M F Moyers1, D W Miller, D A Bush, J D Slater. 1. Department of Radiation Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA 92354, USA. moyers@proton.llumc.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: Proton beams can potentially increase the dose delivered to lung tumors without increasing the dose to critical normal tissues because protons can be stopped before encountering the normal tissues. This potential can only be realized if tissue motion and planning uncertainties are correctly included during planning. This study evaluated several planning strategies to determine which method best provides adequate tumor coverage, minimal normal tissue irradiation, and simplicity of use. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Proton beam treatment plans were generated using one or more of three different planning strategies. These strategies included designing apertures and boluses to the PTV, apertures to the PTV and boluses to the CTV, and aperture and bolus to the CTV. RESULTS: The planning target volume as specified in ICRU Report 50 can be used only to design the lateral margins of beams, because the distal and proximal margins resulting from CT number uncertainty, beam range uncertainty, tissue motions, and setup uncertainties, are different than the lateral margins resulting from these same factors. The best strategy for target coverage with the planning tools available overirradiated some normal tissues unnecessarily. The available tools also made the planning of lung tumors difficult. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that inclusion of target motion and setup uncertainties into a plan should be performed in the beam design step instead of creating new targets. New computerized treatment planning system tools suggested by this study will ease planning, facilitate abandonment of the PTV concept, improve conformance of the dose distribution to the target, and improve conformal avoidance of critical normal tissues.
PURPOSE: Proton beams can potentially increase the dose delivered to lung tumors without increasing the dose to critical normal tissues because protons can be stopped before encountering the normal tissues. This potential can only be realized if tissue motion and planning uncertainties are correctly included during planning. This study evaluated several planning strategies to determine which method best provides adequate tumor coverage, minimal normal tissue irradiation, and simplicity of use. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Proton beam treatment plans were generated using one or more of three different planning strategies. These strategies included designing apertures and boluses to the PTV, apertures to the PTV and boluses to the CTV, and aperture and bolus to the CTV. RESULTS: The planning target volume as specified in ICRU Report 50 can be used only to design the lateral margins of beams, because the distal and proximal margins resulting from CT number uncertainty, beam range uncertainty, tissue motions, and setup uncertainties, are different than the lateral margins resulting from these same factors. The best strategy for target coverage with the planning tools available overirradiated some normal tissues unnecessarily. The available tools also made the planning of lung tumors difficult. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that inclusion of target motion and setup uncertainties into a plan should be performed in the beam design step instead of creating new targets. New computerized treatment planning system tools suggested by this study will ease planning, facilitate abandonment of the PTV concept, improve conformance of the dose distribution to the target, and improve conformal avoidance of critical normal tissues.
Authors: Arya Amini; Katherine Ciura; James Welsh; Ngoc Nguyen; Matt Palmer; Pamela K Allen; Michael Paolini; Zhongxing Liao; Jaques Bluett; Radhe Mohan; Daniel Gomez; James D Cox; Ritsuko Komaki; Joe Y Chang Journal: Med Dosim Date: 2013 Impact factor: 1.482
Authors: Adam D Yock; Radhe Mohan; Stella Flampouri; Walter Bosch; Paige A Taylor; David Gladstone; Siyong Kim; Jason Sohn; Robert Wallace; Ying Xiao; Jeff Buchsbaum Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-12-15
Authors: Laura A Rechner; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Carol Etzel; Andrew K Lee; Wayne D Newhauser Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Peter C Park; X Ronald Zhu; Andrew K Lee; Narayan Sahoo; Adam D Melancon; Lifei Zhang; Lei Dong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-06-22 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Julie A Bradley; Meng Wei Ho; Zuofeng Li; Xiaoying Liang; Michael Rutenberg; Roi Dagan; Nancy P Mendenhall Journal: Int J Part Ther Date: 2017-07-11
Authors: Chenbin Liu; Steven E Schild; Joe Y Chang; Zhongxing Liao; Shawn Korte; Jiajian Shen; Xiaoning Ding; Yanle Hu; Yixiu Kang; Sameer R Keole; Terence T Sio; William W Wong; Narayan Sahoo; Martin Bues; Wei Liu Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Laura A Rechner; John G Eley; Rebecca M Howell; Rui Zhang; Dragan Mirkovic; Wayne D Newhauser Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2015-04-28 Impact factor: 3.609