Literature DB >> 18374228

Proton therapy coverage for prostate cancer treatment.

Carlos Vargas1, Marcus Wagner, Chaitali Mahajan, Daniel Indelicato, Amber Fryer, Aaron Falchook, David Horne, Angela Chellini, Craig McKenzie, Paula Lawlor, Zuofeng Li, Liyong Lin, Sameer Keole.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of prostate motion on dose coverage in proton therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 120 prostate positions were analyzed on 10 treatment plans for 10 prostate patients treated using our low-risk proton therapy prostate protocol (University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute 001). Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging T(2)-weighted turbo spin-echo scans were registered for all cases. The planning target volume included the prostate with a 5-mm axial and 8-mm superoinferior expansion. The prostate was repositioned using 5- and 10-mm one-dimensional vectors and 10-mm multidimensional vectors (Points A-D). The beam was realigned for the 5- and 10-mm displacements. The prescription dose was 78 Gy equivalent (GE).
RESULTS: The mean percentage of rectum receiving 70 Gy (V(70)) was 7.9%, the bladder V(70) was 14.0%, and the femoral head/neck V(50) was 0.1%, and the mean pelvic dose was 4.6 GE. The percentage of prostate receiving 78 Gy (V(78)) with the 5-mm movements changed by -0.2% (range, 0.006-0.5%, p > 0.7). However, the prostate V(78) after a 10-mm displacement changed significantly (p < 0.003) with different movements: 3.4% (superior), -5.6% (inferior), and -10.2% (posterior). The corresponding minimal doses were also reduced: 4.5 GE, -4.7 GE, and -11.7 GE (p < or = 0.003). For displacement points A-D, the clinical target volume V(78) coverage had a large and significant reduction of 17.4% (range, 13.5-17.4%, p < 0.001) in V(78) coverage of the clinical target volume. The minimal prostate dose was reduced 33% (25.8 GE), on average, for Points A-D. The prostate minimal dose improved from 69.3 GE to 78.2 GE (p < 0.001) with realignment for 10-mm movements.
CONCLUSION: The good dose coverage and low normal doses achieved for the initial plan was maintained with movements of < or = 5 mm. Beam realignment improved coverage for 10-mm displacements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18374228     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  4 in total

1.  Towards a Clinical Decision Support System for External Beam Radiation Oncology Prostate Cancer Patients: Proton vs. Photon Radiotherapy? A Radiobiological Study of Robustness and Stability.

Authors:  Seán Walsh; Erik Roelofs; Peter Kuess; Yvonka van Wijk; Ben Vanneste; Andre Dekker; Philippe Lambin; Bleddyn Jones; Dietmar Georg; Frank Verhaegen
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2018-02-18       Impact factor: 6.639

2.  Beam-specific planning target volumes incorporating 4D CT for pencil beam scanning proton therapy of thoracic tumors.

Authors:  Liyong Lin; Minglei Kang; Sheng Huang; Rulon Mayer; Andrew Thomas; Timothy D Solberg; James E McDonough; Charles B Simone
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Impact of intrafraction prostate motion on clinical target coverage in proton therapy: A simulation study of dosimetric differences in two delivery techniques.

Authors:  Zhong Su; Roelf Slopsema; Stella Flampouri; Zuofeng Li
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  On-line dose-guidance to account for inter-fractional motion during proton therapy.

Authors:  Kia Busch; Ludvig P Muren; Sara Thörnqvist; Andreas G Andersen; Jesper Pedersen; Lei Dong; Jørgen B B Petersen
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-12-19
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.