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

被引:3
|
作者
Halthore, Aditya [1 ,2 ]
Fellows, Zachary [2 ]
Tran, Anh [2 ]
Deville, Curtiland, Jr. [1 ,2 ]
Wright, Jean L. [1 ,2 ]
Meyer, Jeffrey [1 ]
Li, Heng [1 ,2 ]
Sheikh, Khadija [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol & Mol Sci, Sch Med, Baltimore, MD USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Proton Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Washington, DC USA
关键词
proton; spatial fractionation; GRID; bulky tumors; RADIATION-THERAPY;
D O I
10.14338/IJPT-22-00028
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
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 cm3. 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 (2cm 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.
引用
收藏
页码:40 / 49
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Proton pencil beam scanning for mediastinal lymphoma: the impact of interplay between target motion and beam scanning
    Zeng, C.
    Plastaras, J. P.
    Tochner, Z. A.
    White, B. M.
    Hill-Kayser, C. E.
    Hahn, S. M.
    Both, S.
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2015, 60 (07) : 3013 - 3029
  • [42] A comprehensive pre-clinical treatment quality assurance program using unique spot patterns for proton pencil beam scanning FLASH radiotherapy
    Tsai, Pingfang
    Yang, Yunjie
    Wu, Mengjou
    Chen, Chin-Cheng
    Yu, Francis
    Simone II, Charles B.
    Choi, Jehee Isabelle
    Tome, Wolfgang A.
    Lin, Haibo
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2024, 25 (08):
  • [43] A comparison of the dose distributions from three proton treatment planning systems in the planning of meningioma patients with single-field uniform dose pencil beam scanning
    Doolan, Paul J.
    Alshaikhi, Jailan
    Rosenberg, Ivan
    Ainsley, Christopher G.
    Gibson, Adam
    D'Souza, Derek
    Bentefour, El Hassane
    Royle, Gary
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 16 (01): : 86 - 99
  • [44] Development and validation of the Dynamic Collimation Monte Carlo simulation package for pencil beam scanning proton therapy
    Nelson, Nicholas P.
    Culberson, Wesley S.
    Hyer, Daniel E.
    Geoghegan, Theodore J.
    Patwardhan, Kaustubh A.
    Smith, Blake R.
    Flynn, Ryan T.
    Yu, Jen
    Rana, Suresh
    Gutierrez, Alonso N.
    Hill, Patrick M.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06) : 3172 - 3185
  • [45] Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy for Paediatric Neuroblastoma with Motion Mitigation Strategy for Moving Target Volumes
    Lim, P. S.
    Pica, A.
    Hrbacek, J.
    Bachtiary, B.
    Walser, M.
    Lomax, A. J.
    Weber, D. C.
    CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 32 (07) : 467 - 476
  • [46] Optimization of GEANT4 settings for Proton Pencil Beam Scanning simulations using GATE
    Grevillot, Loic
    Frisson, Thibault
    Zahra, Nabil
    Bertrand, Damien
    Stichelbaut, Frederic
    Freud, Nicolas
    Sarrut, David
    NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS & METHODS IN PHYSICS RESEARCH SECTION B-BEAM INTERACTIONS WITH MATERIALS AND ATOMS, 2010, 268 (20) : 3295 - 3305
  • [47] Supine craniospinal irradiation in pediatric patients by proton pencil beam scanning
    Farace, Paolo
    Bizzocchi, Nicola
    Righetto, Roberto
    Fellin, Francesco
    Fracchiolla, Francesco
    Lorentini, Stefano
    Widesott, Lamberto
    Algranati, Carlo
    Rombi, Barbara
    Vennarini, Sabina
    Amichetti, Maurizio
    Schwarz, Marco
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2017, 123 (01) : 112 - 118
  • [48] A practical experience of dose modeling for proton pencil beam scanning in KNCC
    Kwanghyun Jo
    Mi Young Kim
    Jong Hwi Jeong
    EunHee Jeang
    Haksoo Kim
    Seyjoon Park
    Jeong-Hoon Park
    Young Kyung Lim
    Dongho Shin
    Se Byeong Lee
    Kwanghyun Jo
    Chiyoung Jeong
    Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 2015, 67 : 108 - 115
  • [49] Applications of various range shifters for proton pencil beam scanning radiotherapy
    Lin, Haibo
    Shi, Chengyu
    Huang, Sheng
    Shen, Jiajian
    Kang, Minglei
    Chen, Qing
    Zhai, Huifang
    McDonough, James
    Tochner, Zelig
    Deville, Curtiland
    Simone, Charles B., II
    Both, Stefan
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2021, 16 (01)
  • [50] Fast Pencil Beam Dose calculation for Proton Therapy Using a Double-Gaussian Beam Model
    da Silva, Joakim
    Ansorge, Richard
    Jena, Rajesh
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2015, 5