Cargando…

Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy

PURPOSE: To compare spatially fractionated radiation therapy (GRID) treatment planning techniques using proton pencil-beam-scanning (PBS) and photon therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PBS and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) GRID plans were retrospectively generated for 5 patients with bulky tum...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Halthore, Aditya, Fellows, Zachary, Tran, Anh, Deville, Curtiland, Wright, Jean L., Meyer, Jeffrey, Li, Heng, Sheikh, Khadija
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9875826/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36721485
http://dx.doi.org/10.14338/IJPT-22-00028
_version_ 1784878036588429312
author Halthore, Aditya
Fellows, Zachary
Tran, Anh
Deville, Curtiland
Wright, Jean L.
Meyer, Jeffrey
Li, Heng
Sheikh, Khadija
author_facet Halthore, Aditya
Fellows, Zachary
Tran, Anh
Deville, Curtiland
Wright, Jean L.
Meyer, Jeffrey
Li, Heng
Sheikh, Khadija
author_sort Halthore, Aditya
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare spatially fractionated radiation therapy (GRID) treatment planning techniques using proton pencil-beam-scanning (PBS) and photon therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PBS and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) GRID plans were retrospectively generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. GRID targets were arranged along the long axis of the gross tumor, spaced 2 and 3 cm apart, and treated with a prescription of 18 Gy. PBS plans used 2- to 3-beam multiple-field optimization with robustness evaluation. Dosimetric parameters including peak-to-edge ratio (PEDR), ratio of dose to 90% of the valley to dose to 10% of the peak VPDR(D90/D10), and volume of normal tissue receiving at least 5 Gy (V5) and 10 Gy (V10) were calculated. The peak-to-valley dose ratio (PVDR), VPDR(D90/D10), and organ-at-risk doses were prospectively assessed in 2 patients undergoing PBS-GRID with pretreatment quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) scans. RESULTS: PBS and VMAT GRID plans were generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. Gross tumor volume values ranged from 826 to 1468 cm(3). Peak-to-edge ratio for PBS was higher than for VMAT for both spacing scenarios (2-cm spacing, P = .02; 3-cm spacing, P = .01). VPDR(D90/D10) for PBS was higher than for VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .004; 3-cm spacing, P = .002). Normal tissue V5 was lower for PBS than for VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .03; 3-cm spacing, P = .02). Normal tissue mean dose was lower with PBS than with VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .03; 3-cm spacing, P = .02). Two patients treated using PBS GRID and assessed with pretreatment QACT scans demonstrated robust PVDR, VPDR(D90/D10), and organs-at-risk doses. CONCLUSIONS: The PEDR was significantly higher for PBS than VMAT plans, indicating lower target edge dose. Normal tissue mean dose was significantly lower with PBS than VMAT. PBS GRID may result in lower normal tissue dose compared with VMAT plans, allowing for further dose escalation in patients with bulky disease.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9875826
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98758262023-01-30 Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy Halthore, Aditya Fellows, Zachary Tran, Anh Deville, Curtiland Wright, Jean L. Meyer, Jeffrey Li, Heng Sheikh, Khadija Int J Part Ther Original Articles PURPOSE: To compare spatially fractionated radiation therapy (GRID) treatment planning techniques using proton pencil-beam-scanning (PBS) and photon therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PBS and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) GRID plans were retrospectively generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. GRID targets were arranged along the long axis of the gross tumor, spaced 2 and 3 cm apart, and treated with a prescription of 18 Gy. PBS plans used 2- to 3-beam multiple-field optimization with robustness evaluation. Dosimetric parameters including peak-to-edge ratio (PEDR), ratio of dose to 90% of the valley to dose to 10% of the peak VPDR(D90/D10), and volume of normal tissue receiving at least 5 Gy (V5) and 10 Gy (V10) were calculated. The peak-to-valley dose ratio (PVDR), VPDR(D90/D10), and organ-at-risk doses were prospectively assessed in 2 patients undergoing PBS-GRID with pretreatment quality assurance computed tomography (QACT) scans. RESULTS: PBS and VMAT GRID plans were generated for 5 patients with bulky tumors. Gross tumor volume values ranged from 826 to 1468 cm(3). Peak-to-edge ratio for PBS was higher than for VMAT for both spacing scenarios (2-cm spacing, P = .02; 3-cm spacing, P = .01). VPDR(D90/D10) for PBS was higher than for VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .004; 3-cm spacing, P = .002). Normal tissue V5 was lower for PBS than for VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .03; 3-cm spacing, P = .02). Normal tissue mean dose was lower with PBS than with VMAT (2-cm spacing, P = .03; 3-cm spacing, P = .02). Two patients treated using PBS GRID and assessed with pretreatment QACT scans demonstrated robust PVDR, VPDR(D90/D10), and organs-at-risk doses. CONCLUSIONS: The PEDR was significantly higher for PBS than VMAT plans, indicating lower target edge dose. Normal tissue mean dose was significantly lower with PBS than VMAT. PBS GRID may result in lower normal tissue dose compared with VMAT plans, allowing for further dose escalation in patients with bulky disease. The Particle Therapy Co-operative Group 2022-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9875826/ /pubmed/36721485 http://dx.doi.org/10.14338/IJPT-22-00028 Text en ©Copyright 2022 The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY. Open Access (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) ).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Halthore, Aditya
Fellows, Zachary
Tran, Anh
Deville, Curtiland
Wright, Jean L.
Meyer, Jeffrey
Li, Heng
Sheikh, Khadija
Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
title Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
title_full Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
title_fullStr Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
title_full_unstemmed Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
title_short Treatment Planning of Bulky Tumors Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton GRID Therapy
title_sort treatment planning of bulky tumors using pencil beam scanning proton grid therapy
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9875826/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36721485
http://dx.doi.org/10.14338/IJPT-22-00028
work_keys_str_mv AT halthoreaditya treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT fellowszachary treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT trananh treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT devillecurtiland treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT wrightjeanl treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT meyerjeffrey treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT liheng treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy
AT sheikhkhadija treatmentplanningofbulkytumorsusingpencilbeamscanningprotongridtherapy