Predicted Secondary Malignancies following Proton versus Photon Radiation for Oropharyngeal Cancers

Secondary cancer risk in six anatomical sites when using PAT, IMPT, and VMAT/IMRT radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Compared to intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), proton arc therapy (PAT) is expected to improve dose conformality, delivery efficiency, and provide a more favorable LET distribution. Alternatively, the low-dose bath is potentially spread over larger volumes, which could impact the likelihood of developing a radiation-induced, secondary cancer (SC). The goal of this study was to evaluate this risk in several anatomical sites using newly developed commercial tools.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Treatment plans encompassing six anatomical sites, five patients per site, and three techniques per patient were created using RayStation. Techniques included PAT and IMPT for protons, and either volumetrically modulated radiotherapy (VMAT) or intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for photons. Risk estimates were based on the organ-equivalent dose (OED) concept using both Schneider's mechanistic dose-response model for carcinoma induction and a linear dose-response model.

RESULTS

With few exceptions, mean and integral dose were lowest with PAT. For protons, the factor OEDIMPT/OEDPAT ranged from 0.7 to 1.8 with both the mechanistic and linear model, while for photons OEDphoton/OEDPAT ranged from 1.5 to 10 using the mechanistic model and 1.3 to using the linear model. A strong correlation was found between mean dose and OED for organs with significant repopulation/repair (high R value) and less cell death from single hit interactions (low α value).

CONCLUSION

Based on results from both mechanistic and linear risk models, the transition from IMPT to PAT should not substantially affect SC risk in patients treated with proton therapy. Additionally, when using Schneider's model, the shapes of the dose-response curves can be used as a good predictor of how SC risk will respond to shifts from intermediate dose to low dose as anticipated when moving from IMPT to PAT.

Proton pencil beam scanning radiotherapy in the postoperative treatment of p16 positive squamous cell tonsillar cancer - evaluation of toxicity and effectivity

PURPOSE

Patients with p16 positive tonsillar cancer (p16 + TC) have an excellent prognosis and long-life expectancy. Deintensification of therapy is a prevalent topic of discussion. Proton radiotherapy is one way to reduce radiation exposure and thus reduce acute and late toxicity. The aim is to evaluate treatment outcomes and toxicity of postoperative treatment with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT).

METHODS

Between September 2013 and November 2021, 47 patients with p16 + TC were treated postoperatively with IMPT. Median age was 54.9 (38.2-74.9) years, 31 were males and 16 were females. All patients had squamous cell carcinoma and underwent surgery as a primary treatment. Median dose of radiotherapy was 66 GyE in 33 fractions. Bilateral neck irradiation was used in 39 patients and unilateral in 8. Concomitant chemotherapy was applied in 24 patients.

RESULTS

Median follow-up time was 4.2 (0.15-9.64) years. Five-year overall survival, relapse free survival and local control were 95.7%, 97.8% and 100%. The most common acute toxicities were dermatitis and mucositis, with grade 2 + in 61.7% and 70.2% of patients. No acute percutaneous gastrostomy insertion was necessary and intravenous rehydration was used in 12.8% of patients. The most common late toxicity was grade 1 xerostomia in 70.2% of patients and grade 2 in 10.6% of patients. Subcutaneous fibrosis of grades 2 and 3 occurred in 17.0% and 2.1% of patients, respectively. One patient developed late severe dysphagia and became PEG-dependent.

CONCLUSION

IMPT for the postoperative treatment of p16 + TC is feasible with excellent efficiency and acceptable acute and late toxicity.

The emerging role of Artificial Intelligence in proton therapy: A review

Artificial intelligence (AI) has made a tremendous impact in the space of healthcare, and proton therapy is not an exception. Proton therapy has witnessed growing popularity in oncology over recent decades, and researchers are increasingly looking to develop AI and machine learning tools to aid in various steps of the treatment planning and delivery processes. This review delves into the emergent role of AI in proton therapy, evaluating its development, advantages, intended clinical contexts, and areas of application. Through the analysis of 76 studies, we aim to underscore the importance of AI applications in advancing proton therapy and to highlight their prospective influence on clinical practices.

A Practical Primer on Particle Therapy

PURPOSE

Particle therapy is a promising treatment technique that is becoming more commonly used. Although proton beam therapy remains the most commonly used particle therapy, multiple other heavier ions have been used in the preclinical and clinical settings, each with its own unique properties. This practical review aims to summarize the differences between the studied particles, discussing their radiobiological and physical properties with additional review of the available clinical data.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A search was carried out on the PubMed databases with search terms related to each particle. Relevant radiobiology, physics, and clinical studies were included. The articles were summarized to provide a practical resource for practicing clinicians.

RESULTS

A total of 113 articles and texts were included in our narrative review. Currently, proton beam therapy has the most data and is the most widely used, followed by carbon, helium, and neutrons. Although oxygen, neon, silicon, and argon have been used clinically, their future use will likely remain limited as monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This review summarizes the properties of each of the clinically relevant particles. Protons, helium, and carbon will likely remain the most commonly used, although multi-ion therapy is an emerging technique.

Current Status and Future Directions of Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma

The growing interest in proton therapy (PT) in recent decades is justified by the evidence that protons dose distribution allows maximal dose release at the tumor depth followed by sharp distal dose fall-off. But, in the holistic management of head and neck cancer (HNC), limiting the potential of PT to a mere dosimetric advantage appears reductive. Indeed, the precise targeting of PT may help evaluate the effectiveness of de-escalation strategies, especially for patients with human papillomavirus associated-oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) and nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). Furthermore, PT could have potentially greater immunogenic effects than conventional photon therapy, possibly enhancing both the radiotherapy (RT) capability to activate anti-tumor immune response and the effectiveness of immunotherapy drugs. Based on these premises, the aim of the present paper is to conduct a narrative review reporting the safety and efficacy of PT compared to photon RT focusing on NPC and OPC. We also provide a snapshot of ongoing clinical trials comparing PT with photon RT for these two clinical scenarios. Finally, we discuss new insights that may further develop clinical research on PT for HNC.

Proton and alpha radiation-induced mutational profiles in human cells

Ionizing radiation is known to be DNA damaging and mutagenic, however less is known about which mutational footprints result from exposures of human cells to different types of radiation. We were interested in the mutagenic effects of particle radiation exposures on genomes of various human cell types, in order to gauge the genotoxic risks of galactic cosmic radiation, and of certain types of tumor radiotherapy. To this end, we exposed cultured cell lines from the human blood, breast and lung to fractionated proton and alpha particle (helium nuclei) beams at doses sufficient to considerably affect cell viability. Whole-genome sequencing revealed that mutation rates were not overall markedly increased upon proton and alpha exposures. However, there were modest changes in mutation spectra and distributions, such as the increases in clustered mutations and of certain types of indels and structural variants. The spectrum of mutagenic effects of particle beams may be cell-type and/or genetic background specific. Overall, the mutational effects of repeated exposures to proton and alpha radiation on human cells in culture appear subtle, however further work is warranted to understand effects of long-term exposures on various human tissues.

Proton Beam Radiation Therapy for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Purpose

To discuss the role of proton beam therapy (PBT) in the treatment of patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC).

Materials and Methods

A review of the pertinent literature.

Results

Proton beam therapy likely results in reduced acute and late toxicity as compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The extent of the reduced toxicity, which may be modest, depends on the endpoint and technical factors such as pencil beam versus passive scattered PBT and adaptive replanning. The disease control rates after PBT are likely similar to those after IMRT.

Conclusion

Proton beam therapy is an attractive option to treat patients with OPSCC. Whether it becomes widely available depends on access.

Proton Therapy for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Early Clinical Experience and Current Challenges

Simple Summary

Proton therapy is a promising type of radiation therapy used to destroy tumor cells. It has the potential to further improve the outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer since it allows to minimize the radiation dose to vital structures around the tumor, leading to less toxicity. This paper describes the current experience worldwide with proton therapy in head and neck cancer.

Abstract

Proton therapy (PT) is a promising development in radiation oncology, with the potential to further improve outcomes for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). By utilizing the finite range of protons, healthy tissue can be spared from beam exit doses that would otherwise be irradiated with photon-based treatments. Current evidence on PT for HNSCC is limited to comparative dosimetric analyses and retrospective single-institution series. As a consequence, the recognized indications for the reimbursement of PT remain scarce in most countries. Nevertheless, approximately 100 PT centers are in operation worldwide, and initial experiences for HNSCC are being reported. This review aims to summarize the results of the early clinical experience with PT for HNSCC and the challenges that are currently faced.

Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Better Spares Non-Adjacent Organs and Reduces the Risk of Secondary Malignant Neoplasms in the Treatment of Sinonasal Cancers

This study compare dosimetric parameters and secondary malignancy risk (SMN) using intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for the treatment of sinonasal cancer (SC). After IRB-approval, 10 patients previously treated with IMPT for cancers of the ethmoid, sphenoid, maxillary, or frontal sinuses were identified. Dosimetrists blinded to the IMPT plans generated VMAT plans for comparison. Volume coverage and dose to organs at risk (OAR) were recorded and compared. Organ equivalent dose (OED) of tissues outside of the treatment volume was used to define the excess absolute and relative risk of SMNs. In all cases, both VMAT and IMPT provided acceptable target volume coverage and were able to meet OAR constraints. IMPT was superior for brain V10, V30, and mean, brainstem D0.01 ipsilateral cochlea V30, contralateral cochlea mean, contralateral lacrimal gland mean, contralateral parotid mean, spinal cord D0.01 and body outside of the CTV V10, V20, and V30. VMAT was superior for ipsilateral eye mean, ipsilateral lens mean, CTV V100 and maximum hotspot. The relative risk of SMNs with VMAT compared to IMPT is 3.35 (95% CI, 1.92-5.89). For the treatment of SC, IMPT spares OARs that are not immediately adjacent to the treatment volume and reduces the risk of SMNs when compared to VMAT. VMAT spares OARs abutting the target volume better than IMPT and has more homogenous target coverage. Tumors of the ethmoid sinus, benefit more from IMPT, while tumors located elsewhere require application of our findings on a case by case basis.