Literature DB >> 21163588

Variations in linear energy transfer within clinical proton therapy fields and the potential for biological treatment planning.

Clemens Grassberger1, Alexei Trofimov, Anthony Lomax, Harald Paganetti.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To calculate the linear energy transfer (LET) distributions in patients undergoing proton therapy. These distributions can be used to identify areas of elevated or diminished biological effect. The location of such areas might be influenced in intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) optimization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Because Monte Carlo studies to investigate the LET distribution in patients have not been undertaken so far, the code is first validated with simulations in water. The code was used in five patients, for each of them three planning and delivery techniques were simulated: passive scattering, three-dimensional modulation IMPT (3D-IMPT), and distal edge tracking IMPT (DET-IMPT).
RESULTS: The inclusion of secondary particles led to significant differences compared with analytical techniques. In addition, passive scattering and 3D-IMPT led to largely comparable LET distributions, whereas the DET-IMPT plans resulted in considerably increased LET values in normal tissues and critical structures. In the brainstem, dose-averaged LET values exceeding 5 keV/μm were observed in areas with significant dose (>70% of prescribed dose). In noncritical normal tissues, even values >8 keV/μm occurred.
CONCLUSION: This work demonstrates that active scanning offers the possibility of influencing the distribution of dose-averaged LET (i.e., the biological effect) without significantly altering the distribution of physical dose. On the basis of this finding, we propose a method to alter deliberately the LET distribution of a treatment plan in such a manner that the LET is maximized within certain target areas and minimized in normal tissues, while maintaining the prescribed target dose and dose constraints for organs at risk.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21163588      PMCID: PMC3094592          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.027

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


  22 in total

1.  Radiobiological significance of beamline dependent proton energy distributions in a spread-out Bragg peak.

Authors:  H Paganetti; M Goitein
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Intensity modulation methods for proton radiotherapy.

Authors:  A Lomax
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Three-dimensional LET calculations for treatment planning of proton therapy.

Authors:  Jan J Wilkens; Uwe Oelfke
Journal:  Z Med Phys       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.820

4.  Influence of dose engine accuracy on the optimum dose distribution in intensity-modulated proton therapy treatment plans.

Authors:  Martin Soukup; Markus Alber
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-01-12       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Depth absorbed dose and LET distributions of therapeutic 1H, 4He, 7Li, and 12C beams.

Authors:  Johanna Kempe; Irena Gudowska; Anders Brahme
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Measurements of relative biological effectiveness of the 70 MeV proton beam at TRIUMF using Chinese hamster V79 cells and the high-precision cell sorter assay.

Authors:  B G Wouters; G K Lam; U Oelfke; K Gardey; R E Durand; L D Skarsgard
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 2.841

7.  In vivo determinations of RBE in a high energy modulated proton beam using normal tissue reactions and fractionated dose schedules.

Authors:  J Tepper; L Verhey; M Goitein; H D Suit
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1977 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Radiobiological studies of a high-energy modulated proton beam utilizing cultured mammalian cells.

Authors:  J B Robertson; J R Williams; R A Schmidt; J B Little; D F Flynn; H D Suit
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  The influence of RBE variations in a clinical proton treatment plan for a hypopharynx cancer.

Authors:  N Tilly; J Johansson; U Isacsson; J Medin; E Blomquist; E Grusell; B Glimelius
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-05-25       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Clinical implementation of full Monte Carlo dose calculation in proton beam therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Hongyu Jiang; Katia Parodi; Roelf Slopsema; Martijn Engelsman
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-08-13       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  43 in total

Review 1.  Robust Proton Treatment Planning: Physical and Biological Optimization.

Authors:  Jan Unkelbach; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.934

Review 2.  Treatment planning optimisation in proton therapy.

Authors:  S E McGowan; N G Burnet; A J Lomax
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  TOPAS: an innovative proton Monte Carlo platform for research and clinical applications.

Authors:  J Perl; J Shin; J Schumann; B Faddegon; H Paganetti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Linear energy transfer incorporated intensity modulated proton therapy optimization.

Authors:  Wenhua Cao; Azin Khabazian; Pablo P Yepes; Gino Lim; Falk Poenisch; David R Grosshans; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Why RBE must be a variable and not a constant in proton therapy.

Authors:  Bleddyn Jones
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 6.  Modelling variable proton relative biological effectiveness for treatment planning.

Authors:  Aimee McNamara; Henning Willers; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Linear energy transfer-guided optimization in intensity modulated proton therapy: feasibility study and clinical potential.

Authors:  Drosoula Giantsoudi; Clemens Grassberger; David Craft; Andrzej Niemierko; Alexei Trofimov; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Evaluating Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Relative to Passive Scattering Proton Therapy for Increased Vertebral Column Sparing in Craniospinal Irradiation in Growing Pediatric Patients.

Authors:  Drosoula Giantsoudi; Joao Seco; Bree R Eaton; F Joseph Simeone; Hanne Kooy; Torunn I Yock; Nancy J Tarbell; Thomas F DeLaney; Judith Adams; Harald Paganetti; Shannon M MacDonald
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Risk-optimized proton therapy to minimize radiogenic second cancers.

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

10.  Relative biological effectiveness of the 60-MeV therapeutic proton beam at the Institute of Nuclear Physics (IFJ PAN) in Kraków, Poland.

Authors:  Dorota Słonina; Beata Biesaga; Jan Swakoń; Damian Kabat; Leszek Grzanka; Marta Ptaszkiewicz; Urszula Sowa
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2014-07-19       Impact factor: 1.925

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.