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

Title: SU-F-T-196: Hypo-Fractionation with Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Unilateral Metallic Prosthesis Prostate Cancer Patients

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the dosimetric feasibility of hypo-fractionated intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for unilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer patients based on proton collaborative group (PCG)-GU002-10 (NCT01230866) protocol criteria. Methods: A total of five unilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer cases were included in this retrospective study. For each case, IMPT plans were generated for treatment to be delivered with 7.6 Gy[RBE] per fraction in 5 fractions per week for a total dose of 38 Gy(RBE). Each plan was generated using two anterior-oblique beams and one lateral beam. Treatment plans were optimized with an objective meeting PCG-GU002-10 (NCT01230866) protocol criteria: (i) planning target volume (PTV): D99.5% > 36.1 Gy[RBE], (ii) rectum: V24 < 35%, V33.6 < 10%, (iii) bladder: V39 < 8 cc, and (iv) femoral head: V23 < 1cc. Results: All five cases satisfied PTV D99.5% (average=36.82 Gy[RBE]; range, 36.36–37.13 Gy[RBE]). PTV D95% ranged from 36.66 Gy[RBE] to 38.65 Gy[RBE] and PTV V100 ranged from 95.47% to 97.95%. For the rectum, V24 was less than 35% (average=14.07 Gy[RBE]; range, 6.22–18.42%, whereas V33.6 Gy[RBE] was less than 10% (average=6.83; range, 3.06 – 9.15%). Rectal mean dose ranged from 4.22 Gy[RBE] to 9.97 Gy[RBE]. For themore » bladder, V39 was found to be less than 8 cc (average=3.69 cc; range, 0.19–7.68 cc). Bladder mean dose ranged from 4.22 Gy[RBE] to 18.83 Gy[RBE]. For the femoral head, V23 was 0 in all five cases. Conclusion: All five unilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer IMPT plans generated with one lateral and two anterior-oblique beams satisfied the dosimetric criteria of PCG-GU002-10 (NCT01230866) protocol.« less

Authors:
;  [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [5]
  1. McLaren Proton Therapy Center, Karmanos Cancer Institute at McLaren-Flint, Flint, MI (United States)
  2. Procure Proton Therapy Center, Oklahoma City, OK (United States)
  3. University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Liberty Township, OH (United States)
  4. 21st Century Oncology, Estero, FL (United States)
  5. Vantage Oncology, West Hills, CA (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22648813
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; BLADDER; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; PLANNING; PROSTATE; PROSTHESES; PROTON BEAMS; RADIATION DOSES; RADIOTHERAPY; RBE; RECTUM

Citation Formats

Rana, S, Park, S, Zheng, Y, Zhang, Y, Pokharel, and Cheng, C. SU-F-T-196: Hypo-Fractionation with Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Unilateral Metallic Prosthesis Prostate Cancer Patients. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956333.
Rana, S, Park, S, Zheng, Y, Zhang, Y, Pokharel, & Cheng, C. SU-F-T-196: Hypo-Fractionation with Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Unilateral Metallic Prosthesis Prostate Cancer Patients. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956333.
Rana, S, Park, S, Zheng, Y, Zhang, Y, Pokharel, and Cheng, C. 2016. "SU-F-T-196: Hypo-Fractionation with Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Unilateral Metallic Prosthesis Prostate Cancer Patients". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956333.
@article{osti_22648813,
title = {SU-F-T-196: Hypo-Fractionation with Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Unilateral Metallic Prosthesis Prostate Cancer Patients},
author = {Rana, S and Park, S and Zheng, Y and Zhang, Y and Pokharel and Cheng, C},
abstractNote = {Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the dosimetric feasibility of hypo-fractionated intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for unilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer patients based on proton collaborative group (PCG)-GU002-10 (NCT01230866) protocol criteria. Methods: A total of five unilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer cases were included in this retrospective study. For each case, IMPT plans were generated for treatment to be delivered with 7.6 Gy[RBE] per fraction in 5 fractions per week for a total dose of 38 Gy(RBE). Each plan was generated using two anterior-oblique beams and one lateral beam. Treatment plans were optimized with an objective meeting PCG-GU002-10 (NCT01230866) protocol criteria: (i) planning target volume (PTV): D99.5% > 36.1 Gy[RBE], (ii) rectum: V24 < 35%, V33.6 < 10%, (iii) bladder: V39 < 8 cc, and (iv) femoral head: V23 < 1cc. Results: All five cases satisfied PTV D99.5% (average=36.82 Gy[RBE]; range, 36.36–37.13 Gy[RBE]). PTV D95% ranged from 36.66 Gy[RBE] to 38.65 Gy[RBE] and PTV V100 ranged from 95.47% to 97.95%. For the rectum, V24 was less than 35% (average=14.07 Gy[RBE]; range, 6.22–18.42%, whereas V33.6 Gy[RBE] was less than 10% (average=6.83; range, 3.06 – 9.15%). Rectal mean dose ranged from 4.22 Gy[RBE] to 9.97 Gy[RBE]. For the bladder, V39 was found to be less than 8 cc (average=3.69 cc; range, 0.19–7.68 cc). Bladder mean dose ranged from 4.22 Gy[RBE] to 18.83 Gy[RBE]. For the femoral head, V23 was 0 in all five cases. Conclusion: All five unilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer IMPT plans generated with one lateral and two anterior-oblique beams satisfied the dosimetric criteria of PCG-GU002-10 (NCT01230866) protocol.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956333},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Megavoltage photon intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is typically used in the treatment of prostate cancer at our institution. Approximately 1% to 2% of patients with prostate cancer have hip prostheses. The presence of the prosthesis usually complicates the planning process because of dose perturbation around the prosthesis, radiation attenuation through the prosthesis, and the introduction of computed tomography artifacts in the planning volume. In addition, hip prostheses are typically made of materials of high atomic number, which add uncertainty to the dosimetry of the prostate and critical organs in the planning volume. When the prosthesis is bilateral, treatment planning ismore » further complicated because only a limited number of beam angles can be used to avoid the prostheses. In this case study, we will report the observed advantages of using noncoplanar beams in the delivery of IMRT to a prostate cancer patient with bilateral hip prostheses. The treatment was planned for 75.6 Gy using a 7-field coplanar approach and a noncoplanar arrangement, with all fields avoiding entrance though the prostheses. Our results indicate that, compared with the coplanar plan, the noncoplanar plan delivers the prescribed dose to the target with a slightly better conformality and sparing of rectal tissue versus the coplanar plan.« less
  • Purpose: To compare intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and helical tomotherapy (HT) treatment plans for high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa) patients. Methods and Materials: The plans of 8 patients with HRPCa treated with HT were compared with IMPT plans with two quasilateral fields set up (-100{sup o}; 100{sup o}) and optimized with the Hyperion treatment planning system. Both techniques were optimized to simultaneously deliver 74.2 Gy/Gy relative biologic effectiveness (RBE) in 28 fractions on planning target volumes (PTVs)3-4 (P + proximal seminal vesicles), 65.5 Gy/Gy(RBE) on PTV2 (distal seminal vesicles and rectum/prostate overlapping), and 51.8 Gy/Gy(RBE) to PTV1 (pelvic lymph nodes). Normalmore » tissue calculation probability (NTCP) calculations were performed for the rectum, and generalized equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) was estimated for the bowel cavity, penile bulb and bladder. Results: A slightly better PTV coverage and homogeneity of target dose distribution with IMPT was found: the percentage of PTV volume receiving {>=}95% of the prescribed dose (V{sub 95%}) was on average >97% in HT and >99% in IMPT. The conformity indexes were significantly lower for protons than for photons, and there was a statistically significant reduction of the IMPT dosimetric parameters, up to 50 Gy/Gy(RBE) for the rectum and bowel and 60 Gy/Gy(RBE) for the bladder. The NTCP values for the rectum were higher in HT for all the sets of parameters, but the gain was small and in only a few cases statistically significant. Conclusions: Comparable PTV coverage was observed. Based on NTCP calculation, IMPT is expected to allow a small reduction in rectal toxicity, and a significant dosimetric gain with IMPT, both in medium-dose and in low-dose range in all OARs, was observed.« less
  • Purpose: To investigate patients' willingness to participate (WTP) in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with proton beam therapy (PBT) for prostate cancer (PCa). Methods and Materials: We undertook a qualitative research study in which we prospectively enrolled patients with clinically localized PCa. We used purposive sampling to ensure a diverse sample based on age, race, travel distance, and physician. Patients participated in a semi-structured interview in which they reviewed a description of a hypothetical RCT, were asked open-ended and focused follow-up questions regarding their motivations for and concerns about enrollment, and completed a questionnaire assessing characteristicsmore » such as demographics and prior knowledge of IMRT or PBT. Patients' stated WTP was assessed using a 6-point Likert scale. Results: Forty-six eligible patients (33 white, 13 black) were enrolled from the practices of eight physicians. We identified 21 factors that impacted patients' WTP, which largely centered on five major themes: altruism/desire to compare treatments, randomization, deference to physician opinion, financial incentives, and time demands/scheduling. Most patients (27 of 46, 59%) stated they would either 'definitely' or 'probably' participate. Seventeen percent (8 of 46) stated they would 'definitely not' or 'probably not' enroll, most of whom (6 of 8) preferred PBT before their physician visit. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of patients indicated high WTP in a RCT comparing IMRT and PBT for PCa.« less
  • Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to investigate the optimum oblique-beam arrangement for bilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer treatment in pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy. Methods: A computed tomography dataset of bilateral metallic prosthesis prostate cancer case was selected for this retrospective study. A total of four beams (rightanterior- oblique [RAO], left-anterior-oblique [LAO], left-posterior-oblique [LPO], and right-posterior-oblique [RPO]) were selected for treatment planning. PBS plans were generated using multi-field-optimization technique for a total dose of 79.2 Gy[RBE] to be delivered in 44 fractions. Specifically, five different PBS plans were generated based on 2.5% ± 2 mm rangemore » uncertainty using five different beam arrangements (i)LAO+RAO+LPO+RPO, (ii)LAO+RAO, (iii)LPO+RPO, (iv)RAO+LPO, and (v)LAO+RPO. Each PBS plan was optimized by applying identical dose-volume constraints to the PTV, rectum, and bladder. Treatment plans were then compared based on the dose-volume histograms results. Results: The PTV coverage was found to be greater than 99% in all five plans. The homogeneity index (HI) was found to be almost identical (range, 0.03–0.04). The PTV mean dose was found to be comparable (range, 81.0–81.1 Gy[RBE]). For the rectum, the lowest mean dose (8.0 Gy[RBE]) and highest mean dose (31.1 Gy[RBE]) were found in RAO+LAO plan and LPO+RPO plan, respectively. LAO+RAO plan produced the most favorable dosimetric results of the rectum in the medium-dose region (V50) and high-dose region (V70). For the bladder, the lowest (5.0 Gy[RBE]) and highest mean dose (10.3 Gy[RBE]) were found in LPO+RPO plan and RAO+LAO plan, respectively. Other dosimetric results (V50 and V70) of the bladder were slightly better in LPO+RPO plan than in other plans. Conclusion: Dosimetric findings from this study suggest that two anterior-oblique proton beams arrangement (LAO+RAO) is a more favorable option with the possibility of reducing rectal dose significantly while maintaining comparable target coverage and acceptable bladder dose.« less
  • A small decrease in testosterone level has been documented after prostate irradiation, possibly owing to the incidental dose to the testes. Testicular doses from prostate external beam radiation plans with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were calculated to investigate any difference. Testicles were contoured for 16 patients being treated for localized prostate cancer. For each patient, 2 plans were created: 1 with IMRT and 1 with VMAT. No specific attempt was made to reduce testicular dose. Minimum, maximum, and mean doses to the testicles were recorded for each plan. Of the 16 patients, 4 receivedmore » a total dose of 7800 cGy to the prostate alone, 7 received 8000 cGy to the prostate alone, and 5 received 8000 cGy to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. The mean (range) of testicular dose with an IMRT plan was 54.7 cGy (21.1 to 91.9) and 59.0 cGy (25.1 to 93.4) with a VMAT plan. In 12 cases, the mean VMAT dose was higher than the mean IMRT dose, with a mean difference of 4.3 cGy (p = 0.019). There was a small but statistically significant increase in mean testicular dose delivered by VMAT compared with IMRT. Despite this, it unlikely that there is a clinically meaningful difference in testicular doses from either modality.« less