Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of early stage prostate cancer: A treatment planning comparison

被引:28
作者
Schwarz, Marco [1 ]
Pierelli, Alessio [2 ]
Fiorino, Claudio [2 ]
Fellin, Francesco [1 ]
Cattaneo, Giovanni Mauro [2 ]
Cozzarini, Cesare [2 ]
Di Muzio, Nadia [2 ]
Calandrino, Riccardo [2 ]
Widesott, Lamberto [1 ]
机构
[1] Agenzia Prov Protonterapia, I-38122 Trento, Italy
[2] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
关键词
IMPT; Tomotherapy; Prostate; Planning comparison; DOSE-ESCALATION TRIAL; X-RAY THERAPY; CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY; IMAGE-GUIDANCE; VOLUME; IMRT; OPTIMIZATION; MULTICENTER; ISSUES; TUMORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2010.10.027
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To compare helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) on early stage prostate cancer treatments delivered with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in moderate hypofractionation. Material/methods: Eight patients treated with HT were replanned with two-field IMPT (2fIMPT) and five-field IMPT (5fIMPT), using a small pencil beam size (3 mm sigma). The prescribed dose was 74.3 Gy in 28 fractions on PTV1 (prostate) and PTV2 (proximal seminal vesicles), 65.5 Gy on PTV3 (distal seminal vesicles) and on the overlap between rectum and PTVs. Results: IMPT and HT achieved similar target coverage and dose homogeneity, with 5fIMPT providing the best results. The conformity indexes of IMPT were significantly lower for PTV1+2 and PTV3. Above 65 Gy, HT and IMPT were equivalent in the rectum, while IMPT spared the bladder and the penile bulb from 0 to 70 Gy. From 0 up to 60 Gy, IMPT dosimetric values were (much) lower for all OARs except the femur heads, where HT was better than 2fIMPT in the 25-35 Gy dose range. OARs mean doses were typically reduced by 30-50% by IMPT. NTCPs for the rectum were within 1% between the two techniques, except when the endpoint was stool frequency, where IMPT showed a small (though statistically significant) benefit. Conclusions: HT and IMPT produce similar dose distributions in the target volume. The current knowledge on dose-effect relations does not allow to quantify the clinical impact of the large sparing of IMPT at medium-to-low doses. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 98 (2011) 74-80
引用
收藏
页码:74 / 80
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Pelvic Lymph Node Irradiation Including Pararectal Sentinel Nodes for Prostate Cancer Patients: Treatment Optimization Comparing Intensity Modulated X-rays, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, and Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy
    Vees, Hansjorg
    Dipasquale, Giovanna
    Nouet, Philippe
    Zilli, Thomas
    Cozzi, Luca
    Miralbell, Raymond
    TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT, 2015, 14 (02) : 181 - 189
  • [42] A Dosimetric Analysis Comparing Treatment of Low-Risk Prostate Cancer With TomoTherapy Versus Static Field Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy
    Shah, Anand P.
    Chen, Sea S.
    Strauss, Jonathan B.
    Kirk, Michael C.
    Coleman, Joy L.
    Coon, Alan B.
    Miller, Cheryl
    Dickler, Adam
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY-CANCER CLINICAL TRIALS, 2009, 32 (05): : 460 - 466
  • [43] Dosimetric Comparisons of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, Tomotherapy, Stereotactic Radiosurgery, and Proton Therapy for Treatment of Patients with a Vestibular Schwannoma
    Yoonjin Oh
    Dong Oh Shin
    Moonkyoo Kong
    Dong Ho Shin
    Weon Kuu Chung
    Dong Wook Kim
    Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 2019, 74 : 389 - 398
  • [44] Dosimetric Comparisons of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy, Tomotherapy, Stereotactic Radiosurgery, and Proton Therapy for Treatment of Patients with a Vestibular Schwannoma
    Oh, Yoonjin
    Shin, Dong Oh
    Kong, Moonkyoo
    Shin, Dong Ho
    Chung, Weon Kuu
    Kim, Dong Wook
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY, 2019, 74 (04) : 389 - 398
  • [45] Assessment of daily dose accumulation for robustly optimized intensity modulated proton therapy treatment of prostate cancer
    Xu, Yihang
    Diwanji, Tejan
    Brovold, Nellie
    Butkus, Michael
    Padgett, Kyle R.
    Schmidt, Ryder M.
    King, Adam
    Dal Pra, Alan
    Abramowitz, Matt
    Pollack, Alan
    Dogan, Nesrin
    PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 81 : 77 - 85
  • [46] TREATMENT AND DOSIMETRIC ADVANTAGES BETWEEN VMAT, IMRT, AND HELICAL TOMOTHERAPY IN PROSTATE CANCER
    Tsai, Chiao-Ling
    Wu, Jian-Kuen
    Chao, Hsiao-Ling
    Tsai, Yi-Chun
    Cheng, Jason Chia-Hsien
    MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2011, 36 (03) : 264 - 271
  • [47] Quality assurance of helical tomotherapy intensity modulated radiation therapy
    Xu, Shouping
    Deng, Xiaowu
    Dai, Xiangkun
    Wang, Lianyuan
    Wang, Yunlai
    Xie, Chuanbin
    Ge, Ruigang
    Gong, Hanshun
    APCMBE 2008: 7TH ASIAN-PACIFIC CONFERENCE ON MEDICAL AND BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING, 2008, 19 : 447 - +
  • [48] A treatment planning study comparing tomotherapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, Sliding Window and proton therapy for low-risk prostate carcinoma
    Sergiu Scobioala
    Christopher Kittel
    Nicolas Wissmann
    Uwe Haverkamp
    Mohammed Channaoui
    Omar Habibeh
    Khaled Elsayad
    Hans Theodor Eich
    Radiation Oncology, 11
  • [49] In silico comparison of whole pelvis intensity-modulated photon versus proton therapy for the postoperative management of prostate cancer
    Gogineni, Emile
    Cruickshank, Ian K.
    Chen, Hao
    Halthore, Aditya
    Li, Heng
    Deville, Curtiland
    ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2023, 62 (06) : 642 - 647
  • [50] Comparison of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for the treatment of head and neck cancer based on radiobiological modelling
    Nguyen, My-Lien
    Afrin, Kazi T.
    Newbury, Patrick
    Henson, Christina
    Ahmad, Salahuddin
    JOURNAL OF RADIOTHERAPY IN PRACTICE, 2023, 22