Clinical Review of Proton Therapy in the Treatment of Unilateral Head and Neck Cancers

Dosimetric and NTCP analyses for selecting parotid gland cancer patients for proton therapy

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

To perform a dosimetric and a normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) comparison between intensity modulated proton therapy and photon volumetric modulated arc therapy in a cohort of patients with parotid gland cancers in a post-operative or radical setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From May 2011 to September 2021, 37 parotid gland cancers patients treated at two institutions were eligible. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients aged ⩾ 18 years, diagnosis of parotid gland cancers candidate for postoperative radiotherapy or definitive radiotherapy, presence of written informed consent for the use of anonymous data for research purposes. Organs at risk (OARs) were retrospectively contoured. Target coverage goal was defined as D95 > 98%. Six NTCP models were selected. NTCP profiles were calculated for each patient using an internally-developed Python script in RayStation TPS. Average differences in NTCP between photon and proton plans were tested for significance with a two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

Seventy-four plans were generated. A lower Dmean to the majority of organs at risk (inner ear, cochlea, oral cavity, pharyngeal constrictor muscles, contralateral parotid and submandibular gland) was obtained with intensity modulated proton therapy vs volumetric modulated arc therapy with statistical significance (p < .05). Ten (27%) patients had a difference in NTCP (photon vs proton plans) greater than 10% for hearing loss and tinnitus: among them, seven qualified for both endpoints, two patients for hearing loss only, and one for tinnitus.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current study, nearly one-third of patients resulted eligible for proton therapy and they were the most likely to benefit in terms of prevention of hearing loss and tinnitus.

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.

Low contralateral failure rate with unilateral proton beam radiotherapy for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: A multi-institutional prospective study from the proton collaborative group

INTRODUCTION

Unilateral radiation therapy is appropriate for select patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). The use of proton beam therapy (PBT) in the unilateral setting decreases the dose to the contralateral neck and organs at risk. This study aims to evaluate contralateral recurrences in patients who received ipsilateral PBT.

METHODS

We evaluated the Proton Collaborative Group database for patients treated with PBT for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma between the years 2015-2020 at 12 institutions. Dosimetric analysis was performed in five cases.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 41 patients that received ipsilateral PBT with a mean follow-up of 14.7 months. 37% patients (n = 15) were treated for recurrent disease, and 63% (n = 26) were treated for de novo disease. Oropharyngeal sites included tonsillar fossa (n = 30) and base of tongue (n = 11). The median dose and BED delivered were 69.96 CGE and 84 Gy, respectively. Eight (20%) patients experienced at least one grade 3 dysphagia (n = 4) or esophagitis (n = 4) toxicity. No grade ≥ 4 toxicities were reported. There was one (2.4%) failure in the contralateral neck. The 1-year locoregional control was 88.9% and the freedom from distant metastasis was 95.5% (n = 2). The dosimetric analysis demonstrated similar ipsilateral level II cervical nodal region doses, whereas contralateral doses were higher with photon plans, mean: 15.5 Gy and 0.7CGE, D5%: 25.1 Gy and 6.6CGE.

CONCLUSIONS

Our series is the first to report outcomes for patients with OPSCC receiving unilateral PBT. The contralateral neck failure rate was excellent and comparable to failure rates with photon irradiation.

Head and neck proton therapy in France: A missed opportunity or a challenge in front of us?

Following major advances of the best of photon-techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and, to arrive soon, magnetic resonance (MR)-linac radiotherapy, there are still substantial opportunities in the treatment of head and neck cancers to further reduce the toxicity burden. Proton therapy represents another attractive option in this high-quality and highly competitive precision radiotherapy landscape. Proton therapy holds promises to reduce toxicities and to escalate the dose in radioresistant cases or cases where dose distribution is not satisfactory with photons. However, the selection of patients for proton therapy needs to be done using evidence-based medicine to build arguments in favor of personalized precision radiation therapy. Referral to proton therapy versus IMRT or SBRT should be registered (ProtonShare® platform) and envisioned in a formalized clinical research perspective through randomized trials. The use of an enrichment process using a model-based approach should be done to only randomize patients doomed to benefit from proton. To tackle such great opportunities, the French proton therapy challenge is to collaborate at the national and international levels, and to demonstrate that the extra-costs of treatment are worth clinically and economically in the short, mid, and long-term. In parallel to the clinical developments, there are still preclinical issues to be tackled (e.g., proton FLASH, mini-beams, combination with immunotherapy), for which the French Radiotransnet network offers a unique platform. The current article provides a personal view of the challenges and opportunities with a focus on clinical research and randomized trial requirements as well as the needs for strong collaborations at the national and international levels for PT in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck to date.