The impact of treatment accuracy on proton therapy patient selection for oropharyngeal cancer patients

被引:24
|
作者
Arts, Tine [1 ]
Breedveld, Sebastiaan [1 ]
de Jong, Martin A. [2 ]
Astreinidou, Eleftheria [2 ]
Tans, Lisa [1 ]
Keskin-Cambay, Fatma [1 ]
Krol, Augustinus D. G. [2 ]
van de Water, Steven [1 ]
Bijman, Rik G. [1 ]
Hoogeman, Mischa S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus MC Canc Inst, Dept Radiat Oncol, POB 5201, NL-3008 AE Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] LUMC, Dept Radiat Oncol, Leiden, Netherlands
关键词
Proton therapy; Head and neck cancer; Oropharyngeal cancer; IMRT; IMPT; Robust optimization; INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY; COMPLICATION PROBABILITY; NECK-CANCER; SETUP UNCERTAINTIES; SALIVARY-GLANDS; HEAD; OPTIMIZATION; ROBUSTNESS; MODEL; MARGINS;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2017.09.028
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background and purpose: The impact of treatment accuracy on NTCP-based patient selection for proton therapy is currently unknown. This study investigates this impact for oropharyngeal cancer patients. Materials and methods: Data of 78 patients was used to automatically generate treatment plans for a simultaneously integrated boost prescribing 70 Gy(RBE)/54.25 Gy(RBE) in 35 fractions. IMRT treatment plans were generated with three different margins; intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans for five different setup and range robustness settings. Four NTCP models were evaluated. Patients were selected for proton therapy if NTCP reduction was >= 10% or >= 5% for grade II or III complications, respectively. Results: The degree of robustness had little impact on patient selection for tube feeding dependence, while the margin had. For other complications the impact of the robustness setting was noticeably higher. For high-precision IMRT (3 mm margin) and high-precision IMPT (3 mm setup/3% range error), most patients were selected for proton therapy based on problems swallowing solid food (51.3%) followed by tube feeding dependence (37.2%), decreased parotid flow (29.5%), and patient-rated xerostomia (7.7%). Conclusions: Treatment accuracy has a significant impact on the number of patients selected for proton therapy. Therefore, it cannot be ignored in estimating the number of patients for proton therapy. (c) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:520 / 525
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Pencil beam scanning proton therapy vs rotational arc radiation therapy: A treatment planning comparison for postoperative oropharyngeal cancer
    Apinorasethkul, Ontida
    Kirk, Maura
    Teo, Kevin
    Swisher-McClure, Samuel
    Lukens, John N.
    Lin, Alexander
    [J]. MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2017, 42 (01) : 7 - 11
  • [32] Patient selection for therapy in prostate cancer
    Crawford, ED
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2002, 1 (02) : 2 - 6
  • [33] Selection of patients for proton therapy: a physicists view
    Hoogeman, M.
    Arts, T.
    Van de Water, S.
    Van der Voort, S.
    Perko, Z.
    Lathouwers, D.
    Breedveld, S.
    Heijmen, B.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2016, 119 : S4 - S4
  • [34] Comparative analysis of acute toxicities and patient reported outcomes between intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer
    Manzar, Gohar S.
    Lester, Scott C.
    Routman, David M.
    Harmsen, William S.
    Petersen, Molly M.
    Sloan, Jeff A.
    Mundy, Daniel W.
    Hunzeker, Ashley E.
    Amundson, Adam C.
    Anderson, Jeffrey L.
    Patel, Samir H.
    Garces, Yolanda, I
    Halyard, Michele Y.
    McGee, Lisa A.
    Neben-Wittich, Michelle A.
    Ma, Daniel J.
    Frank, Steven J.
    Whitaker, Thomas J.
    Foote, Robert L.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2020, 147 : 64 - 74
  • [35] Clinical Impact of CYFRA 21-1 a Marker for Treatment Failure in Patients With Oropharyngeal Cancer Treated by Radio(chemo)therapy
    Rudhart, Stefan A.
    Langen, Philipp
    Thangavelu, Kruthika
    Gehrt, Francesca
    Stankovic, Petar
    Wilhelm, Thomas
    Stuck, Boris A.
    Hoch, Stephan
    [J]. ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2022, 42 (01) : 137 - 146
  • [36] Anticoagulant therapy of cancer patients: Will patient selection increase overall survival?
    Spek, C. Arnold
    Versteeg, Henri H.
    Borensztajn, Keren S.
    [J]. THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2015, 114 (03) : 530 - 536
  • [37] The Impact of Treatment Delays in Oropharyngeal Cancer Patients Treated With Surgery Followed by (Chemo)radiation
    Logie, N.
    Chu, K. P.
    Ghosh, S.
    Scrimger, R.
    Jha, N.
    Parliament, M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2014, 90 : S519 - S519
  • [38] Patient selection for proton therapy of early breast cancer - the DBCG phase II study strategy
    Stick, L. B.
    Lorenzen, E. L.
    Yates, E. S.
    Anandadas, C.
    Andersen, K.
    Aristei, C.
    Byrne, O.
    Hol, S.
    Jensen, I.
    Kirby, A.
    Kirova, Y. M.
    Marrazzo, L.
    Matias-Perez, A.
    Nielsen, M. M. B.
    Nissen, H. D.
    Oliveros, S.
    Verhoeven, K.
    Vikstrom, J.
    Offersen, B. V.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2019, 133 : S15 - S17
  • [39] A Patient Selection Approach Based on NTCP Models and DVH Parameters for Definitive Proton Therapy in Locally Advanced Sinonasal Cancer Patients
    Mirandola, Alfredo
    Russo, Stefania
    Bonora, Maria
    Vischioni, Barbara
    Camarda, Anna Maria
    Ingargiola, Rossana
    Molinelli, Silvia
    Ronchi, Sara
    Rossi, Eleonora
    Vai, Alessandro
    Iacovelli, Nicola Alessandro
    Thariat, Juliette
    Ciocca, Mario
    Orlandi, Ester
    [J]. CANCERS, 2022, 14 (11)
  • [40] Preoperative accuracy of gastric cancer staging in patient selection for preoperative therapy: race may affect accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography
    Ikoma, Naruhiko
    Lee, Jeffrey H.
    Bhutani, Manoop S.
    Ross, William A.
    Weston, Brian
    Chiang, Yi-Ju
    Blum, Mariela A.
    Sagebiel, Tara
    Devine, Catherine E.
    Matamoros, Aurelio, Jr.
    Fournier, Keith
    Mansfield, Paul
    Ajani, Jaffer A.
    Badgwell, Brian D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 8 (06) : 1009 - 1017