ART for head and neck patients: On the difference between VMAT and IMPT

被引:29
|
作者
Gora, Joanna [1 ,2 ]
Kuess, Peter [1 ,3 ]
Stock, Markus [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Andrzejewski, Piotr [1 ,3 ]
Knaeusl, Barbara [1 ,3 ]
Paskeviciute, Brigita [1 ]
Altorjai, Gabriela [1 ,3 ]
Georg, Dietmar [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Vienna, AKH Wien, Dept Radiat Oncol, Vienna, Austria
[2] EBG MedAustron GmbH, A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
[3] Med Univ Vienna, Christian Doppler Lab Med Radiat Res Radiat Oncol, Vienna, Austria
关键词
MODULATED PROTON THERAPY; LOCALLY ADVANCED HEAD; DEFORMABLE REGISTRATION; ADAPTIVE RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER; UNCERTAINTIES; IMRT; PROSTATE; TARGETS; TUMORS;
D O I
10.3109/0284186X.2015.1028590
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Anatomical changes in the head-and-neck (H&N) region during the course of treatment can cause deteriorated dose distributions. Different replanning strategies were investigated for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). Material and methods. For six H&N patients two repeated computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) (CT1/MR1 at week 2 and CT2,/MR2 at week 4) scans were acquired additionally to the initial planning CT/MR. Organs-at-risk (OARs) and three targets (CTV70Gy, CTV63Gy, CTV56Gy) were delineated on MRs and transferred to respective CT data set. Simultaneously integrated boost plans were created using VMAT (two arcs) and IMPT (four beams). To assess the need of replanning the initial VMAT and IMPT plans were recalculated on repeated CTs. Furthermore, VMAT and IMPT plans were replanned on the repeated CTs. A Demon algorithm was used for deformable registration of the repeated CTs with the initial CT and utilized for dose accumulation. Total dose estimations were performed to compare ART versus standard treatment strategies. Results. Dosimetric evaluation of recalculated plans on CT1 and CT2 showed increasing OAR doses for both, VMAT and IMPT. The target coverage of recalculated VMAT plans was considered acceptable in three cases, while for all IMPT plans it dropped. Adaptation of the treatment reduced D-2% for brainstem by 6.7 Gy for VMAT and by 8 Gy for IMPT, for particular patients. These D-2% reductions were reaching 9 Gy and 14 Gy for the spinal cord. ART improved target dose homogeneity, especially for protons, i.e. D-2% decreased by up to 8 Gy while D-98% increased by 1.2 Gy. Conclusion. ART showed benefits for both modalities. However, as IMPT is more conformal, the magnitude of dosimetric changes was more pronounced compared to VMAT. Large anatomic variations had a severe impact on treatment plan quality for both VMAT and IMPT. ART is justified in those cases irrespective of treatment modalities.
引用
收藏
页码:1166 / 1174
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A comparison of swallowing sparing IMPT and VMAT for head and neck cancer
    Furre, T.
    Rekstad, B.
    Ramberg, C.
    Hellebust, T.
    Malinen, E.
    Dale, E.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2018, 127 : S489 - S489
  • [2] Current status of IMPT versus VMAT in head and neck cancer
    Krengli, M.
    Pisani, C.
    Franco, P.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2021, 161 : S351 - S352
  • [3] IMPT & VMAT sensitivity to anatomical variations - replanning strategies for advanced head and neck cancer
    Gora, J.
    Kuess, P.
    Stock, M.
    Altorjai, G.
    Knaeusl, B.
    Georg, D.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2014, 111 : S92 - S92
  • [4] Robust optimization of VMAT in head and neck patients
    Wagenaar, D.
    Kierkels, R. G. J.
    Free, J.
    Langendijk, J. A.
    Korevaar, E. W.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2017, 123 : S234 - S235
  • [5] Proton therapy of head and neck cancer: comparing PTV-based and robustly optimized IMPT with VMAT
    Almberg, S. S.
    Aarberg, A. E.
    Frengen, J.
    Danielsen, S.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2018, 127 : S488 - S489
  • [6] Optimized VMAT Planning for Patients with Head and Neck Tumors
    Klippel, N.
    Schmuecking, M.
    Geretschlaeger, A.
    Bigler, R.
    Terribilini, D.
    Aebersold, D. M.
    Manser, P.
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2012, 188 : 150 - 150
  • [7] Comparison of Therapy Results between Tomotherapy and VMAT/IMRT for Head and Neck Tumor Patients
    Ott, J.
    Pickhard, A.
    Bier, H. A.
    Wolff, K. -D
    Combs, S. E.
    Pigorsch, S. U.
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2019, 195 : S78 - S78
  • [8] Osteoradionecrosis of the mandible in head and neck cancer patients treated with VMAT
    Munoz Montplet, C.
    Marruecos, J.
    De Pablo, A.
    Jurado Bruggeman, D.
    Romera Martinez, I.
    Onses, A.
    Fuentes, R.
    Vilanova, J. C.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2020, 152 : S449 - S449
  • [9] Dosimetric results and NTCP models comparison between VMAT and IMPT for nasopharyngeal cancer patients
    Ingargiola, Rossana
    Vai, Alessandro
    Iacovelli, Nicola Alessandro
    Cavallo, Anna
    Molinelli, Silvia
    Rossi, Eleonora
    Magro, Giuseppe
    Ronchi, Sara
    Bonora, Maria
    Vischioni, Barbara
    Franceschini, Marzia
    Rancati, Tiziana
    Pignoli, Emanuele
    Ciocca, Mario
    Orlandi, Ester
    ORAL ONCOLOGY, 2021, 118
  • [10] Quality of Head and Neck VMAT Treatment Plans Transferred Between Machines
    Zakariaee, R.
    DeMarco, J.
    Lewis, J.
    Zumsteg, Z.
    Fraass, B.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (06) : E836 - E837