Cargando…

A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of a proton arc technique for treating tumors of the para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN). METHOD: In nine patients, a proton arc therapy (PAT) technique was compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rah, Jeong-Eun, Kim, Gwe-Ya, Oh, Do Hoon, Kim, Tae Hyun, Kim, Jong Won, Kim, Dae Yong, Park, Sung Yong, Shin, Dongho
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5073975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27769262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0717-4
_version_ 1782461669940658176
author Rah, Jeong-Eun
Kim, Gwe-Ya
Oh, Do Hoon
Kim, Tae Hyun
Kim, Jong Won
Kim, Dae Yong
Park, Sung Yong
Shin, Dongho
author_facet Rah, Jeong-Eun
Kim, Gwe-Ya
Oh, Do Hoon
Kim, Tae Hyun
Kim, Jong Won
Kim, Dae Yong
Park, Sung Yong
Shin, Dongho
author_sort Rah, Jeong-Eun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of a proton arc technique for treating tumors of the para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN). METHOD: In nine patients, a proton arc therapy (PAT) technique was compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) techniques with respect to the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR). PTV coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and OAR doses were compared. Organ-specific radiation induced cancer risks were estimated by applying organ equivalent dose (OED) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). RESULTS: The PAT techniques showed better PTV coverage than IMRT and PBT plans. The CI obtained with PAT was 1.19 ± 0.02, which was significantly better than that for the IMRT techniques. The HI was lowest for the PAT plan and highest for IMRT. The dose to the OARs was always below the acceptable limits and comparable for all three techniques. OED results calculated based on a plateau dose–response model showed that the risk of secondary cancers in organs was much higher when IMRT or PBT were employed than when PAT was used. NTCPs of PAT to the stomach (0.29 %), small bowel (0.69 %) and liver (0.38 %) were substantially lower than those of IMRT and PBT. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that there is a potential role for PAT as a commercialized instrument in the future to proton therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5073975
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50739752016-10-27 A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy Rah, Jeong-Eun Kim, Gwe-Ya Oh, Do Hoon Kim, Tae Hyun Kim, Jong Won Kim, Dae Yong Park, Sung Yong Shin, Dongho Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of a proton arc technique for treating tumors of the para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN). METHOD: In nine patients, a proton arc therapy (PAT) technique was compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton beam therapy (PBT) techniques with respect to the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR). PTV coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and OAR doses were compared. Organ-specific radiation induced cancer risks were estimated by applying organ equivalent dose (OED) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). RESULTS: The PAT techniques showed better PTV coverage than IMRT and PBT plans. The CI obtained with PAT was 1.19 ± 0.02, which was significantly better than that for the IMRT techniques. The HI was lowest for the PAT plan and highest for IMRT. The dose to the OARs was always below the acceptable limits and comparable for all three techniques. OED results calculated based on a plateau dose–response model showed that the risk of secondary cancers in organs was much higher when IMRT or PBT were employed than when PAT was used. NTCPs of PAT to the stomach (0.29 %), small bowel (0.69 %) and liver (0.38 %) were substantially lower than those of IMRT and PBT. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that there is a potential role for PAT as a commercialized instrument in the future to proton therapy. BioMed Central 2016-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5073975/ /pubmed/27769262 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0717-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Rah, Jeong-Eun
Kim, Gwe-Ya
Oh, Do Hoon
Kim, Tae Hyun
Kim, Jong Won
Kim, Dae Yong
Park, Sung Yong
Shin, Dongho
A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
title A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
title_full A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
title_fullStr A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
title_full_unstemmed A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
title_short A treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
title_sort treatment planning study of proton arc therapy for para-aortic lymph node tumors: dosimetric evaluation of conventional proton therapy, proton arc therapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5073975/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27769262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0717-4
work_keys_str_mv AT rahjeongeun atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimgweya atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT ohdohoon atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimtaehyun atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimjongwon atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimdaeyong atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT parksungyong atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT shindongho atreatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT rahjeongeun treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimgweya treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT ohdohoon treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimtaehyun treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimjongwon treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT kimdaeyong treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT parksungyong treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy
AT shindongho treatmentplanningstudyofprotonarctherapyforparaaorticlymphnodetumorsdosimetricevaluationofconventionalprotontherapyprotonarctherapyandintensitymodulatedradiotherapy