1
|
Xu Y, Jin W, Butkus M, De Ornelas M, Cyriac J, Studenski MT, Padgett K, Simpson G, Samuels S, Samuels M, Dogan N. Cone beam CT-based adaptive intensity modulated proton therapy assessment using automated planning for head-and-neck cancer. Radiat Oncol 2024; 19:13. [PMID: 38263237 PMCID: PMC10804468 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-024-02406-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2022] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 01/25/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To assess the feasibility of CBCT-based adaptive intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using automated planning for treatment of head and neck (HN) cancers. METHODS Twenty HN cancer patients who received radiotherapy and had pretreatment CBCTs were included in this study. Initial IMPT plans were created using automated planning software for all patients. Synthetic CTs (sCT) were then created by deforming the planning CT (pCT) to the pretreatment CBCTs. To assess dose calculation accuracy on sCTs, repeat CTs (rCTs) were deformed to the pretreatment CBCT obtained on the same day to create deformed rCT (rCTdef), serving as gold standard. The dose recalculated on sCT and on rCTdef were compared by using Gamma analysis. The accuracy of DIR generated contours was also assessed. To explore the potential benefits of adaptive IMPT, two sets of plans were created for each patient, a non-adapted IMPT plan and an adapted IMPT plan calculated on weekly sCT images. The weekly doses for non-adaptive and adaptive IMPT plans were accumulated on the pCT, and the accumulated dosimetric parameters of two sets were compared. RESULTS Gamma analysis of the dose recalculated on sCT and rCTdef resulted in a passing rate of 97.9% ± 1.7% using 3 mm/3% criteria. With the physician-corrected contours on the sCT, the dose deviation range of using sCT to estimate mean dose for the most organ at risk (OARs) can be reduced to (- 2.37%, 2.19%) as compared to rCTdef, while for V95 of primary or secondary CTVs, the deviation can be controlled within (- 1.09%, 0.29%). Comparison of the accumulated doses from the adaptive planning against the non-adaptive plans reduced mean dose to constrictors (- 1.42 Gy ± 2.79 Gy) and larynx (- 2.58 Gy ± 3.09 Gy). The reductions result in statistically significant reductions in the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of larynx edema by 7.52% ± 13.59%. 4.5% of primary CTVs, 4.1% of secondary CTVs, and 26.8% tertiary CTVs didn't meet the V95 > 95% constraint on non-adapted IMPT plans. All adaptive plans were able to meet the coverage constraint. CONCLUSION sCTs can be a useful tool for accurate proton dose calculation. Adaptive IMPT resulted in better CTV coverage, OAR sparing and lower NTCP for some OARs as compared with non-adaptive IMPT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yihang Xu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA
| | - William Jin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Michael Butkus
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Mariluz De Ornelas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Jonathan Cyriac
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Matthew T Studenski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Kyle Padgett
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Garrett Simpson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Stuart Samuels
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Michael Samuels
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, Gilbert, AZ, USA
| | - Nesrin Dogan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chang L, Shaaban SG, Gogineni E, Page B, Quon H, Li H, Ger R. Daily Head and Neck Treatment Assessment for Optimal Proton Therapy Planning Robustness. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3719. [PMID: 37509380 PMCID: PMC10378634 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15143719] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Revised: 07/20/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Robust optimization in proton therapy ensures adequate target coverage; however, validation of fractional plan quality and setup uncertainty in patients has not been performed. We aimed to assess plan robustness on delivered head and neck proton plans classified into two categories: (1) primary only (PO) and (2) primary and neck nodal (PNN) coverage. Registration at the machine was utilized for daily CBCT to generate a synthetic CT. The dose for the clinical target volume (CTV) and organs at risk (OAR) was compared to the expected robustness bands using 3.5% range uncertainty and 3 mm vs. 5 mm setup uncertainty. The fractional deviation was defined as D95% and V100% outside of uncertainty constraints. About 203 daily fractions from 6 patients were included for analysis. The percentage of fractions that exceeded robustness calculations was greater in 3 mm as compared to 5 mm setup uncertainty for both CTV and OAR volumes. PO plans had clinically insignificant average fractional deviation, less than 1%, in delivered D95% and V100%. In comparison, PNN plans had up to 2.2% average fractional deviation in delivered V100% using 3 mm robustness. Given the need to balance dose accuracy with OAR sparing, we recommend the utilization of 3 mm setup uncertainty as an acceptable simulation of the dose delivered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leslie Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Sherif G Shaaban
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Emile Gogineni
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
| | - Brandi Page
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Harry Quon
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Heng Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Rachel Ger
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bobić M, Lalonde A, Nesteruk KP, Lee H, Nenoff L, Gorissen BL, Bertolet A, Busse PM, Chan AW, Winey BA, Sharp GC, Verburg JM, Lomax AJ, Paganetti H. Large anatomical changes in head-and-neck cancers – a dosimetric comparison of online and offline adaptive proton therapy. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2023; 40:100625. [PMID: 37090849 PMCID: PMC10120292 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100625] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/30/2023] [Indexed: 04/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose This work evaluates an online adaptive (OA) workflow for head-and-neck (H&N) intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and compares it with full offline replanning (FOR) in patients with large anatomical changes. Methods IMPT treatment plans are created retrospectively for a cohort of eight H&N cancer patients that previously required replanning during the course of treatment due to large anatomical changes. Daily cone-beam CTs (CBCT) are acquired and corrected for scatter, resulting in 253 analyzed fractions. To simulate the FOR workflow, nominal plans are created on the planning-CT and delivered until a repeated-CT is acquired; at this point, a new plan is created on the repeated-CT. To simulate the OA workflow, nominal plans are created on the planning-CT and adapted at each fraction using a simple beamlet weight-tuning technique. Dose distributions are calculated on the CBCTs with Monte Carlo for both delivery methods. The total treatment dose is accumulated on the planning-CT. Results Daily OA improved target coverage compared to FOR despite using smaller target margins. In the high-risk CTV, the median D98 degradation was 1.1 % and 2.1 % for OA and FOR, respectively. In the low-risk CTV, the same metrics yield 1.3 % and 5.2 % for OA and FOR, respectively. Smaller setup margins of OA reduced the dose to all OARs, which was most relevant for the parotid glands. Conclusion Daily OA can maintain prescription doses and constraints over the course of fractionated treatment, even in cases of large anatomical changes, reducing the necessity for manual replanning in H&N IMPT.
Collapse
|
4
|
Borderías-Villarroel E, Taasti V, Van Elmpt W, Teruel-Rivas S, Geets X, Sterpin E. Evaluation of the clinical value of automatic online dose restoration for adaptive proton therapy of head and neck cancer. Radiother Oncol 2022; 170:190-197. [PMID: 35346754 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2022.03.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2021] [Revised: 03/21/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) is highly sensitive to anatomical variations which can cause inadequate target coverage during treatment. This study compares not-adapted (NA) robust plans to two adaptive IMPT methods - a fully-offline adaptive (FOA) and a simplified automatic online adaptive strategy (dose restoration (DR)) to determine the benefit of DR, in head and neck cancer (HNC). MATERIAL/METHODS Robustly optimized clinical IMPT doses in planning-CTs (pCTs) were available for a cohort of 10 HNC patients. During robust re-optimization, DR used isodose contours, generated from the clinical dose on pCTs, and patient specific objectives to reproduce the clinical dose in every repeated-CT(rCT). For each rCT(n=50), NA, DR and FOA plans were robustly evaluated. RESULTS An improvement in DVH-metrics and robustness was seen for DR and FOA plans compared to NA plans. For NA plans, 74%(37/50) of rCTs did not fulfill the CTV coverage criteria (D98%>95%Dprescription). DR improved target coverage, target homogeneity and variability on critical risk organs such as the spinal cord. After DR, 52%(26/50) of rCTs met all clinical goals. Because of large anatomical changes and/or inaccurate patient repositioning, 48%(24/50) of rCTs still needed full offline adaptation to ensure an optimal treatment since dose restoration was not able to re-establish the initial plan quality. CONCLUSION Robust optimization together with fully-automatized DR avoided offline adaptation in 52% of the cases. Implementation of dose restoration in clinical routine could ensure treatment plan optimality while saving valuable human and material resources to radiotherapy departments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elena Borderías-Villarroel
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium. Avenue Hippocrate 54, Bte B1.54.07, 1200 Brussels, (Belgium).
| | - Vicki Taasti
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Doctor Tanslaan 12, 6229 ET Maastricht, (Netherlands).
| | - Wouter Van Elmpt
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Doctor Tanslaan 12, 6229 ET Maastricht, (Netherlands).
| | - S Teruel-Rivas
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium. Avenue Hippocrate 54, Bte B1.54.07, 1200 Brussels, (Belgium)
| | - X Geets
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium. Avenue Hippocrate 54, Bte B1.54.07, 1200 Brussels, (Belgium); Department of Radiation Oncology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium. Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, (Belgium).
| | - E Sterpin
- Molecular Imaging, Radiotherapy and Oncology (MIRO), UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium. Avenue Hippocrate 54, Bte B1.54.07, 1200 Brussels, (Belgium); Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, KULeuven, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, (Belgium).
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gordon KB, Smyk DI, Gulidov IA. Proton Therapy in Head and Neck Cancer Treatment: State of the Problem and Development Prospects (Review). Sovrem Tekhnologii Med 2021; 13:70-80. [PMID: 34603766 PMCID: PMC8482826 DOI: 10.17691/stm2021.13.4.08] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Proton therapy (PT) due to dosimetric characteristics (Bragg peak formation, sharp dose slowdown) is currently one of the most high-tech techniques of radiation therapy exceeding the standards of photon methods. In recent decades, PT has traditionally been used, primarily, for head and neck cancers (HNC) including skull base tumors. Regardless of the fact that recently PT application area has significantly expanded, HNC still remain a leading indication for proton radiation since PT’s physic-dosimetric and radiobiological advantages enable to achieve the best treatment results in these tumors. The present review is devoted to PT usage in HNC treatment in the world and Russian medicine, the prospects for further technique development, the assessment of PT’s radiobiological features, a physical and dosimetric comparison of protons photons distribution. The paper shows PT’s capabilities in the treatment of skull base tumors, HNC (nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, nasopharynx, oropharynx, and laryngopharynx, etc.), eye tumors, sialomas. The authors analyze the studies on repeated radiation and provide recent experimental data on favorable profile of proton radiation compared to the conventional radiation therapy. The review enables to conclude that currently PT is a dynamic radiation technique opening up new opportunities for improving therapy of oncology patients, especially those with HNC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K B Gordon
- Senior Researcher, Proton Therapy Department; A. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre - Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 4 Koroleva St., Kaluga Region, Obninsk, 249036, Russia
| | - D I Smyk
- Junior Researcher, Proton Therapy Department; A. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre - Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 4 Koroleva St., Kaluga Region, Obninsk, 249036, Russia
| | - I A Gulidov
- Professor, Head of the Proton Therapy Department; A. Tsyb Medical Radiological Research Centre - Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 4 Koroleva St., Kaluga Region, Obninsk, 249036, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Narita Y, Kato T, Ono T, Oyama S, Yamazaki Y, Ouchi H, Takemasa K, Murakami M. Trend analysis of the dosimetric impact of anatomical changes during proton therapy for maxillary sinus carcinoma. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 22:298-306. [PMID: 34402579 PMCID: PMC8425936 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2021] [Revised: 07/25/2021] [Accepted: 07/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Anatomical changes, such as shrinkage and aeration, can affect dose distribution in proton therapy (PT) for maxillary sinus carcinoma (MSC). These changes can affect the dose to the target and organs at risk (OARs); however, when these changes occur during PT is unclear. This study aimed to investigate the dosimetric impact of anatomical changes during PT. MATERIALS AND METHODS Fifteen patients with MSC were enrolled in this study. Initial PT plans were generated based on initial computed tomography (CT) images. Several repeat CT images were obtained to confirm anatomical changes during PT. Evaluation PT plans were generated by copying initial PT plans to repeat CT images. The dose differences of the target and OARs were evaluated by comparing both the plans. RESULTS At 3-4 weeks after the initiation of PT, the target volume reduced by approximately 10% as compared with the initial volume. Consequently, the target volumes gradually varied until the end of treatment. The value of V95 (volume that received 95% of the prescription dose) in the clinical target volume of the evaluation PT plan was similar to that of the initial PT plan. However, the dose to OARs, such as the contralateral optic nerve, contralateral eyeball, brainstem, and optic chiasm, increased significantly from the middle to the later phases of the treatment course. In contrast, there was a slight dose difference in the ipsilateral optic apparatus. CONCLUSION The trend analysis in this study showed that anatomical changes appeared 3-4 weeks after the start of PT, and the dose to the OARs tended to increase. Therefore, it is recommended to check the status of tumor 3-4 weeks after the start of treatment to avoid the deterioration of dose distribution due to these changes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuki Narita
- Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan
| | - Takahiro Kato
- Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan.,School of Health Sciences, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan
| | - Takashi Ono
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata University, Yamagata, Japan
| | - Sho Oyama
- Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan
| | - Yuhei Yamazaki
- Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan
| | - Hisao Ouchi
- Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan
| | - Kimihiro Takemasa
- Department of Radiation Physics and Technology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan
| | - Masao Murakami
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Southern TOHOKU Proton Therapy Center, Koriyama, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Lalonde A, Bobić M, Winey B, Verburg J, Sharp GC, Paganetti H. Anatomic changes in head and neck intensity-modulated proton therapy: Comparison between robust optimization and online adaptation. Radiother Oncol 2021; 159:39-47. [PMID: 33741469 PMCID: PMC8205952 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.03.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2020] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 03/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE Setup variations and anatomical changes can severely affect the quality of head and neck intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) treatments. The impact of these changes can be alleviated by increasing the plan's robustness a priori, or by adapting the plan online. This work compares these approaches in the context of head and neck IMPT. MATERIALS/METHODS A representative cohort of 10 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients with daily cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was evaluated. For each patient, three IMPT plans were created: 1- a classical robust optimization (cRO) plan optimized on the planning CT, 2- an anatomical robust optimization (aRO) plan additionally including the two first daily CBCTs and 3- a plan optimized without robustness constraints, but online-adapted (OA) daily, using a constrained spot intensity re-optimization technique only. RESULTS The cumulative dose following OA fulfilled the clinical objective of both the high-risk and low-risk clinical target volumes (CTV) coverage in all 10 patients, compared to 8 for aRO and 4 for cRO. aRO did not significantly increase the dose to most organs at risk compared to cRO, although the integral dose was higher. OA significantly reduced the integral dose to healthy tissues compared to both robust methods, while providing equivalent or superior target coverage. CONCLUSION Using a simple spot intensity re-optimization, daily OA can achieve superior target coverage and lower dose to organs at risk than robust optimization methods.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arthur Lalonde
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
| | - Mislav Bobić
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA; ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Brian Winey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Joost Verburg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Gregory C Sharp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital & Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Paganetti H, Beltran C, Both S, Dong L, Flanz J, Furutani K, Grassberger C, Grosshans DR, Knopf AC, Langendijk JA, Nystrom H, Parodi K, Raaymakers BW, Richter C, Sawakuchi GO, Schippers M, Shaitelman SF, Teo BKK, Unkelbach J, Wohlfahrt P, Lomax T. Roadmap: proton therapy physics and biology. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abcd16] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2020] [Accepted: 11/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
9
|
Bobić M, Lalonde A, Sharp GC, Grassberger C, Verburg JM, Winey BA, Lomax AJ, Paganetti H. Comparison of weekly and daily online adaptation for head and neck intensity-modulated proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2021; 66. [PMID: 33503592 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/abe050] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
The high conformality of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) dose distributions causes treatment plans to be sensitive to geometrical changes during the course of a fractionated treatment. This can be addressed using adaptive proton therapy (APT). One important question in APT is the frequency of adaptations performed during a fractionated treatment, which is related to the question whether plan adaptation has to be done online or offline. The purpose of this work is to investigate the impact of weekly and daily online IMPT plan adaptation on the treatment quality for head and neck patients. A cohort of ten head and neck patients with daily acquired cone-beam CT (CBCT) images was evaluated retrospectively. Dose tracking of the IMPT treatment was performed for three scenarios: base plan with no adaptation (BP), weekly online adaptation (OAW), and daily online adaptation (OAD). Both adaptation schemes used an in-house developed online APT workflow, performing Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculations on scatter-corrected CBCTs. IMPT plan adaptation was achieved by only tuning the weights of a subset of beamlets, based on deformable image registration from the planning CT to each CBCT. Although OADmitigated random delivery errors more effectively than OAWon a fraction per fraction basis, both OAWand OADachieved the clinical goals for all ten patients, while BP failed for six cases. In the high-risk CTV, accumulated values of D98%ranged between 97.15% and 99.73% of the prescription dose for OAD, with a median of 98.07%. For OAW, values between 95.02% and 99.26% were obtained, with a median of 97.61% of the prescription dose. Otherwise, the dose to most organs at risk was similar for all three scenarios. Globally, our results suggest that OAWcould be used as an alternative approach to OADfor most patients in order to reduce the clinical workload.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mislav Bobić
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, UNITED STATES
| | - Arthur Lalonde
- Radiation-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114-2696, UNITED STATES
| | - Gregory C Sharp
- Dept of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 100 Blossom Street, Cox Building, 302, Boston, MA 02114, USA, Boston, UNITED STATES
| | | | - Joost M Verburg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, Massachussets General Hospital, Francis H Burr Proton Therapy Center, 30 Fruit Street, Boston, 02114, UNITED STATES
| | - Brian A Winey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Harvard Medical School, FH Burr Proton Therapy Center, 55 Fruit St, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114, UNITED STATES
| | - Antony John Lomax
- Department of Radiation Medicine, Paul Scherrer Institute, CH-5232 Villigen PSI, Villigen, SWITZERLAND
| | - Harald Paganetti
- Northeast Proton Therapy Centre, Massachusetts General Hospital, 30 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA, Boston, Massachusetts, 02114, UNITED STATES
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Minatogawa H, Yasuda K, Dekura Y, Takao S, Matsuura T, Yoshimura T, Suzuki R, Yokota I, Fujima N, Onimaru R, Shimizu S, Aoyama H, Shirato H. Potential benefits of adaptive intensity-modulated proton therapy in nasopharyngeal carcinomas. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2020; 22:174-183. [PMID: 33338323 PMCID: PMC7856494 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2020] [Revised: 11/24/2020] [Accepted: 11/25/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To investigate potential advantages of adaptive intensity‐modulated proton beam therapy (A‐IMPT) by comparing it to adaptive intensity‐modulated X‐ray therapy (A‐IMXT) for nasopharyngeal carcinomas (NPC). Methods Ten patients with NPC treated with A‐IMXT (step and shoot approach) and concomitant chemotherapy between 2014 and 2016 were selected. In the actual treatment, 46 Gy in 23 fractions (46Gy/23Fx.) was prescribed using the initial plan and 24Gy/12Fx was prescribed using an adapted plan thereafter. New treatment planning of A‐IMPT was made for the same patients using equivalent dose fractionation schedule and dose constraints. The dose volume statistics based on deformable images and dose accumulation was used in the comparison of A‐IMXT with A‐IMPT. Results The means of the Dmean of the right parotid gland (P < 0.001), right TM joint (P < 0.001), left TM joint (P < 0.001), oral cavity (P < 0.001), supraglottic larynx (P = 0.001), glottic larynx (P < 0.001), , middle PCM (P = 0.0371), interior PCM (P < 0.001), cricopharyngeal muscle (P = 0.03643), and thyroid gland (P = 0.00216), in A‐IMPT are lower than those of A‐IMXT, with statistical significance. The means of, D0.03cc, and Dmean of each sub portion of auditory apparatus and D30% for Eustachian tube and D0.5cc for mastoid volume in A‐IMPT are significantly lower than those of A‐IMXT. The mean doses to the oral cavity, supraglottic larynx, and glottic larynx were all reduced by more than 20 Gy (RBE = 1.1). Conclusions An adaptive approach is suggested to enhance the potential benefit of IMPT compared to IMXT to reduce adverse effects for patients with NPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hideki Minatogawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Koichi Yasuda
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.,Global Station for Quantum Medical Science and Engineering, Global Institution for Collaborative Research and Education (GI-CoRE), Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Yasuhiro Dekura
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Seishin Takao
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Taeko Matsuura
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Takaaki Yoshimura
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.,Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Ryusuke Suzuki
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Isao Yokota
- Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Noriyuki Fujima
- Department of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Rikiya Onimaru
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Shinichi Shimizu
- Global Station for Quantum Medical Science and Engineering, Global Institution for Collaborative Research and Education (GI-CoRE), Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.,Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Hidefumi Aoyama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Hiroki Shirato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.,Global Station for Quantum Medical Science and Engineering, Global Institution for Collaborative Research and Education (GI-CoRE), Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lalonde A, Winey B, Verburg J, Paganetti H, Sharp GC. Evaluation of CBCT scatter correction using deep convolutional neural networks for head and neck adaptive proton therapy. Phys Med Biol 2020; 65. [DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab9fcb] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2020] [Accepted: 06/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
|
12
|
Jiří K, Vladimír V, Michal A, Matěj N, Silvia S, Pavel V, Kateřina D, Jana P, Barbora O, Eliška R, Petr L, Matěj P, Alexander G, Jozef R. Proton pencil-beam scanning radiotherapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal cancer: dosimetric parameters and 2-year results. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 278:763-769. [PMID: 32623508 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-06175-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2020] [Accepted: 06/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Patients with nasopharyngeal cancer are candidates for proton radiotherapy due to large and comprehensive target volumes, and the necessity for sparing of healthy tissues. The aim of this work is to evaluate treatment outcome and toxicity profile of patients treated with proton pencil-beam scanning radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between Jan 2013 and June 2018, 40 patients were treated for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) with IMPT (proton radiotherapy with modulated intensity). Median age was 47 years and the majority of patients had locally advanced tumors (stage 2-8 patients. (20%); stage 3-18 patients (45%); stage 4A-10 patients. (25%); stage 4B-4 patients. (10%). Median of total dose was 74 GyE (70-76 GyE) in 37 fractions (35-38). Bilateral neck irradiation was used in all cases. Concomitant chemotherapy was applied in 34 cases. (85%). Median follow-up time was 24 (1.5-62) months. RESULTS Two-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local control (LC) were 80%, 75%, and 84%, respectively. Acute toxicity was generally mild despite large target volumes and concurrent application of chemotherapy with skin toxicity and dysphagia reported as the most frequent acute side effects. The insertion of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrectomy (PEG) was necessary in four cases (10%). Serious late toxicity (G > 3. RTOG) was observed in two patients (5%) (dysphagia and brain necrosis). CONCLUSION IMPT for nasopharyngeal cancer patients is feasible with mild acute toxicity. Treatment outcomes are promising despite the high percentage of advanced disease in this group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kubeš Jiří
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
- Department of Oncology, 1st Faculty of Medicine, General University Hospital, Charles University, Kateřinská, 32 121 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic
- Department of Oncology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague and Motol University Hospital, Kateřinská, 32 121 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic
- Department of Health Care Disciplines and Population Protection, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University, Sítná square 3105, 272 01, Kladno, Czech Republic
| | - Vondráček Vladimír
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
- Department of Health Care Disciplines and Population Protection, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University, Sítná square 3105, 272 01, Kladno, Czech Republic
| | - Andrlik Michal
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic.
- Department of Health Care Disciplines and Population Protection, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University, Sítná square 3105, 272 01, Kladno, Czech Republic.
| | - Navrátil Matěj
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
- Department of Health Care Disciplines and Population Protection, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University, Sítná square 3105, 272 01, Kladno, Czech Republic
| | - Sláviková Silvia
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
| | - Vítek Pavel
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
- Department of Oncology, 1st Faculty of Medicine, General University Hospital, Charles University, Kateřinská, 32 121 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic
- Department of Oncology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague and Motol University Hospital, Kateřinská, 32 121 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic
| | - Dědečková Kateřina
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
- Department of Oncology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague and Motol University Hospital, Kateřinská, 32 121 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic
| | - Prausová Jana
- Department of Oncology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Prague and Motol University Hospital, Kateřinská, 32 121 08, Praha 2, Czech Republic
| | - Ondrová Barbora
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
| | - Rotnáglová Eliška
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
| | - Lukeš Petr
- Proton Therapy Center Czech, Budínova 1a, 18000, Prague 8, Czech Republic
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, V Úvalu 84, 150 06, Prague 5, Czech Republic
| | - Patzelt Matěj
- Department of Medical Biophysics and Informatics, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Praha 10 Ruská 87, 100 00, Prague, Czech Republic
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Ruská 87, 100 00, Praha 10, Czech Republic
| | - Grebenyuk Alexander
- Department of Health Protection and Disaster Medicine, Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Lva Tolstogo 6-8, 197020, Saint Petersburg, Russia
| | - Rosina Jozef
- Department of Medical Biophysics and Informatics, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Praha 10 Ruská 87, 100 00, Prague, Czech Republic
- Department of Health Care Disciplines and Population Protection, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering, Czech Technical University, Sítná square 3105, 272 01, Kladno, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Single institution implementation of permanent 131Cs interstitial brachytherapy for previously irradiated patients with resectable recurrent head and neck carcinoma. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2019; 11:227-234. [PMID: 31435429 PMCID: PMC6701381 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2019.85778] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2018] [Accepted: 05/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Permanent interstitial brachytherapy is an appealing treatment modality for patients with locoregional recurrent, resectable head and neck carcinoma (HNC), having previously received radiation. Cesium-131 (131Cs) is a permanent implant brachytherapy isotope, with a low average photon energy of 30 keV and a short half-life of 9.7 days. Exposure to medical staff and family members is low; patient isolation and patient room shielding are not required. This work presents a single institution’s implementation process of utilizing an intraoperative, permanent 131Cs implant for patients with completely resected recurrent HNC. Material and methods Fifteen patients receiving 131Cs permanent seed brachytherapy were included in this analysis. The process of pre-planning, selecting the dose prescription, seed ordering, intraoperative procedures, post-implant planning, and radiation safety protocols are described. Results Tumor volumes were contoured on the available preoperative PET/CT scans and a pre-implant treatment plan was created using uniform source strength and uniform 1 cm seed spacing. Implants were performed intraoperatively, following tumor resection. In five of the fifteen cases, intraoperative findings necessitated a change from the planned number of seeds and recalculation of the pre-implant plan. The average prescription dose was 56.1 ±6.6 Gy (range, 40-60 Gy). The average seed strength used was 2.2 ±0.2 U (3.5 ±0.3 mCi). Patients returned to a recovery room on a standard surgical floor and remained inpatients, without radiation safety restrictions, based on standard surgical recovery protocols. A post-implant treatment plan was generated based on immediate post-operative CT imaging to verify the seed distribution and confirm delivery of the prescription dose. Patients were provided educational information regarding radiation safety recommendations. Conclusions Cesium-131 interstitial brachytherapy is feasible and does not pose major radiation safety concerns; it should be considered as a treatment option for previously irradiated patients with recurrent, resectable HNC.
Collapse
|
14
|
Cubillos-Mesías M, Troost EG, Lohaus F, Agolli L, Rehm M, Richter C, Stützer K. Including anatomical variations in robust optimization for head and neck proton therapy can reduce the need of adaptation. Radiother Oncol 2019; 131:127-134. [DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.12.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2018] [Revised: 10/29/2018] [Accepted: 12/05/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
15
|
Blanchard P, Gunn GB, Lin A, Foote RL, Lee NY, Frank SJ. Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancers. Semin Radiat Oncol 2018; 28:53-63. [PMID: 29173756 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2017.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Because of its sharp lateral penumbra and steep distal fall-off, proton therapy offers dosimetric advantages over photon therapy. In head and neck cancer, proton therapy has been used for decades in the treatment of skull-base tumors. In recent years the use of proton therapy has been extended to numerous other disease sites, including nasopharynx, oropharynx, nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses, periorbital tumors, skin, and salivary gland, or to reirradiation. The aim of this review is to present the physical properties and dosimetric benefit of proton therapy over advanced photon therapy; to summarize the clinical benefit described for each disease site; and to discuss issues of patient selection and cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pierre Blanchard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - Gary Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Alexander Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Robert L Foote
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Cubillos-Mesías M, Baumann M, Troost EGC, Lohaus F, Löck S, Richter C, Stützer K. Impact of robust treatment planning on single- and multi-field optimized plans for proton beam therapy of unilateral head and neck target volumes. Radiat Oncol 2017; 12:190. [PMID: 29183377 PMCID: PMC5706329 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-017-0931-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2017] [Accepted: 11/22/2017] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Proton beam therapy is promising for the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC), but it is sensitive to uncertainties in patient positioning and particle range. Studies have shown that the planning target volume (PTV) concept may not be sufficient to ensure robustness of the target coverage. A few planning studies have considered irradiation of unilateral HNC targets with protons, but they have only taken into account the dose on the nominal plan, without considering anatomy changes occurring during the treatment course. METHODS Four pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy plans were calculated for 8 HNC patients with unilateral target volumes: single-field (SFO) and multi-field optimized (MFO) plans, either using the PTV concept or clinical target volume (CTV)-based robust optimization. The dose was recalculated on computed tomography (CT) scans acquired during the treatment course. Doses to target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) were compared for the nominal plans, cumulative doses considering anatomical changes, and additional setup and range errors in each fraction. If required, the treatment plan was adapted, and the dose was compared with the non-adapted plan. RESULTS All nominal plans fulfilled the clinical specifications for target coverage, but significantly higher doses on the ipsilateral parotid gland were found for both SFO approaches. MFO PTV-based plans had the lowest robustness against range and setup errors. During the treatment course, the influence of the anatomical variation on the dose has shown to be patient specific, mostly independent of the chosen planning approach. Nine plans in four patients required adaptation, which led to a significant improvement of the target coverage and a slight reduction in the OAR dose in comparison to the cumulative dose without adaptation. CONCLUSIONS The use of robust MFO optimization is recommended for ensuring plan robustness and reduced doses in the ipsilateral parotid gland. Anatomical changes occurring during the treatment course might degrade the target coverage and increase the dose in the OARs, independent of the chosen planning approach. For some patients, a plan adaptation may be required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Macarena Cubillos-Mesías
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Michael Baumann
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
| | - Esther G. C. Troost
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), partner site Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Fabian Lohaus
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christian Richter
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| | - Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay – National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden – Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany
- Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology – OncoRay, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Grau C, Høyer M, Poulsen PR, Muren LP, Korreman SS, Tanderup K, Lindegaard JC, Alsner J, Overgaard J. Rethink radiotherapy - BIGART 2017. Acta Oncol 2017; 56:1341-1352. [PMID: 29148908 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2017.1371326] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Cai Grau
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Morten Høyer
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Ludvig Paul Muren
- Department of Medical Physics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Kari Tanderup
- Department of Medical Physics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Jan Alsner
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Jens Overgaard
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Berger T, Petersen JBB, Lindegaard JC, Fokdal LU, Tanderup K. Impact of bowel gas and body outline variations on total accumulated dose with intensity-modulated proton therapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients. Acta Oncol 2017; 56:1472-1478. [PMID: 28931343 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2017.1376753] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Density changes occurring during fractionated radiotherapy in the pelvic region may degrade proton dose distributions. The aim of the study was to quantify the dosimetric impact of gas cavities and body outline variations. MATERIAL AND METHODS Seven patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) were analyzed through a total of 175 daily cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. Four-beams intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) dose plans were generated targeting the internal target volume (ITV) composed of: primary tumor, elective and pathological nodes. The planned dose was 45 Gy [Relative-Biological-Effectiveness-weighted (RBE)] in 25 fractions and simultaneously integrated boosts of pathologic lymph nodes were 55-57.5 Gy (RBE). In total, 475 modified CTs were generated to evaluate the effect of: 1/gas cavities, 2/outline variations and 3/the two combined. The anatomy of each fraction was simulated by propagating gas cavities contours and body outlines from each daily CBCT to the pCT. Hounsfield units corresponding to gas and fat were assigned to the propagated contours. D98 (least dose received by the hottest 98% of the volume) and D99.9 for targets and V43Gy(RBE) (volume receiving ≥43 Gy(RBE)) for organs at risk (OARs) were recalculated on each modified CT, and total dose was evaluated through dose volume histogram (DVH) addition across all fractions. RESULTS Weight changes during radiotherapy were between -3.1% and 1.2%. Gas cavities and outline variations induced a median [range] dose degradation for ITV45 of 1.0% [0.5-3.5%] for D98 and 2.1% [0.8-6.4%] for D99.9. Outline variations had larger dosimetric impact than gas cavities. Worst nodal dose degradation was 2.0% for D98 and 2.3% for D99.9. The impact on bladder, bowel and rectum was limited with V43Gy(RBE) variations ≤3.5 cm3. CONCLUSION Bowel gas cavities and outline variations had minor impact on accumulated dose in targets and OAR of four-field IMPT in a LACC population of moderate weight changes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas Berger
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | | | | | - Kari Tanderup
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
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
|
20
|
Stützer K, Jakobi A, Bandurska-Luque A, Barczyk S, Arnsmeyer C, Löck S, Richter C. Potential proton and photon dose degradation in advanced head and neck cancer patients by intratherapy changes. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2017; 18:104-113. [PMID: 28921843 PMCID: PMC5689930 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12189] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2017] [Revised: 07/28/2017] [Accepted: 08/21/2017] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Evaluation of dose degradation by anatomic changes for head‐and‐neck cancer (HNC) intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) relative to intensity‐modulated photon therapy (IMRT) and identification of potential indicators for IMPT treatment plan adaptation. Methods For 31 advanced HNC datasets, IMPT and IMRT plans were recalculated on a computed tomography scan (CT) taken after about 4 weeks of therapy. Dose parameter changes were determined for the organs at risk (OARs) spinal cord, brain stem, parotid glands, brachial plexus, and mandible, for the clinical target volume (CTV) and the healthy tissue outside planning target volume (PTV). Correlation of dose degradation with target volume changes and quality of rigid CT matching was investigated. Results Recalculated IMPT dose distributions showed stronger degradation than the IMRT doses. OAR analysis revealed significant changes in parotid median dose (IMPT) and near maximum dose (D1ml) of spinal cord (IMPT, IMRT) and mandible (IMPT). OAR dose parameters remained lower in IMPT cases. CTV coverage (V95%) and overdose (V107%) deteriorated for IMPT plans to (93.4 ± 5.4)% and (10.6 ± 12.5)%, while those for IMRT plans remained acceptable. Recalculated plans showed similarly decreased PTV conformity, but considerable hotspots, also outside the PTV, emerged in IMPT cases. Lower CT matching quality was significantly correlated with loss of PTV conformity (IMPT, IMRT), CTV homogeneity and coverage (IMPT). Target shrinkage correlated with increased dose in brachial plexus (IMRT, IMPT), hotspot generation outside the PTV (IMPT) and lower PTV conformity (IMRT). Conclusions The study underlines the necessity of precise positioning and monitoring of anatomy changes, especially in IMPT which might require adaptation more often. Since OAR doses remained typically below constraints, IMPT plan adaptation will be indicated by target dose degradations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Bautzner Landstr. 400, 01328, Dresden, Germany
| | - Annika Jakobi
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Bautzner Landstr. 400, 01328, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - Anna Bandurska-Luque
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Barczyk
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - Carolin Arnsmeyer
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Bautzner Landstr. 400, 01328, Dresden, Germany
| | - Christian Richter
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Fetscherstr. 74, PF 41, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Bautzner Landstr. 400, 01328, Dresden, Germany.,Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Germany.,German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Dresden, Germany and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69192, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Blanchard P, Frank SJ. [Proton therapy for head and neck cancers]. Cancer Radiother 2017; 21:515-520. [PMID: 28869195 DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2017.06.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2017] [Revised: 06/27/2017] [Accepted: 06/30/2017] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
The absence of exit dose and the sharp lateral penumbra are key assets for proton therapy, which are responsible for its dosimetric superiority over advanced photon radiotherapy. Dosimetric comparisons have consistently shown a reduction of the integral dose and the dose to organs at risk favouring intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) over intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The structures that benefit the most of these dosimetric improvements in head and neck cancers are the anterior oral cavity, the posterior fossa, the visual apparatus and swallowing structures. A number of publications have concluded that these dosimetric differences actually translate into reduced toxicities with IMPT, for example with regards to reduced weight loss or need for feeding tube. Patient survival is usually similar to IMRT series, except in base of skull or sinonasal malignancies, where a survival advantage of IMPT could exist. The goals of the present review is to describe the major characteristics of proton therapy, to analyse the clinical data with regards to head and neck cancer patients, and to highlight the issue of patient selection and physical and biological uncertainties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Blanchard
- Department of radiation oncology, MD Anderson cancer center, the university of Texas, Houston, Texas, États-Unis; Département de radiothérapie, Gustave-Roussy cancer campus, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94800 Villejuif, France.
| | - S J Frank
- Department of radiation oncology, MD Anderson cancer center, the university of Texas, Houston, Texas, États-Unis
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Kurz C, Kamp F, Park YK, Zöllner C, Rit S, Hansen D, Podesta M, Sharp GC, Li M, Reiner M, Hofmaier J, Neppl S, Thieke C, Nijhuis R, Ganswindt U, Belka C, Winey BA, Parodi K, Landry G. Investigating deformable image registration and scatter correction for CBCT-based dose calculation in adaptive IMPT. Med Phys 2016; 43:5635. [DOI: 10.1118/1.4962933] [Citation(s) in RCA: 70] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
|
23
|
Kurz C, Nijhuis R, Reiner M, Ganswindt U, Thieke C, Belka C, Parodi K, Landry G. Feasibility of automated proton therapy plan adaptation for head and neck tumors using cone beam CT images. Radiat Oncol 2016; 11:64. [PMID: 27129305 PMCID: PMC4851791 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-016-0641-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2015] [Accepted: 04/27/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) of head and neck (H&N) tumors may benefit from plan adaptation to correct for the dose perturbations caused by weight loss and tumor volume changes observed in these patients. As cone beam CT (CBCT) is increasingly considered in proton therapy, it may be possible to use available CBCT images following intensity correction for plan adaptation. This is the first study exploring IMPT plan adaptation on CBCT images corrected and delineated by deformable image registration of the planning CT (pCT) to the CBCT, yielding a virtual CT (vCT). Methods A Morphons algorithm was used to deform the pCTs and corresponding delineations of 9 H&N cancer patients to a weekly CBCT acquired within ±3 days of a control replanning CT scan (rpCT). The IMPT treatment plans were adapted using the vCT and the adapted and original plans were recalculated on the rpCT for dose/volume parameter evaluation of the impact of adaptation. Results On the rpCT, the adapted plans were equivalent to the original plans in terms of target volumes D95 and V95, but showed a significant reduction of D2 in these volumes. OAR doses were mostly equivalent or reduced. In particular, the adapted plans did not reduce parotid gland Dmean, but the dose to the optical system. For three patients the spinal cord or brain stem received higher, though well below tolerance, maximum dose. Subsequent tightening of the treatment planning constraints for these OARs on new vCT-adapted plans did not degrade target coverage and yielded pCT equivalent plans on the vCT. Conclusions An offline automated procedure to generate an adapted IMPT plan on CBCT images was developed and investigated. When evaluating the adapted plan on a control rpCT we observed reduced D2 in target volumes as major improvement. OAR sparing was only partially improved by the procedure. Despite potential limitations in the accuracy of the vCT approach, an improved quality of the adapted plans could be achieved. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-016-0641-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Kurz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Reinoud Nijhuis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Michael Reiner
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Ute Ganswindt
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Claus Belka
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Katia Parodi
- Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Guillaume Landry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. .,Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Unilateral and bilateral neck SIB for head and neck cancer patients : Intensity-modulated proton therapy, tomotherapy, and RapidArc. Strahlenther Onkol 2016; 192:232-9. [PMID: 26852243 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-016-0945-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2015] [Accepted: 01/14/2016] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
AIM To compare simultaneous integrated boost plans for intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), helical tomotherapy (HT), and RapidArc therapy (RA) for patients with head and neck cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 20 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck received definitive chemoradiation with bilateral (n = 14) or unilateral (n = 6) neck irradiation and were planned using IMPT, HT, and RA with 54.4, 60.8, and 70.4 GyE/Gy in 32 fractions. Dose distributions, coverage, conformity, homogeneity to planning target volumes (PTV)s and sparing of organs at risk and normal tissue were compared. RESULTS All unilateral and bilateral plans showed excellent PTV coverage and acceptable dose conformity. For unilateral treatment, IMPT delivered substantially lower mean doses to contralateral salivary glands (< 0.001-1.1 Gy) than both rotational techniques did (parotid gland: 6-10 Gy; submandibular gland: 15-20 Gy). Regarding the sparing of classical organs at risk for bilateral treatment, IMPT and HT were similarly excellent and RA was satisfactory. CONCLUSION For unilateral neck irradiation, IMPT may minimize the dry mouth risk in this subgroup but showed no advantage over HT for bilateral neck treatment regarding classical organ-at-risk sparing. All methods satisfied modern standards regarding toxicity and excellent target coverage for unilateral and bilateral treatment of head and neck cancer at the planning level.
Collapse
|
25
|
Jakobi A, Lühr A, Stützer K, Bandurska-Luque A, Löck S, Krause M, Baumann M, Perrin R, Richter C. Increase in Tumor Control and Normal Tissue Complication Probabilities in Advanced Head-and-Neck Cancer for Dose-Escalated Intensity-Modulated Photon and Proton Therapy. Front Oncol 2015; 5:256. [PMID: 26636038 PMCID: PMC4653282 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2015.00256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2015] [Accepted: 11/06/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Presently used radiochemotherapy regimens result in moderate local control rates for patients with advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Dose escalation (DE) may be an option to improve patient outcome, but may also increase the risk of toxicities in healthy tissue. The presented treatment planning study evaluated the feasibility of two DE levels for advanced HNSCC patients, planned with either intensity-modulated photon therapy (IMXT) or proton therapy (IMPT). MATERIALS AND METHODS For 45 HNSCC patients, IMXT and IMPT treatment plans were created including DE via a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in the high-risk volume, while maintaining standard fractionation with 2 Gy per fraction in the remaining target volume. Two DE levels for the SIB were compared: 2.3 and 2.6 Gy. Treatment plan evaluation included assessment of tumor control probabilities (TCP) and normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP). RESULTS An increase of approximately 10% in TCP was estimated between the DE levels. A pronounced high-dose rim surrounding the SIB volume was identified in IMXT treatment. Compared to IMPT, this extra dose slightly increased the TCP values and to a larger extent the NTCP values. For both modalities, the higher DE level led only to a small increase in NTCP values (mean differences <2%) in all models, except for the risk of aspiration, which increased on average by 8 and 6% with IMXT and IMPT, respectively, but showed a considerable patient dependence. CONCLUSION Both DE levels appear applicable to patients with IMXT and IMPT since all calculated NTCP values, except for one, increased only little for the higher DE level. The estimated TCP increase is of relevant magnitude. The higher DE schedule needs to be investigated carefully in the setting of a prospective clinical trial, especially regarding toxicities caused by high local doses that lack a sound dose-response description, e.g., ulcers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annika Jakobi
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| | - Armin Lühr
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) , Heidelberg , Germany
| | - Kristin Stützer
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| | - Anna Bandurska-Luque
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden , Dresden , Germany
| | - Steffen Löck
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| | - Mechthild Krause
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) , Heidelberg , Germany ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| | - Michael Baumann
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) , Heidelberg , Germany ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| | - Rosalind Perrin
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| | - Christian Richter
- OncoRay - National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) , Heidelberg , Germany ; Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden , Dresden , Germany ; Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden - Rossendorf , Dresden , Germany
| |
Collapse
|