Cargando…

Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields

Purpose: We quantified the inter-fractional changes associated with passive carbon-ion radiotherapy using vertical and horizontal beam fields for prostate cancer. Methods: In total, 118 treatment-room computed tomography (TRCT) image sets were acquired from 10 patients. Vertical (anterior–posterior)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yokoyama, Ayaka, Kubota, Yoshiki, Kawamura, Hidemasa, Miyasaka, Yuhei, Kubo, Nobuteru, Sato, Hiro, Abe, Satoshi, Tsuda, Kazuhisa, Sutou, Takayuki, Ohno, Tatsuya, Nakano, Takashi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7399086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32850384
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.01264
_version_ 1783566080621412352
author Yokoyama, Ayaka
Kubota, Yoshiki
Kawamura, Hidemasa
Miyasaka, Yuhei
Kubo, Nobuteru
Sato, Hiro
Abe, Satoshi
Tsuda, Kazuhisa
Sutou, Takayuki
Ohno, Tatsuya
Nakano, Takashi
author_facet Yokoyama, Ayaka
Kubota, Yoshiki
Kawamura, Hidemasa
Miyasaka, Yuhei
Kubo, Nobuteru
Sato, Hiro
Abe, Satoshi
Tsuda, Kazuhisa
Sutou, Takayuki
Ohno, Tatsuya
Nakano, Takashi
author_sort Yokoyama, Ayaka
collection PubMed
description Purpose: We quantified the inter-fractional changes associated with passive carbon-ion radiotherapy using vertical and horizontal beam fields for prostate cancer. Methods: In total, 118 treatment-room computed tomography (TRCT) image sets were acquired from 10 patients. Vertical (anterior–posterior) and horizontal (left–right) fields were generated on the planning target volume identified by treatment planning CT. The dose distribution for each field was recalculated on each TRCT image set at the bone-matching position and evaluated using the dose–volume parameters for the prostate and rectum V95 values. To confirm adequate margins, we generated vertical and horizontal fields with 0-, 2-, 4-, and 6-mm isotropic margins from the prostate and recalculated the dose distributions on all TRCT image sets. Sigmoid functions were fitted to a plot of acceptable ratios (that is, when prostate V95 > 98%) vs. the isotropic margin size to identify the margin at which this ratio was achieved in 95% of patients with a vertical or horizontal field. Results: The prostate V95 values (mean ± standard deviation) were 99.89 ± 0.62% and 99.99 ± 0.00% with vertical and horizontal fields, respectively; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.067). The rectum V95 values were 1.93 ± 1.25 and 1.88 ± 0.96 ml with vertical and horizontal fields, respectively; the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.432). The estimated adequate margins were 2.2 and 3.0 mm for vertical and horizontal fields, respectively. Conclusions: Although there is no significant difference, horizontal fields offer higher reproducibility for prostate dosing than vertical fields in our clinical setting, and 3.0 mm was found to be an adequate margin for inter-fractional changes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7399086
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73990862020-08-25 Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields Yokoyama, Ayaka Kubota, Yoshiki Kawamura, Hidemasa Miyasaka, Yuhei Kubo, Nobuteru Sato, Hiro Abe, Satoshi Tsuda, Kazuhisa Sutou, Takayuki Ohno, Tatsuya Nakano, Takashi Front Oncol Oncology Purpose: We quantified the inter-fractional changes associated with passive carbon-ion radiotherapy using vertical and horizontal beam fields for prostate cancer. Methods: In total, 118 treatment-room computed tomography (TRCT) image sets were acquired from 10 patients. Vertical (anterior–posterior) and horizontal (left–right) fields were generated on the planning target volume identified by treatment planning CT. The dose distribution for each field was recalculated on each TRCT image set at the bone-matching position and evaluated using the dose–volume parameters for the prostate and rectum V95 values. To confirm adequate margins, we generated vertical and horizontal fields with 0-, 2-, 4-, and 6-mm isotropic margins from the prostate and recalculated the dose distributions on all TRCT image sets. Sigmoid functions were fitted to a plot of acceptable ratios (that is, when prostate V95 > 98%) vs. the isotropic margin size to identify the margin at which this ratio was achieved in 95% of patients with a vertical or horizontal field. Results: The prostate V95 values (mean ± standard deviation) were 99.89 ± 0.62% and 99.99 ± 0.00% with vertical and horizontal fields, respectively; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.067). The rectum V95 values were 1.93 ± 1.25 and 1.88 ± 0.96 ml with vertical and horizontal fields, respectively; the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.432). The estimated adequate margins were 2.2 and 3.0 mm for vertical and horizontal fields, respectively. Conclusions: Although there is no significant difference, horizontal fields offer higher reproducibility for prostate dosing than vertical fields in our clinical setting, and 3.0 mm was found to be an adequate margin for inter-fractional changes. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7399086/ /pubmed/32850384 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.01264 Text en Copyright © 2020 Yokoyama, Kubota, Kawamura, Miyasaka, Kubo, Sato, Abe, Tsuda, Sutou, Ohno and Nakano. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Yokoyama, Ayaka
Kubota, Yoshiki
Kawamura, Hidemasa
Miyasaka, Yuhei
Kubo, Nobuteru
Sato, Hiro
Abe, Satoshi
Tsuda, Kazuhisa
Sutou, Takayuki
Ohno, Tatsuya
Nakano, Takashi
Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields
title Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields
title_full Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields
title_fullStr Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields
title_short Impact of Inter-fractional Anatomical Changes on Dose Distributions in Passive Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Vertical and Horizontal Fields
title_sort impact of inter-fractional anatomical changes on dose distributions in passive carbon-ion radiotherapy for prostate cancer: comparison of vertical and horizontal fields
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7399086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32850384
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.01264
work_keys_str_mv AT yokoyamaayaka impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT kubotayoshiki impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT kawamurahidemasa impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT miyasakayuhei impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT kubonobuteru impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT satohiro impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT abesatoshi impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT tsudakazuhisa impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT sutoutakayuki impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT ohnotatsuya impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields
AT nakanotakashi impactofinterfractionalanatomicalchangesondosedistributionsinpassivecarbonionradiotherapyforprostatecancercomparisonofverticalandhorizontalfields