pitfalls

As the number of patients cured from breast cancer increases with improvements in multidisciplinary care, emphasis on reducing late toxicities of treatment has increased, in order to improve long-term quality of life. Proton beam therapy (PBT) is a form of radiotherapy that uses particles with unique physical properties that enable treatment delivery with minimal dose deposition beyond the treatment target. Therefore, PBT has emerged as an exciting radiotherapy modality for breast cancer due to the ability to minimize exposure to the heart, lungs, muscle, and bone. Herein, we review the rationale for PBT in breast cancer, potential clinical applications, and the available clinical data supporting its use. We also address some of the technical and logistical challenges and areas of ongoing research that will ultimately establish the role for PBT for breast cancer in the years ahead.