Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of dominant intraprostatic lesion: A treament planning comparison

被引:17
|
作者
Fellin, Francesco [1 ]
Azzeroni, Raffaella [2 ]
Maggio, Angelo [2 ]
Lorentini, Stefano [1 ]
Cozzarini, Cesare [2 ]
Di Muzio, Nadia [2 ]
Fiorino, Claudio [2 ]
Calandrino, Riccardo [2 ]
Schwarz, Marco [1 ]
机构
[1] Agenzia Prov Protonterapia, Trento, Italy
[2] Ist Sci San Raffaele, I-20132 Milan, Italy
关键词
Prostate radiotherapy; Protons; Tomotherapy; IMRT; PROSTATE-CANCER; CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY; TISSUE; TUMOR; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2013.02.016
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To compare helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for prostate cancer irradiation while concomitantly boosting dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs). Methods and materials: Treatment plans of seven patients were designed for HT and IMPT (pencil beam size: 3 mm sigma). The prescribed median PTV/DIL doses were 71.4/100 Gy in 28 fractions, while satisfying "safe" dose constraints for organs at risks (OARS) including rectum, bladder, femoral heads, penile bulb and urethra. The planner could further reduce the dose to OARs if PTV/DIL constraints were reached. Results: IMPT achieved better dose conformity (CI = 1.11 vs 1.31, p < 0.05) and coverage (V95% = 97.3% vs 95.3%, p < 0.05) in PTV. Concerning DIL volumes, both techniques delivered the prescribed dose (Dmedian: HT = 100 Gy, IMPT = 102.1 Gy) with similar dose conformity (CI: HT = 1.49, IMPT = 1.44) and same dose homogeneity, D99%, D1%, while satisfying the OARs constraints. Excepting urethra, the sparing of OARS was significantly better with IMPT; in general, the lower the dose, the greater the benefit of IMPT. Normal tissue complication probabilities for the rectum were in favor of IMPT with an absolute reduction of 3-8%, depending on the NTCP model (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Both techniques allowed delivering 100 Gy to DILs, while complying with the OARs constraints. IMPT was superior in sparing OARs for doses up to approximately 70 Gy, with larger benefit at lower doses. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 107 (2013) 207-212
引用
收藏
页码:207 / 212
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] TOMOTHERAPY AND INTENSITY MODULATED PROTON THERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF DOMINANT INTRAPROSTATIC LESION.
    Fellin, F.
    Azzeroni, R.
    Fiorino, C.
    Lorentini, S.
    Schwarz, M.
    Cozzarini, C.
    Di Muzio, N.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2011, 99 : S100 - S101
  • [2] Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of early stage prostate cancer: A treatment planning comparison
    Schwarz, Marco
    Pierelli, Alessio
    Fiorino, Claudio
    Fellin, Francesco
    Cattaneo, Giovanni Mauro
    Cozzarini, Cesare
    Di Muzio, Nadia
    Calandrino, Riccardo
    Widesott, Lamberto
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2011, 98 (01) : 74 - 80
  • [3] Dosimetric Uncertainties in Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion Simultaneous Boost Using Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy
    Zhou, Jun
    Yang, Xiaofeng
    Chang, Chih-Wei
    Tian, Sibo
    Wang, Tonghe
    Lin, Liyong
    Wang, Yinan
    Janopaul-Naylor, James Robert
    Patel, Pretesh
    Demoor, John D.
    Bohannon, Duncan
    Stanforth, Alex
    Eaton, Bree
    McDonald, Mark W.
    Liu, Tian
    Patel, Sagar Anil
    [J]. ADVANCES IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2022, 7 (01)
  • [4] Intensity-modulated proton therapy versus helical tomotherapy in nasopharynx cancer: Planning comparison and NTCP evaluation
    Widesott, Lamberto
    Pierelli, Alessio
    Fiorino, Claudio
    Dell'Oca, Italo
    Broggi, Sara
    Catraneo, Giovanni Mauro
    Di Muzio, Nadia
    Fazio, Ferruccio
    Calandrino, Riccardo
    Schwarz, Marco
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 72 (02): : 589 - 596
  • [5] Online Prediction of Dosimetric Changes in Dominant Intraprostatic Lesion Simultaneous Boost Using Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy
    Zhou, J.
    Tian, S.
    Patel, S. A.
    Janopaul-Naylor, J.
    Chang, C. W.
    Lin, L.
    Jung, J.
    Bohannon, D.
    Demoor, J.
    Godette, K. D.
    Eaton, B. R.
    McDonald, M. W.
    Liu, T.
    Yang, X.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2020, 108 (03): : S170 - S171
  • [6] Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy, Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy, and Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Angiosarcoma of the Scalp
    Mizuno, Tomoki
    Tomita, Natsuo
    Takaoka, Taiki
    Tomida, Masashi
    Fukuma, Hiroshi
    Tsuchiya, Takahiro
    Shibamoto, Yuta
    [J]. TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT, 2021, 20
  • [7] A Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy Versus Intensity Modulated Proton for Lung Cancer
    Mo, X.
    Perumal, K.
    Mackie, R.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (06) : 3836 - 3836
  • [8] Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) vs. helicoidal tomotherapy (HT) in the treatment of nasopharynx cancer: A planning comparison
    Widesott, L.
    Pierelli, A.
    Fiorino, C.
    Dell'Oca, I.
    Cattaneo, G.
    Alber, M.
    Solikup, M.
    Fazio, F.
    Calandrino, R.
    Schwarz, M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2007, 69 (03): : S663 - S663
  • [9] Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Using Static Ports of Tomotherapy: Comparison With the Helical Tomotherapy Mode
    Murai, T.
    Shibamoto, Y.
    Murata, R.
    Manabe, Y.
    Ayakawa, S.
    Sugie, C.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2012, 84 (03): : S854 - S854
  • [10] Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy
    Stuschke, Martin
    Kaiser, Andreas
    Abu-Jawad, Jehad
    Poettgen, Christoph
    Levegruen, Sabine
    Farr, Jonathan
    [J]. RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8