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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |