Literature DB >> 10435821

A treatment planning inter-comparison of proton and intensity modulated photon radiotherapy.

A J Lomax1, T Bortfeld, G Goitein, J Debus, C Dykstra, P A Tercier, P A Coucke, R O Mirimanoff.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A comparative treatment planning study has been undertaken between standard photon delivery techniques,b intensity modulated photon methods and spot scanned protons in order to investigate the merits and limitations of each of these treatment approaches.
METHODS: Plans for each modality were performed using CT scans and planning information for nine patients with varying indications and lesion sites and the results have been analysed using a variety of dose and volume based parameters.
RESULTS: Over all cases, it is predicted that the use of protons could lead to a reduction of the total integral dose by a factor three compared to standard photon techniques and a factor two compared to IM photon plans. In addition, in all but one Organ at Risk (OAR) for one case, protons are predicted to reduce both mean OAR dose and the irradiated volume at the 50% mean target dose level compared to both photon methods. However, when considering the volume of an OAR irradiated to 70% or more of the target dose, little difference could be shown between proton and intensity modulated photon plans. On comparing the magnitude of dose hot spots in OARs resulting from the proton and IM photon plans, more variation was observed, and the ranking of the plans was then found to be case and OAR dependent.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of protons has been found to reduce the medium to low dose load (below about 70% of the target dose) to OARs and all non-target tissues compared to both standard and inversely planned photons, but that the use of intensity modulated photons can result in similar levels of high dose conformation to that afforded by protons. However, the introduction of inverse planning methods for protons is necessary before general conclusions on the relative efficacy of photons and protons can be drawn.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10435821     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(99)00036-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  45 in total

1.  Verification of proton range, position, and intensity in IMPT with a 3D liquid scintillator detector system.

Authors:  L Archambault; F Poenisch; N Sahoo; D Robertson; A Lee; M T Gillin; R Mohan; S Beddar
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Contribution to Neutron Fluence and Neutron Absorbed Dose from Double Scattering Proton Therapy System Components.

Authors:  A Pérez-Andújar; W D Newhauser; P M Deluca
Journal:  Nucl Technol       Date:  2009-01-01

3.  Clinical characterization of a proton beam continuous uniform scanning system with dose layer stacking.

Authors:  J B Farr; A E Mascia; W C Hsi; C E Allgower; F Jesseph; A N Schreuder; M Wolanski; D F Nichiporov; V Anferov
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Comparison of intensity modulated x-ray therapy and intensity modulated proton therapy for selective subvolume boosting: a phantom study.

Authors:  R T Flynn; D L Barbee; T R Mackie; R Jeraj
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Technical Note: Optimization of spot and trimmer position during dynamically collimated proton therapy.

Authors:  Blake R Smith; Daniel E Hyer; Ryan T Flynn; Wesley S Culberson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Trimmer sequencing time minimization during dynamically collimated proton therapy using a colony of cooperating agents.

Authors:  Blake R Smith; Daniel E Hyer; Ryan T Flynn; Patrick M Hill; Wesley S Culberson
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Proton beam radiotherapy: report of the first ten patients treated at the "Centro Nazionale di Adroterapia Oncologica (CNAO)" for skull base and spine tumours.

Authors:  Roberto Orecchia; Viviana Vitolo; Maria Rosaria Fiore; Piero Fossati; Alberto Iannalfi; Barbara Vischioni; Anurita Srivastava; Jeffrey Tuan; Mario Ciocca; Silvia Molinelli; Alfredo Mirandola; Gloria Vilches; Andrea Mairani; Barbara Tagaste; Marco Riboldi; Giulia Fontana; Guido Baroni; Sandro Rossi; Marco Krengli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Small bowel toxicity after high dose spot scanning-based proton beam therapy for paraspinal/retroperitoneal neoplasms.

Authors:  R A Schneider; V Vitolo; F Albertini; T Koch; C Ares; A Lomax; G Goitein; E B Hug
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2013-09-21       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 9.  Assessment of the risk for developing a second malignancy from scattered and secondary radiation in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.316

10.  Comparative study of dose distribution between carbon ion radiotherapy and photon radiotherapy for head and neck tumor.

Authors:  M Amirul Islam; Takeshi Yanagi; Jun-Etsu Mizoe; Hideyuki Mizuno; Hirohiko Tsujii
Journal:  Radiat Med       Date:  2008-09-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.