A Planning Comparison of IMRT vs. Pencil Beam Scanning for Deep Inspiration Breath Hold Lung Cancers

Deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) has dosimetric advantages for lung cancer patients treated with external beam therapy, but is difficult for many patients to perform. Proton therapy permits sparing of the downstream organs at risk (OAR). We compared conventionally fractionated proton (p) and photon(x) plans on both free breathing (FB) and DIBH planning CTs to determine the effect of DIBH with proton therapy. We evaluated 24 plans from 6 lung cancer patients treated with photon DIBH on a prospective protocol. All patients were re-planned using pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy. New plans were generated for FB datasets with both modalities. All plans were renormalized to 60 Gy. We evaluated dosimetric parameters for heart, lung and esophagus. We also compared FB_p to DIBH_x parameters to quantify how FB_p plans compare to DIBH_x plans. Significant differences were found for lung metrics V20 and mean lung dose between FB and DIBH plans regardless of treatment modality. Furthermore, lung metrics for FB_p were comparable or superior to DIBH_x, suggesting that FB protons may be a viable alternative for those patients that cannot perform DIBH with IMRT. The heart dose metrics were significantly different for the 5 out of 6 patients where the PTV overlapped the heart as DIBH moved heart out of the high dose volume. Heart dose metrics were further reduced by proton therapy. DIBH offers similar relative advantages for lung sparing for PBS as it does for IMRT but the magnitude of the DIBH related gains in OAR sparing were smaller for PBS than IMRT. FB_p plans offer similar or better lung and heart sparing compared to DIBH_x plans. For IMRT patients who have difficulty performing DIBH, FB protons may offer an alternative.

A treatment planning comparison of contemporary photon-based radiation techniques for breast cancer

Background and purpose

Adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) of the whole breast (WB) is still the standard treatment for early breast cancer. A variety of radiation techniques is currently available according to different delivery strategies. This study aims to provide a comparison of six treatment planning strategies commonly adopted for breast-conserving adjuvant RT and to use the Pareto concept in an attempt to assess the degree of plan optimization.

Materials and methods

Two groups of six left- and five right-sided cases with different dose prescriptions were involved (22 patients in total). Field-in-Field (FiF), two and four Fields static-IMRT (sIMRT-2f and sIMRT-4f), Volumetric-Modulated-Arc-Therapy (VMAT), Helical Tomotherapy (HT) and Static-Angles Tomotherapy (TomoDirect™ – TD) were planned. Dose volume constraints were taken from the RTOG protocol 1005. Pareto fronts were built for a selected case to evaluate the reliability of the plan optimization process.

Results

The best target dose coverage was observed for TD able to improve significantly (p < 0.01) the V95% in a range varying from 1.2% to 7.5% compared to other techniques. The V105% was significantly reduced up to 2% for HT (p < 0.05) although FiF and VMAT produced similar values. For the ipsilateral lung, V5Gy, V10Gy and Dmean were significantly lower than all other techniques (p < 0.02) for TD while the lowest value of V20Gy was observed for HT. The maximum dose to contralateral breast was significantly lowest for TD (p < 0.02) and for FiF (p < 0.05). Minor differences were observed for the heart in left-sided patients. Plans for all tested techniques were found to lie on their respective Pareto fronts.

Conclusions

Overall, TD provided significantly better results in terms of target coverage and dose sparing of ipsilateral lung with respect to all other evaluated techniques. It also significantly minimized dose to contralateral breast together with FiF. Pareto front analysis confirmed the reliability of the optimization for a selected case.

Assessment of improved organ at risk sparing for meningioma: light ion beam therapy as boost versus sole treatment option

PURPOSE

To compare photons, protons and carbon ions and their combinations for treatment of atypical and anaplastical skull base meningioma.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two planning target volumes (PTVinitial/PTVboost) were delineated for 10 patients (prescribed doses 50 Gy(RBE) and 10 Gy(RBE)). Plans for intensity modulated photon (IMXT), proton (IMPT) and carbon ion therapy ((12)C) were generated assuming a non-gantry scenario for particles. The following combinations were compared: IMXT+IMXT/IMPT/(12)C; IMPT+IMPT/(12)C; and (12)C+(12)C. Plan quality was evaluated by target conformity and homogeneity (CI, HI), V95%, D2% and D50% and dose-volume-histogram (DVH) parameters for organs-at-risk (OAR). If dose escalation was possible, it was performed until OAR tolerance levels were reached.

RESULTS

CI was worst for IMXT. HI<0.05±0.01 for (12)C was significantly better than for IMXT. For all treatment options dose escalation above 60 Gy(RBE) was possible for four patients, but impossible for six patients. Compared to IMXT+IMXT, ion beam therapy showed an improved sparing for most OARs, e.g. using protons and carbon ions D50% was reduced by more than 50% for the ipsilateral eye and the brainstem.

CONCLUSION

Highly conformal IMPT and (12)C plans could be generated with a non-gantry scenario. Improved OAR sparing favors both sole (12)C and/or IMPT plans.