Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of early stage prostate cancer: A treatment planning comparison

被引:28
|
作者
Schwarz, Marco [1 ]
Pierelli, Alessio [2 ]
Fiorino, Claudio [2 ]
Fellin, Francesco [1 ]
Cattaneo, Giovanni Mauro [2 ]
Cozzarini, Cesare [2 ]
Di Muzio, Nadia [2 ]
Calandrino, Riccardo [2 ]
Widesott, Lamberto [1 ]
机构
[1] Agenzia Prov Protonterapia, I-38122 Trento, Italy
[2] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
关键词
IMPT; Tomotherapy; Prostate; Planning comparison; DOSE-ESCALATION TRIAL; X-RAY THERAPY; CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY; IMAGE-GUIDANCE; VOLUME; IMRT; OPTIMIZATION; MULTICENTER; ISSUES; TUMORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2010.10.027
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) on early stage prostate cancer treatments delivered with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in moderate hypofractionation. Material/methods: Eight patients treated with HT were replanned with two-field IMPT (2fIMPT) and five-field IMPT (5fIMPT), using a small pencil beam size (3 mm sigma). The prescribed dose was 74.3 Gy in 28 fractions on PTV1 (prostate) and PTV2 (proximal seminal vesicles), 65.5 Gy on PTV3 (distal seminal vesicles) and on the overlap between rectum and PTVs. Results: IMPT and HT achieved similar target coverage and dose homogeneity, with 5fIMPT providing the best results. The conformity indexes of IMPT were significantly lower for PTV1+2 and PTV3. Above 65 Gy, HT and IMPT were equivalent in the rectum, while IMPT spared the bladder and the penile bulb from 0 to 70 Gy. From 0 up to 60 Gy, IMPT dosimetric values were (much) lower for all OARs except the femur heads, where HT was better than 2fIMPT in the 25-35 Gy dose range. OARs mean doses were typically reduced by 30-50% by IMPT. NTCPs for the rectum were within 1% between the two techniques, except when the endpoint was stool frequency, where IMPT showed a small (though statistically significant) benefit. Conclusions: HT and IMPT produce similar dose distributions in the target volume. The current knowledge on dose-effect relations does not allow to quantify the clinical impact of the large sparing of IMPT at medium-to-low doses. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 98 (2011) 74-80
引用
收藏
页码:74 / 80
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of dominant intraprostatic lesion: A treament planning comparison
    Fellin, Francesco
    Azzeroni, Raffaella
    Maggio, Angelo
    Lorentini, Stefano
    Cozzarini, Cesare
    Di Muzio, Nadia
    Fiorino, Claudio
    Calandrino, Riccardo
    Schwarz, Marco
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2013, 107 (02) : 207 - 212
  • [2] 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
  • [3] 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
  • [4] A comparison of conformal and intensity modulated treatment planning techniques for early prostate cancer
    Vaarkamp, J.
    Malde, R.
    Dixit, S.
    Hamilton, C. S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2009, 53 (03) : 310 - 317
  • [5] A treatment planning study comparing helical tomotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy for the treatment of anal cancer
    Joseph, Kurian Jones
    Syme, Alasdair
    Small, Cormac
    Warkentin, Heather
    Quon, Harvey
    Ghosh, Sunita
    Field, Colin
    Pervez, Nadeem
    Tankel, Keith
    Patel, Samir
    Usmani, Nawaid
    Severin, Diane
    Nijjar, Tirath
    Fallone, Gino
    Pedersen, John
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2010, 94 (01) : 60 - 66
  • [6] 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
  • [7] Early clinical outcomes of helical tomotherapy/intensity-modulated proton therapy combination in nasopharynx cancer
    Park, Seung Gyu
    Ahn, Yong Chan
    Oh, Dongryul
    Noh, Jae Myoung
    Ju, Sang Gyu
    Kwon, Dongyeol
    Jo, Kwanghyun
    Chung, Kwangzoo
    Chung, Eunah
    Lee, Woojin
    Park, Seyjoon
    [J]. CANCER SCIENCE, 2019, 110 (09) : 2867 - 2874
  • [8] Comparison of Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy (IMPT) to Passively Scattered Proton Therapy (PSPT) in the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
    Choi, S.
    Amin, M.
    Palmer, M.
    Zhu, X. R.
    Nguyen, Q.
    Pugh, T. J.
    Kuban, D. A.
    Lee, A. K.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2011, 81 (02): : S154 - S155
  • [9] A treatment planning protocol for hypofractionated helical tomotherapy of prostate cancer
    Iacco, M.
    Didona, A.
    Marcantonini, M.
    Zucchetti, C.
    Dipilato, A.
    Bellavita, R.
    Falcinelli, L.
    Palumbo, I.
    Gobbi, G.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2014, 111 : S310 - S311
  • [10] Intensity Modulated Proton and Photon Therapy for Early Prostate Cancer With or Without Transperineal Injection of a Polyethylen Glycol Spacer: A Treatment Planning Comparison Study
    Weber, Damien C.
    Zilli, Thomas
    Vallee, Jean Paul
    Rouzaud, Michel
    Miralbell, Raymond
    Cozzi, Luca
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2012, 84 (03): : E311 - E318