Pencil-beam scanning proton therapy for anal cancer: a dosimetric comparison with intensity-modulated radiotherapy

被引:23
|
作者
Ojerholm, Eric [1 ]
Kirk, Maura L. [1 ]
Thompson, Reid F. [1 ]
Zhai, Huifang [1 ]
Metz, James M. [1 ]
Both, Stefan [1 ]
Ben-Josef, Edgar [1 ]
Plastaras, John P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Penn, Dept Radiat Oncol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
ACUTE HEMATOLOGIC TOXICITY; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; DOSE-VOLUME RELATIONSHIPS; SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA; SMALL-BOWEL TOXICITY; RADIATION-THERAPY; RECTAL-CANCER; CONCURRENT CHEMOTHERAPY; CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY;
D O I
10.3109/0284186X.2014.1002570
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy cures most patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma at the cost of significant treatment-related toxicities. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) reduces side effects compared to older techniques, but whether proton beam therapy (PBT) offers additional advantages is unclear. Material and methods. Eight patients treated with PBT for anal cancer were chosen for this study. We conducted detailed plan comparisons between pencil-beam scanning PBT via two posterior oblique fields and seven-field IMRT. Cumulative dose-volume histograms were analyzed by Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and plan delivery robustness was assessed via verification computed tomography (CT) scans obtained during treatment. Results. Compared to IMRT, PBT reduced low dose radiation (<= 30 Gy) to the small bowel, total pelvic bone marrow, external genitalia, femoral heads, and bladder (all p < 0.05) without compromising target coverage. For PBT versus IMRT, mean small bowel volume receiving 15 Gy (V-15) was 81 versus 151 cm(3), mean external genitalia V-20 was 14 versus 40%, and mean total pelvic bone marrow V-15 was 66 versus 83% (all p = 0.008). The lumbosacral bone marrow dose was higher with PBT due to beam geometry. PBT was delivered with <= 1.3% interfraction deviation in the dose received by 98% of the clinical target volumes. Conclusion. Pencil-beam scanning PBT is clinically feasible and can be robustly delivered for anal cancer patients. Compared with IMRT, PBT reduces low dose radiation to important organs at risk in this population. While the clinical benefit of these differences remains to be shown, existing data suggest that limiting low dose to the small bowel and pelvic bone marrow may reduce treatment toxicity.
引用
收藏
页码:1209 / 1217
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy in cervical cancer
    Liu, J.
    Zhu, L.
    Li, S.
    Gao, S.
    Yan, J.
    Xie, L.
    Hou, Z.
    Zhou, X.
    Liu, B.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2019, 133 : S1005 - S1006
  • [22] Dosimetric Comparison of Patient Alignment Techniques in Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer
    Remick, J.
    Snider, J. W., III
    Diwanji, T.
    Houser, T.
    Langner, U.
    Zhu, M.
    Bentzen, S. M.
    Feigenberg, S. J.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2017, 99 (02): : E714 - E714
  • [23] Dosimetric Comparison of Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy and 3D Proton Radiotherapy with Passively Scattered Beams for Primary Prostate Cancer
    Dimofte, A.
    James, P.
    Kassaee, A.
    McDonough, J.
    Tochner, Z.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06)
  • [24] Dosimetric Comparison of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Hybrid Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy/Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Techniques for Right Breast Cancer
    Liu, Yi-Chi
    Chang, Hung-Ming
    Lin, Hsin-Hon
    Lu, Chia-Chun
    Lai, Lu-Han
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2020, 9 (12) : 1 - 14
  • [25] What is the appropriate size criterion for proton radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma? A dosimetric comparison of spot-scanning proton therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy
    Toramatsu, Chie
    Katoh, Norio
    Shimizu, Shinichi
    Nihongi, Hideaki
    Matsuura, Taeko
    Takao, Seishin
    Miyamoto, Naoki
    Suzuki, Ryusuke
    Sutherland, Kenneth
    Kinoshita, Rumiko
    Onimaru, Rikiya
    Ishikawa, Masayori
    Umegaki, Kikuo
    Shirato, Hiroki
    [J]. RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8
  • [26] Dose-volume comparison of proton therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer
    Vargas, Carlos
    Fryer, Amber
    Mahajan, Chaitali
    Indelicato, Daniel
    Horne, David
    Chellini, Angela
    Mckenzie, Craig
    Lawlor, Paula
    Henderson, Randal
    Li, Zuofeng
    Lin, Liyong
    Olivier, Kenneth
    Keole, Sameer
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 70 (03): : 744 - 751
  • [27] Golden beam data for proton pencil-beam scanning
    Clasie, Benjamin
    Depauw, Nicolas
    Fransen, Maurice
    Goma, Carles
    Panahandeh, Hamid Reza
    Seco, Joao
    Flanz, Jacob B.
    Kooy, Hanne M.
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2012, 57 (05): : 1147 - 1158
  • [28] Radiotherapy for Anal Cancer Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Future Directions
    Castaneda, Serguei A.
    Romak, Lindsay B.
    [J]. SURGICAL ONCOLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2017, 26 (03) : 467 - +
  • [29] Dosimetric Comparison of Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy in Craniospinal Radiotherapy of Childhood
    Ozer, Elif Eda
    Coban, Yasin
    Cifter, Fulya
    Karacam, Songul
    Uzel, Omer
    Turkan, Tahir Sedat
    [J]. TURK ONKOLOJI DERGISI-TURKISH JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY, 2021, 36 (01): : 96 - 103
  • [30] Study On Secondary Cancer Risk Induced by Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Passive Proton Beam Therapy
    Ahn, Sung Hwan
    Kim, Jingsung
    Cheong, Minho
    Shin, Dong Ho
    Park, Sung Yong
    Lee, Se Byeong
    Yoon, Myounggeun
    Kim, Woojin
    Park, Seokhwan
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (06) : 2630 - +