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

Title: SU-F-T-134: Can We Use the Same Dose Constrains Learnt From Photon World to Plan Proton for Lung Cancer?

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate if the same DVH constrains used in photon plans can be safely used to plan proton therapy for lung cancer. Since protons and photons have different dose deposition patterns, the hypothesis is following DVH constrains derived from photon world is not safe for proton. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated plans for 11 lung cancer patients. Each patient was planned with photon and proton following the same dose constrains. Dose statistics on PTV, normal lung, heart and esophagus were extracted for comparison. gEUD for normal lung was calculated and compared between proton and photon plans. We calculated series of gEUDs for each plan by varying the parameter “a” in gEUD formula from 0.1 to 3, covering the whole confidence interval. Results: For all patients, proton plans yield similar PTV coverage and lower dose to heart and esophagus than photon plans. Normal lung V5 was 32.3 % on average in proton plans than 55.4 % in photon. Normal lung gEUD monotonically increased with increasing “a” for all proton and photon plans. For a given patient, the gEUD-proton(a) had a steeper slope than gEUD-photon(a). The two curves crossed for 8 out of 11 patients when “a” = [0.1, 3]. a-crossing rangedmore » from 0.8 to 2.44 with an average of 1.15. For a« less

Authors:
 [1]; ;  [2];  [3]
  1. Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ (United States)
  2. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ (United States)
  3. Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers The State University of New, New Brunswick, NJ (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22642375
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; LUNGS; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; PHOTONS; PRODUCTIVITY; PROTON BEAMS; RADIATION DOSES

Citation Formats

Xiao, Z, Zou, J, Yue, N, and Zhang, M. SU-F-T-134: Can We Use the Same Dose Constrains Learnt From Photon World to Plan Proton for Lung Cancer?. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956270.
Xiao, Z, Zou, J, Yue, N, & Zhang, M. SU-F-T-134: Can We Use the Same Dose Constrains Learnt From Photon World to Plan Proton for Lung Cancer?. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956270.
Xiao, Z, Zou, J, Yue, N, and Zhang, M. 2016. "SU-F-T-134: Can We Use the Same Dose Constrains Learnt From Photon World to Plan Proton for Lung Cancer?". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956270.
@article{osti_22642375,
title = {SU-F-T-134: Can We Use the Same Dose Constrains Learnt From Photon World to Plan Proton for Lung Cancer?},
author = {Xiao, Z and Zou, J and Yue, N and Zhang, M},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To evaluate if the same DVH constrains used in photon plans can be safely used to plan proton therapy for lung cancer. Since protons and photons have different dose deposition patterns, the hypothesis is following DVH constrains derived from photon world is not safe for proton. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated plans for 11 lung cancer patients. Each patient was planned with photon and proton following the same dose constrains. Dose statistics on PTV, normal lung, heart and esophagus were extracted for comparison. gEUD for normal lung was calculated and compared between proton and photon plans. We calculated series of gEUDs for each plan by varying the parameter “a” in gEUD formula from 0.1 to 3, covering the whole confidence interval. Results: For all patients, proton plans yield similar PTV coverage and lower dose to heart and esophagus than photon plans. Normal lung V5 was 32.3 % on average in proton plans than 55.4 % in photon. Normal lung gEUD monotonically increased with increasing “a” for all proton and photon plans. For a given patient, the gEUD-proton(a) had a steeper slope than gEUD-photon(a). The two curves crossed for 8 out of 11 patients when “a” = [0.1, 3]. a-crossing ranged from 0.8 to 2.44 with an average of 1.15. For a},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956270},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: To assess the impact of attenuation and scatter corrections on the calculation of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)-weighted mean dose (SWMD) and functional volume segmentation as applied to radiation therapy treatment planning for lung cancer. Methods and Materials: Nine patients with lung cancer underwent a SPECT lung perfusion scan. For each scan, four image sets were reconstructed using the ordered subsets expectation maximization method with attenuation and scatter corrections ranging from none to a most comprehensive combination of attenuation corrections and direct scatter modeling. Functional volumes were segmented in each reconstructed image using 10%, 20%, ..., 90% ofmore » maximum SPECT intensity as a threshold. Systematic effects of SPECT reconstruction methods on treatment planning using functional volume were studied by calculating size and spatial agreements of functional volumes, and V{sub 20} for functional volume from actual treatment plans. The SWMD was calculated for radiation beams with a variety of possible gantry angles and field sizes. Results: Functional volume segmentation is sensitive to the particular method of SPECT reconstruction used. Large variations in functional volumes, as high as >50%, were observed in SPECT images reconstructed with different attenuation/scatter corrections. However, SWMD was less sensitive to the type of scatter corrections. SWMD was consistent within 2% for all reconstructions as long as computed tomography-based attenuation correction was used. Conclusion: When using perfusion SPECT images during treatment planning optimization/evaluation, the SWMD may be the preferred figure of merit, as it is less affected by reconstruction technique, compared with threshold-based functional volume segmentation.« less
  • Purpose: To analyze outcomes and predictors associated with proton radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the National Cancer Database. Methods and Materials: The National Cancer Database was queried to capture patients with stage I-IV NSCLC treated with thoracic radiation from 2004 to 2012. A logistic regression model was used to determine the predictors for utilization of proton radiation therapy. The univariate and multivariable association with overall survival were assessed by Cox proportional hazards models along with log–rank tests. A propensity score matching method was implemented to balance baseline covariates and eliminate selection bias. Results: A total of 243,822more » patients (photon radiation therapy: 243,474; proton radiation therapy: 348) were included in the analysis. Patients in a ZIP code with a median income of <$46,000 per year were less likely to receive proton treatment, with the income cohort of $30,000 to $35,999 least likely to receive proton therapy (odds ratio 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.90]; P=.011). On multivariate analysis of all patients, non-proton therapy was associated with significantly worse survival compared with proton therapy (hazard ratio 1.21 [95% CI 1.06-1.39]; P<.01). On propensity matched analysis, proton radiation therapy (n=309) was associated with better 5-year overall survival compared with non-proton radiation therapy (n=1549), 22% versus 16% (P=.025). For stage II and III patients, non-proton radiation therapy was associated with worse survival compared with proton radiation therapy (hazard ratio 1.35 [95% CI 1.10-1.64], P<.01). Conclusions: Thoracic radiation with protons is associated with better survival in this retrospective analysis; further validation in the randomized setting is needed to account for any imbalances in patient characteristics, including positron emission tomography–computed tomography staging.« less
  • Purpose: To quantify and compare the effects of respiratory motion on paired passively scattered proton therapy (PSPT) and intensity modulated photon therapy (IMRT) plans; and to establish the relationship between the magnitude of tumor motion and the respiratory-induced dose difference for both modalities. Methods and Materials: In a randomized clinical trial comparing PSPT and IMRT, radiation therapy plans have been designed according to common planning protocols. Four-dimensional (4D) dose was computed for PSPT and IMRT plans for a patient cohort with respiratory motion ranging from 3 to 17 mm. Image registration and dose accumulation were performed using grayscale-based deformable imagemore » registration algorithms. The dose–volume histogram (DVH) differences (4D-3D [3D = 3-dimensional]) were compared for PSPT and IMRT. Changes in 4D-3D dose were correlated to the magnitude of tumor respiratory motion. Results: The average 4D-3D dose to 95% of the internal target volume was close to zero, with 19 of 20 patients within 1% of prescribed dose for both modalities. The mean 4D-3D between the 2 modalities was not statistically significant (P<.05) for all dose–volume histogram indices (mean ± SD) except the lung V5 (PSPT: +1.1% ± 0.9%; IMRT: +0.4% ± 1.2%) and maximum cord dose (PSPT: +1.5 ± 2.9 Gy; IMRT: 0.0 ± 0.2 Gy). Changes in 4D-3D dose were correlated to tumor motion for only 2 indices: dose to 95% planning target volume, and heterogeneity index. Conclusions: With our current margin formalisms, target coverage was maintained in the presence of respiratory motion up to 17 mm for both PSPT and IMRT. Only 2 of 11 4D-3D indices (lung V5 and spinal cord maximum) were statistically distinguishable between PSPT and IMRT, contrary to the notion that proton therapy will be more susceptible to respiratory motion. Because of the lack of strong correlations with 4D-3D dose differences in PSPT and IMRT, the extent of tumor motion was not an adequate predictor of potential dosimetric error caused by breathing motion.« less
  • Purpose: To compare dose volume histograms of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) with those of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) for the treatment of stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to explore the possibility of individualized radical radiotherapy. Methods and Materials: Dose volume histograms designed to deliver IMRT at 60 to 63 Gy, PSPT at 74 Gy, and IMPT at the same doses were compared and the use of individualized radical radiotherapy was assessed in patients with extensive stage IIIB NSCLC (n = 10 patients for each approach). These patients were selected based on theirmore » extensive disease and were considered to have no or borderline tolerance to IMRT at 60 to 63 Gy, based on the dose to normal tissue volume constraints (lung volume receiving 20 Gy [V20] of <35%, total mean lung dose <20 Gy; spinal cord dose, <45 Gy). The possibility of increasing the total tumor dose with IMPT for each patient without exceeding the dose volume constraints (maximum tolerated dose [MTD]) was also investigated. Results: Compared with IMRT, IMPT spared more lung, heart, spinal cord, and esophagus, even with dose escalation from 63 Gy to 83.5 Gy, with a mean MTD of 74 Gy. Compared with PSPT, IMPT allowed further dose escalation from 74 Gy to a mean MTD of 84.4 Gy (range, 79.4-88.4 Gy) while all parameters of normal tissue sparing were kept at lower or similar levels. In addition, IMPT prevented lower-dose target coverage in patients with complicated tumor anatomies. Conclusions: IMPT reduces the dose to normal tissue and allows individualized radical radiotherapy for extensive stage IIIB NSCLC.« less
  • Purpose: This study evaluated the plan quality and dose delivery accuracy of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) helical Tomotherapy (HT) treatments for lung cancer. Results were compared with those previously reported by our group for flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) VMAT treatments. This work forms part of an ongoing multicentre and multisystem planning and dosimetry audit on FFF beams for lung SBRT. Methods: CT datasets and DICOM RT structures delineating the target volume and organs at risk for 6 lung cancer patients were selected. Treatment plans were generated using the HT treatment planning system. Tumour locations were classifiedmore » as near rib, near bronchial tree or in free lung with prescribed doses of 48Gy/4fr, 50Gy/5fr and 54Gy/3fr respectively. Dose constraints were specified by a modified RTOG0915 protocol used for an Australian SBRT phase II trial. Plan quality was evaluated using mean PTV dose, PTV volume receiving 100% of the prescribed dose (V100%), target conformity (CI=VD100%/VPTV) and low dose spillage (LDS=VD50%/VPTV). Planned dose distributions were compared to those measured using an ArcCheck phantom. Delivery accuracy was evaluated using a gamma-index pass rate of 95% with 3% (of max dose) and 3mm criteria. Results: Treatment plans for all patients were clinically acceptable in terms of quality and accuracy of dose delivery. The following DVH metrics are reported as averages (SD) of all plans investigated: mean PTV dose was 115.3(2.4)% of prescription, V100% was 98.8(0.9)%, CI was 1.14(0.03) and LDS was 5.02(0.37). The plans had an average gamma-index passing rate of 99.3(1.3)%. Conclusion: The results reported in this study for HT agree within 1 SD to those previously published by our group for VMAT FF and FFF lung SBRT treatments. This suggests that HT delivers lung SBRT treatments of comparable quality and delivery accuracy as VMAT using both FF and FFF beams.« less