PURPOSE: To compare dose-volume histograms (DVH) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated by photon or proton radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Dose-volume histograms were compared between photon, including three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and proton plans at doses of 66 Gy, 87.5 Gy in Stage I (n=10) and 60-63 Gy, and 74 Gy in Stage III (n=15). RESULTS: For Stage I, the mean total lung V5, V10, and V20 were 31.8%, 24.6%, and 15.8%, respectively, for photon 3D-CRT with 66 Gy, whereas they were 13.4%, 12.3%, and 10.9%, respectively, with proton with dose escalation to 87.5 cobalt Gray equivalents (CGE) (p=0.002). For Stage III, the mean total lung V5, V10, and V20 were 54.1%, 46.9%, and 34.8%, respectively, for photon 3D-CRT with 63 Gy, whereas they were 39.7%, 36.6%, and 31.6%, respectively, for proton with dose escalation to 74 CGE (p=0.002). In all cases, the doses to lung, spinal cord, heart, esophagus, and integral dose were lower with proton therapy even compared with IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: Proton treatment appears to reduce dose to normal tissues significantly, even with dose escalation, compared with standard-dose photon therapy, either 3D-CRT or IMRT.
PURPOSE: To compare dose-volume histograms (DVH) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated by photon or proton radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Dose-volume histograms were compared between photon, including three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and proton plans at doses of 66 Gy, 87.5 Gy in Stage I (n=10) and 60-63 Gy, and 74 Gy in Stage III (n=15). RESULTS: For Stage I, the mean total lung V5, V10, and V20 were 31.8%, 24.6%, and 15.8%, respectively, for photon 3D-CRT with 66 Gy, whereas they were 13.4%, 12.3%, and 10.9%, respectively, with proton with dose escalation to 87.5 cobalt Gray equivalents (CGE) (p=0.002). For Stage III, the mean total lung V5, V10, and V20 were 54.1%, 46.9%, and 34.8%, respectively, for photon 3D-CRT with 63 Gy, whereas they were 39.7%, 36.6%, and 31.6%, respectively, for proton with dose escalation to 74 CGE (p=0.002). In all cases, the doses to lung, spinal cord, heart, esophagus, and integral dose were lower with proton therapy even compared with IMRT. CONCLUSIONS: Proton treatment appears to reduce dose to normal tissues significantly, even with dose escalation, compared with standard-dose photon therapy, either 3D-CRT or IMRT.
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: R Fernando; D Maples; L K Senavirathna; Y Zheng; J C Polf; E R Benton; K E Bartels; D Piao; A Ranjan Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2014-05-23 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: Justin Phillips; Gueorgui Gueorguiev; James A Shackleford; Clemens Grassberger; Stephen Dowdell; Harald Paganetti; Gregory C Sharp Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2014-07-16 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Joe Y Chang; Heng Li; X Ronald Zhu; Zhongxing Liao; Lina Zhao; Amy Liu; Yupeng Li; Narayan Sahoo; Falk Poenisch; Daniel R Gomez; Richard Wu; Michael Gillin; Xiaodong Zhang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Joe Y Chang; Vivek Verma; Ming Li; Wencheng Zhang; Ritsuko Komaki; Charles Lu; Pamela K Allen; Zhongxing Liao; James Welsh; Steven H Lin; Daniel Gomez; Melenda Jeter; Michael O'Reilly; Ronald X Zhu; Xiaodong Zhang; Heng Li; Radhe Mohan; John V Heymach; Ara A Vaporciyan; Stephen Hahn; James D Cox Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-08-10 Impact factor: 31.777