Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy

被引:0
|
作者
Halthore, Aditya [1 ,2 ]
Fellows, Zachary [2 ]
Tran, Anh [2 ]
Deville Jr, Curtiland [1 ,2 ]
Wright, Jean L. [1 ,2 ]
Meyer, Jeffrey [1 ]
Li, Heng [1 ,2 ]
Sheikh, Khadija [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol & Mol Sci, Sch Med, Baltimore, MD USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Proton Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Washington, DC USA
[3] Johns Hopkins Univ, Johns Hopkins Proton Therapy Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol & Mol Radiat Sci, Sch Med, 5255 Loughboro Rd, Washington, DC 20016 USA
关键词
proton; spatial fractionation; GRID; bulky tumors;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To compare spatially fractionated radiation therapy (GRID) treatment planning techniques using proton pencil-beam-scanning (PBS) and photon therapy.Materials and Methods: PBS and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) GRID plans were retrospectively generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. GRID targets were arranged along the long axis of the gross tumor, spaced 2 and 3 cm apart, and treated with a prescription of 18 Gy. PBS plans used 2-to 3-beam multiple-field optimization with robustness evaluation. Dosimetric parameters including peak-to-edge ratio (PEDR), ratio of dose to 90% of the valley to dose to 10% of the peak VPDR(D90/D10), and volume of normal tissue receiving at least 5 Gy (V5) and 10 Gy (V10) were calculated. The peak-to valley dose ratio (PVDR), VPDR(D90/D10), and organ-at-risk doses were prospectively assessed in 2 patients undergoing PBS-GRID with pretreatment quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) scans.Results: PBS and VMAT GRID plans were generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. Gross tumor volume values ranged from 826 to 1468 cm3. Peak-to-edge ratio for PBS was higher than for VMAT for both spacing scenarios (2-cm spacing, P = .02; 3-cm spacing, P = .01). VPDR(D90/D10) for PBS was higher than for VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .004; 3-cm spacing, P = .002). Normal tissue V5 was lower for PBS than for VMAT (2 cm spacing, P = .03; 3-cm spacing, P = .02). Normal tissue mean dose was lower with PBS than with VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .03; 3-cm spacing, P = .02). Two patients treated using PBS GRID and assessed with pretreatment QACT scans demonstrated robust PVDR, VPDR(D90/D10), and organs-at-risk doses.Conclusions: The PEDR was significantly higher for PBS than VMAT plans, indicating lower target edge dose. Normal tissue mean dose was significantly lower with PBS than VMAT. PBS GRID may result in lower normal tissue dose compared with VMAT plans, allowing for further dose escalation in patients with bulky disease.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
    Halthore, Aditya
    Fellows, Zachary
    Tran, Anh
    Deville, Curtiland, Jr.
    Wright, Jean L.
    Meyer, Jeffrey
    Li, Heng
    Sheikh, Khadija
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PARTICLE THERAPY, 2023, 9 (03) : 40 - 49
  • [2] Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy of Bulky Tumors: A Feasibility Study
    Halthore, A. N.
    Fellows, Z.
    Tsien, C.
    Deville, C., Jr.
    Wright, J. L.
    Meyer, J. J.
    Li, H.
    Sheikh, K.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2021, 111 (03): : E523 - E523
  • [3] A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy
    Langner, Ulrich W.
    Mundis, Michelle
    Strauss, Dan
    Zhu, Mingyao
    Mossahebi, Sina
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 19 (01): : 156 - 163
  • [4] Robust Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Treatment Planning for Rectal Cancer Radiation Therapy
    Kiely, Janid Patricia Blanco
    White, Benjamin M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2016, 95 (01): : 208 - 215
  • [5] Proton pencil beam scanning in pediatric posterior fossa tumors: a European treatment planning study
    Toussaint, L.
    Muren, L.
    Cerron Campoo, F.
    Charlwood, F.
    Fager, M.
    Goedgebeur, A.
    Goudjil, F.
    Kristensen, I.
    Laegdsmand, P.
    Mirandola, A.
    Moignier, C.
    Petterson, E.
    Plaude, S.
    Righetto, R.
    Vestergaard, A.
    Matysiak, W.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2023, 182 : S280 - S282
  • [6] Adaptive Planning Workflow in a Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy Center
    Blakey, M.
    Price, S.
    Robison, B.
    Niek, S.
    Moe, S.
    Renegar, J.
    Mark, A.
    Spenser, W.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3282 - 3282
  • [7] Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer
    Dionisi, F.
    Batra, S.
    Kirk, M.
    Both, S.
    Vennarini, S.
    McDonough, J.
    Metz, J. M.
    Plastaras, J. P.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2013, 87 (02): : S341 - S342
  • [8] The dosimetric enhancement of GRID profiles using an external collimator in pencil beam scanning proton therapy
    Smith, Blake R.
    Nelson, Nicholas P.
    Geoghegan, Theodore J.
    Patwardhan, Kaustubh A.
    Hill, Patrick M.
    Yu, Jen
    Gutierrez, Alonso N.
    Allen, Bryan G.
    Hyer, Daniel E.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 49 (04) : 2684 - 2698
  • [9] Validation of automated complex head and neck treatment planning with pencil beam scanning proton therapy
    Hedrick, Samantha Grace
    Petro, Scott
    Ward, Alex
    Morris, Bart
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 23 (02):
  • [10] Robust treatment planning in whole pelvis pencil beam scanning proton therapy for prostate cancer
    Butala, Anish A.
    Ingram, W. Scott
    O'Reilly, Shannon E.
    Hartl, Brett
    Kassaee, Ali
    Deville, Curtiland
    Vapiwala, Neha
    [J]. MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2020, 45 (04) : 334 - 338