Literature DB >> 19239059

A comparison of proton therapy and IMRT treatment plans for prostate radiotherapy.

S J Dowdell1, P E Metcalfe, J E Morales, M Jackson, A B Rosenfeld.   

Abstract

Proton therapy (PT) is becoming a more widely available treatment option on the world stage and there is some interest in investment in this treatment option in Australia. The benefit of PT has been shown for a number of tumour sites, particularly for paediatric patients. The workload from these patients may not completely fill the maximum yearly workload of a machine. This work aims to ascertain if prostate cancer would be a suitable candidate to fill the rest of the workload at an Australian PT facility. Passive and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans were generated for a prostate patient. These were compared to 7 field sliding window and step and shoot IMRT plans. All plans used a prescription dose of 78 CGE. IMRT and IMPT plans used inverse planning for optimisation. Homogeneity in the PTV was best for the IMPT plan. IMPT also gave the best rectal sparing. The bladder and femoral heads were exposed to less dose in both proton plans. Proton plans exposed normal tissue outside the PTV to less than 50% of the dose given by the IMRT plans. PT, particularly IMPT, is a suitable treatment option for the prostate cancer patient presented here.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19239059     DOI: 10.1007/bf03178602

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Australas Phys Eng Sci Med        ISSN: 0158-9938            Impact factor:   1.430


  4 in total

1.  Multifield optimization intensity-modulated proton therapy (MFO-IMPT) for prostate cancer: Robustness analysis through simulation of rotational and translational alignment errors.

Authors:  Thomas J Pugh; Richard A Amos; Sandra John Baptiste; Seungtaek Choi; Quyhn Nhu Nguyen; X Ronald Zhu; Matthew B Palmer; Andrew K Lee
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 1.482

Review 2.  Proton therapy for prostate cancer: current state and future perspectives.

Authors:  Yao-Yu Wu; Kang-Hsing Fan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Multiple Computed Tomography Robust Optimization to Account for Random Anatomic Density Variations During Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy.

Authors:  Mingyao Zhu; Adeel Kaiser; Mark V Mishra; Young Kwok; Jill Remick; Cristina DeCesaris; Katja M Langen
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-12-26

4.  Quality of life and toxicity from passively scattered and spot-scanning proton beam therapy for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Thomas J Pugh; Mark F Munsell; Seungtaek Choi; Quyhn Nhu Nguyen; Benson Mathai; X Ron Zhu; Narayan Sahoo; Michael Gillin; Jennifer L Johnson; Richard A Amos; Lei Dong; Usama Mahmood; Deborah A Kuban; Steven J Frank; Karen E Hoffman; Sean E McGuire; Andrew K Lee
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2013-10-15       Impact factor: 7.038

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.