Cargando…

A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Focal tumour boosting is currently explored in radiotherapy of prostate cancer to increase tumour control. In this study we applied dose response models for both tumour control and normal tissue complications to explore the benefit of proton therapy (PT) combined with focal t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pedersen, Jesper, Casares-Magaz, Oscar, Petersen, Jørgen B.B., Rørvik, Jarle, Bentzen, Lise, Andersen, Andreas G., Muren, Ludvig P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7807577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33458397
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2018.06.002
_version_ 1783636770737356800
author Pedersen, Jesper
Casares-Magaz, Oscar
Petersen, Jørgen B.B.
Rørvik, Jarle
Bentzen, Lise
Andersen, Andreas G.
Muren, Ludvig P.
author_facet Pedersen, Jesper
Casares-Magaz, Oscar
Petersen, Jørgen B.B.
Rørvik, Jarle
Bentzen, Lise
Andersen, Andreas G.
Muren, Ludvig P.
author_sort Pedersen, Jesper
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Focal tumour boosting is currently explored in radiotherapy of prostate cancer to increase tumour control. In this study we applied dose response models for both tumour control and normal tissue complications to explore the benefit of proton therapy (PT) combined with focal tumour boosting, also when accounting for inter-fractional motion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT scans of seven patients fused with MRI-based index volumes were used. Two volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were created for each patient; one with conventional dose (77 Gy) to the entire prostate, and one with an additional integrated boost (total dose of 95 Gy) to the index lesion. Two corresponding intensity modulated PT (IMPT) plans were created using two lateral opposing spot scanning beams. All plans were evaluated using an MRI-based tumour control probability (TCP) model and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models for the rectum and bladder. Plan robustness was evaluated using dose re-calculations on repeat cone-beam CTs. RESULTS: Across all plans, median TCP increased from 86% (range: 59–98%) without boost to 97% (range: 96–99%) with boost. IMPT plans had lower rectum NTCPs (e.g. 3% vs. 4% for boost plans) but higher bladder NTCPs (20% vs. 18% for boost plans), yet only the bladder NTCPs remained different in the cone beam CT-based re-calculations. CONCLUSIONS: Focal tumour boosting can be delivered with either VMAT or protons, and increases the predicted TCP. The small benefit of IMPT when assessing the planned dose distributions was lost when accounting for inter-fractional motion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7807577
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78075772021-01-14 A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting Pedersen, Jesper Casares-Magaz, Oscar Petersen, Jørgen B.B. Rørvik, Jarle Bentzen, Lise Andersen, Andreas G. Muren, Ludvig P. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Original Research Article BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Focal tumour boosting is currently explored in radiotherapy of prostate cancer to increase tumour control. In this study we applied dose response models for both tumour control and normal tissue complications to explore the benefit of proton therapy (PT) combined with focal tumour boosting, also when accounting for inter-fractional motion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT scans of seven patients fused with MRI-based index volumes were used. Two volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans were created for each patient; one with conventional dose (77 Gy) to the entire prostate, and one with an additional integrated boost (total dose of 95 Gy) to the index lesion. Two corresponding intensity modulated PT (IMPT) plans were created using two lateral opposing spot scanning beams. All plans were evaluated using an MRI-based tumour control probability (TCP) model and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models for the rectum and bladder. Plan robustness was evaluated using dose re-calculations on repeat cone-beam CTs. RESULTS: Across all plans, median TCP increased from 86% (range: 59–98%) without boost to 97% (range: 96–99%) with boost. IMPT plans had lower rectum NTCPs (e.g. 3% vs. 4% for boost plans) but higher bladder NTCPs (20% vs. 18% for boost plans), yet only the bladder NTCPs remained different in the cone beam CT-based re-calculations. CONCLUSIONS: Focal tumour boosting can be delivered with either VMAT or protons, and increases the predicted TCP. The small benefit of IMPT when assessing the planned dose distributions was lost when accounting for inter-fractional motion. Elsevier 2018-07-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7807577/ /pubmed/33458397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2018.06.002 Text en © 2018 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Pedersen, Jesper
Casares-Magaz, Oscar
Petersen, Jørgen B.B.
Rørvik, Jarle
Bentzen, Lise
Andersen, Andreas G.
Muren, Ludvig P.
A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
title A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
title_full A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
title_fullStr A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
title_full_unstemmed A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
title_short A biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
title_sort biological modelling based comparison of radiotherapy plan robustness using photons vs protons for focal prostate boosting
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7807577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33458397
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2018.06.002
work_keys_str_mv AT pedersenjesper abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT casaresmagazoscar abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT petersenjørgenbb abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT rørvikjarle abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT bentzenlise abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT andersenandreasg abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT murenludvigp abiologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT pedersenjesper biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT casaresmagazoscar biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT petersenjørgenbb biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT rørvikjarle biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT bentzenlise biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT andersenandreasg biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting
AT murenludvigp biologicalmodellingbasedcomparisonofradiotherapyplanrobustnessusingphotonsvsprotonsforfocalprostateboosting