Beam-specific planning target volumes incorporating 4D CT for pencil beam scanning proton therapy of thoracic tumors

被引:60
|
作者
Lin, Liyong [1 ]
Kang, Minglei [1 ]
Huang, Sheng [1 ]
Mayer, Rulon [2 ]
Thomas, Andrew [3 ]
Solberg, Timothy D. [1 ]
McDonough, Jame E. [1 ]
Simone, Charles B., II [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Penn, Dept Radiat Oncol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[2] Henry Jackson Fdn, Bethesda, MD USA
[3] ATC Healthcare, Washington, DC USA
来源
关键词
4D CT; beam-specific PTV; treatment planning; proton therapy; pencil beam scanning; interplay; RESPIRATORY MOTION; TREATMENT UNCERTAINTIES; PARTICLE THERAPY; SPOT SIZE; LUNG; CANCER; DELIVERY; RADIOTHERAPY; SENSITIVITY; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.1120/jacmp.v16i6.5678
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study is to determine whether organ sparing and target coverage can be simultaneously maintained for pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy treatment of thoracic tumors in the presence of motion, stopping power uncertainties, and patient setup variations. Ten consecutive patients that were previously treated with proton therapy to 66.6/1.8 Gy (RBE) using double scattering (DS) were replanned with PBS. Minimum and maximum intensity images from 4D CT were used to introduce flexible smearing in the determination of the beam specific PTV (BSPTV). Datasets from eight 4D CT phases, using +/- 3% uncertainty in stopping power and +/- 3 mm uncertainty in patient setup in each direction, were used to create 8 x 12 x 10 = 960 PBS plans for the evaluation of 10 patients. Plans were normalized to provide identical coverage between DS and PBS. The average lung V20, V5, and mean doses were reduced from 29.0%, 35.0%, and 16.4 Gy with DS to 24.6%, 30.6%, and 14.1 Gy with PBS, respectively. The average heart V30 and V45 were reduced from 10.4% and 7.5% in DS to 8.1% and 5.4% for PBS, respectively. Furthermore, the maximum spinal cord, esophagus, and heart doses were decreased from 37.1 Gy, 71.7 Gy, and 69.2 Gy with DS to 31.3 Gy, 67.9 Gy, and 64.6 Gy with PBS. The conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), and global maximal dose were improved from 3.2, 0.08, 77.4 Gy with DS to 2.8, 0.04, and 72.1 Gy with PBS. All differences are statistically significant, with p-values < 0.05, with the exception of the heart V45 (p = 0.146). PBS with BSPTV achieves better organ sparing and improves target coverage using a repainting method for the treatment of thoracic tumors. Incorporating motion-related uncertainties is essential.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 292
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A comparison of two pencil beam scanning treatment planning systems for proton therapy
    Langner, Ulrich W.
    Mundis, Michelle
    Strauss, Dan
    Zhu, Mingyao
    Mossahebi, Sina
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 19 (01): : 156 - 163
  • [22] Technical Note: Investigating interplay effects in pencil beam scanning proton therapy with a 4D XCAT phantom within the RayStation treatment planning system
    den Boer, Erik
    Wulff, Joerg
    Maeder, UIf
    Engwall, Erik
    Baeumer, Christian
    Perko, Zoltan
    Timmermann, Beate
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (03) : 1448 - 1455
  • [23] 4D dose calculation for pencil beam scanning proton therapy of pancreatic cancer using repeated 4DMRI datasets
    Dolde, Kai
    Naumann, Patrick
    David, Christian
    Gnirs, Regula
    Kachelriess, Marc
    Lomax, Antony John
    Saito, Nami
    Weber, Damien Charles
    Pfaffenberger, Asja
    Zhang, Ye
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2018, 63 (16):
  • [24] Endoscopic Resection Followed by Proton Therapy With Pencil Beam Scanning for Skull Base Tumors
    Leeman, Jonathan E.
    Lee, Nancy Y.
    Zhou, Ying
    Neal, Brian
    Sine, Kevin
    Tabar, Viviane
    Cohen, Marc A.
    [J]. LARYNGOSCOPE, 2019, 129 (06): : 1313 - 1317
  • [25] Feasibility of Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy SBRT Locally Advanced Lung Tumors
    Lin, L.
    Burgdorf, B.
    Zhai, H.
    Hard, B.
    Huang, S.
    Berman, A.
    Feigenberg, S.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (06) : E489 - E489
  • [26] Dosimetric comparison of VMAT and pencil beam scanning proton therapy for abdominal pediatric tumors
    Guerreiro, F.
    Seravalli, E.
    Janssens, G. O.
    Maduro, J. H.
    Brouwer, C. L.
    Korevaar, E. W.
    Knopf, A. C.
    Raaymakers, B. W.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2018, 127 : S885 - S886
  • [27] Endoscopic Resection Followed by Proton Beam Therapy With Pencil Beam Scanning: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Tumors of the Skull Base
    Leeman, J. E.
    Lee, N.
    Zhou, Y.
    Sine, K.
    Tabar, V. S.
    Cohen, M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2018, 100 (05): : 1348 - 1348
  • [28] Robust Proton Pencil Beam Scanning Treatment Planning for Rectal Cancer Radiation Therapy
    Kiely, Janid Patricia Blanco
    White, Benjamin M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2016, 95 (01): : 208 - 215
  • [29] Effects of spot size errors in DynamicARC pencil beam scanning proton therapy planning
    Rana, Suresh
    Rosenfeld, Anatoly B
    [J]. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2024, 69 (23):
  • [30] Pencil Beam Scanning (PBS) Proton Therapy in a Fixed-Beam Room for Treatment of Pediatric Brain Tumors
    Hollander, A.
    Kirk, M.
    Both, S.
    Lustig, R. A.
    Tochner, Z.
    Hill-Kayser, C. E.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2013, 87 (02): : S592 - S593