Cargando…

Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of systematic setup and range uncertainties for robustly optimized (RO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Twenty-six localized prostate patients previously...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Butkus, Michael P., Brovold, Nellie, Diwanji, Tejan, Xu, Yihang, De Ornelas, Mariluz, Dal Pra, Alan, Abramowitz, Matt, Pollack, Alan, Dogan, Nesrin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9523999/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36175971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02126-y
_version_ 1784800411568308224
author Butkus, Michael P.
Brovold, Nellie
Diwanji, Tejan
Xu, Yihang
De Ornelas, Mariluz
Dal Pra, Alan
Abramowitz, Matt
Pollack, Alan
Dogan, Nesrin
author_facet Butkus, Michael P.
Brovold, Nellie
Diwanji, Tejan
Xu, Yihang
De Ornelas, Mariluz
Dal Pra, Alan
Abramowitz, Matt
Pollack, Alan
Dogan, Nesrin
author_sort Butkus, Michael P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of systematic setup and range uncertainties for robustly optimized (RO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Twenty-six localized prostate patients previously treated with VMAT (CTV to PTV expansion of 3-5 mm) were re-planned with RO-IMPT with 3 mm and 5 mm geometrical uncertainties coupled with 3% range uncertainties. Robust evaluations (RE) accounting for the geometrical uncertainties of 3 and 5 mm were evaluated for the IMPT and VMAT plans. Clinical target volume (CTV), anorectum, and bladder dose metrics were analyzed between the nominal plans and their uncertainty perturbations. RESULTS: With geometric uncertainties of 5 mm and accounting for potential inter-fractional perturbations, RO-IMPT provided statistically significant (p < 0.05) sparing at intermediate doses (V(4000cGy)) to the anorectum and bladder and high dose sparring (V(8000cGy)) to the bladder compared to VMAT. Decreasing the RO and RE parameters to 3 mm improved IMPT sparing over VMAT at all OAR dose levels investigated while maintaining equivalent coverage to the CTV. CONCLUSIONS: For localized prostate treatments, if geometric uncertainties can be maintained at or below 3 mm, RO-IMPT provides clear dosimetric advantages in anorectum and bladder sparing compared to VMAT. This advantage remains even under uncertainty scenarios. As geometric uncertainties increase to 5 mm, RO-IMPT still provides dosimetric advantages, but to a smaller magnitude.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9523999
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95239992022-10-01 Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer Butkus, Michael P. Brovold, Nellie Diwanji, Tejan Xu, Yihang De Ornelas, Mariluz Dal Pra, Alan Abramowitz, Matt Pollack, Alan Dogan, Nesrin Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of systematic setup and range uncertainties for robustly optimized (RO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Twenty-six localized prostate patients previously treated with VMAT (CTV to PTV expansion of 3-5 mm) were re-planned with RO-IMPT with 3 mm and 5 mm geometrical uncertainties coupled with 3% range uncertainties. Robust evaluations (RE) accounting for the geometrical uncertainties of 3 and 5 mm were evaluated for the IMPT and VMAT plans. Clinical target volume (CTV), anorectum, and bladder dose metrics were analyzed between the nominal plans and their uncertainty perturbations. RESULTS: With geometric uncertainties of 5 mm and accounting for potential inter-fractional perturbations, RO-IMPT provided statistically significant (p < 0.05) sparing at intermediate doses (V(4000cGy)) to the anorectum and bladder and high dose sparring (V(8000cGy)) to the bladder compared to VMAT. Decreasing the RO and RE parameters to 3 mm improved IMPT sparing over VMAT at all OAR dose levels investigated while maintaining equivalent coverage to the CTV. CONCLUSIONS: For localized prostate treatments, if geometric uncertainties can be maintained at or below 3 mm, RO-IMPT provides clear dosimetric advantages in anorectum and bladder sparing compared to VMAT. This advantage remains even under uncertainty scenarios. As geometric uncertainties increase to 5 mm, RO-IMPT still provides dosimetric advantages, but to a smaller magnitude. BioMed Central 2022-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9523999/ /pubmed/36175971 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02126-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Butkus, Michael P.
Brovold, Nellie
Diwanji, Tejan
Xu, Yihang
De Ornelas, Mariluz
Dal Pra, Alan
Abramowitz, Matt
Pollack, Alan
Dogan, Nesrin
Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
title Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
title_full Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
title_fullStr Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
title_short Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
title_sort assessment of impt versus vmat plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9523999/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36175971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-022-02126-y
work_keys_str_mv AT butkusmichaelp assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT brovoldnellie assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT diwanjitejan assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT xuyihang assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT deornelasmariluz assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT dalpraalan assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT abramowitzmatt assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT pollackalan assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer
AT dogannesrin assessmentofimptversusvmatplansusingdifferentuncertaintyscenariosforprostatecancer