skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Proton Therapy Coverage for Prostate Cancer Treatment

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the impact of prostate motion on dose coverage in proton therapy. Methods and Materials: A total of 120 prostate positions were analyzed on 10 treatment plans for 10 prostate patients treated using our low-risk proton therapy prostate protocol (University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute 001). Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging T{sub 2}-weighted turbo spin-echo scans were registered for all cases. The planning target volume included the prostate with a 5-mm axial and 8-mm superoinferior expansion. The prostate was repositioned using 5- and 10-mm one-dimensional vectors and 10-mm multidimensional vectors (Points A-D). The beam was realigned for the 5- and 10-mm displacements. The prescription dose was 78 Gy equivalent (GE). Results: The mean percentage of rectum receiving 70 Gy (V{sub 70}) was 7.9%, the bladder V{sub 70} was 14.0%, and the femoral head/neck V{sub 50} was 0.1%, and the mean pelvic dose was 4.6 GE. The percentage of prostate receiving 78 Gy (V{sub 78}) with the 5-mm movements changed by -0.2% (range, 0.006-0.5%, p > 0.7). However, the prostate V{sub 78} after a 10-mm displacement changed significantly (p < 0.003) with different movements: 3.4% (superior), -5.6% (inferior), and -10.2% (posterior). The corresponding minimal doses were also reduced:more » 4.5 GE, -4.7 GE, and -11.7 GE (p {<=} 0.003). For displacement points A-D, the clinical target volume V{sub 78} coverage had a large and significant reduction of 17.4% (range, 13.5-17.4%, p < 0.001) in V{sub 78} coverage of the clinical target volume. The minimal prostate dose was reduced 33% (25.8 GE), on average, for Points A-D. The prostate minimal dose improved from 69.3 GE to 78.2 GE (p < 0.001) with realignment for 10-mm movements. Conclusion: The good dose coverage and low normal doses achieved for the initial plan was maintained with movements of {<=}5 mm. Beam realignment improved coverage for 10-mm displacements.« less

Authors:
 [1]; ;  [1];  [2]; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute, Jacksonville, FL (United States)
  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
21124158
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Journal Name:
International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 70; Journal Issue: 5; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.001; PII: S0360-3016(07)04076-X; Copyright (c) 2008 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Journal ID: ISSN 0360-3016
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; BLADDER; CARCINOMAS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; NMR IMAGING; PROSTATE; RADIATION DOSES; RECTUM; SPIN ECHO

Citation Formats

Vargas, Carlos, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, Wagner, Marcus, Mahajan, Chaitali, Indelicato, Daniel, Fryer, Amber, Falchook, Aaron, Horne, David C, Chellini, Angela, McKenzie, Craig C, Lawlor, Paula C, Zuofeng, Li, Liyong, Lin, and Keole, Sameer. Proton Therapy Coverage for Prostate Cancer Treatment. United States: N. p., 2008. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.001.
Vargas, Carlos, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, Wagner, Marcus, Mahajan, Chaitali, Indelicato, Daniel, Fryer, Amber, Falchook, Aaron, Horne, David C, Chellini, Angela, McKenzie, Craig C, Lawlor, Paula C, Zuofeng, Li, Liyong, Lin, & Keole, Sameer. Proton Therapy Coverage for Prostate Cancer Treatment. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.001
Vargas, Carlos, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, Wagner, Marcus, Mahajan, Chaitali, Indelicato, Daniel, Fryer, Amber, Falchook, Aaron, Horne, David C, Chellini, Angela, McKenzie, Craig C, Lawlor, Paula C, Zuofeng, Li, Liyong, Lin, and Keole, Sameer. 2008. "Proton Therapy Coverage for Prostate Cancer Treatment". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.001.
@article{osti_21124158,
title = {Proton Therapy Coverage for Prostate Cancer Treatment},
author = {Vargas, Carlos and Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL and Wagner, Marcus and Mahajan, Chaitali and Indelicato, Daniel and Fryer, Amber and Falchook, Aaron and Horne, David C and Chellini, Angela and McKenzie, Craig C and Lawlor, Paula C and Zuofeng, Li and Liyong, Lin and Keole, Sameer},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To determine the impact of prostate motion on dose coverage in proton therapy. Methods and Materials: A total of 120 prostate positions were analyzed on 10 treatment plans for 10 prostate patients treated using our low-risk proton therapy prostate protocol (University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute 001). Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging T{sub 2}-weighted turbo spin-echo scans were registered for all cases. The planning target volume included the prostate with a 5-mm axial and 8-mm superoinferior expansion. The prostate was repositioned using 5- and 10-mm one-dimensional vectors and 10-mm multidimensional vectors (Points A-D). The beam was realigned for the 5- and 10-mm displacements. The prescription dose was 78 Gy equivalent (GE). Results: The mean percentage of rectum receiving 70 Gy (V{sub 70}) was 7.9%, the bladder V{sub 70} was 14.0%, and the femoral head/neck V{sub 50} was 0.1%, and the mean pelvic dose was 4.6 GE. The percentage of prostate receiving 78 Gy (V{sub 78}) with the 5-mm movements changed by -0.2% (range, 0.006-0.5%, p > 0.7). However, the prostate V{sub 78} after a 10-mm displacement changed significantly (p < 0.003) with different movements: 3.4% (superior), -5.6% (inferior), and -10.2% (posterior). The corresponding minimal doses were also reduced: 4.5 GE, -4.7 GE, and -11.7 GE (p {<=} 0.003). For displacement points A-D, the clinical target volume V{sub 78} coverage had a large and significant reduction of 17.4% (range, 13.5-17.4%, p < 0.001) in V{sub 78} coverage of the clinical target volume. The minimal prostate dose was reduced 33% (25.8 GE), on average, for Points A-D. The prostate minimal dose improved from 69.3 GE to 78.2 GE (p < 0.001) with realignment for 10-mm movements. Conclusion: The good dose coverage and low normal doses achieved for the initial plan was maintained with movements of {<=}5 mm. Beam realignment improved coverage for 10-mm displacements.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.001},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/21124158}, journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
issn = {0360-3016},
number = 5,
volume = 70,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2008},
month = {Tue Apr 01 00:00:00 EDT 2008}
}