B Jones1, P Wilson, A Nagano, J Fenwick, G McKenna. 1. Gray Institute for Radiation Oncology and Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Bleddyn.Jones@rob.ox.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To improve medulloblastoma proton therapy. Although considered ideal for proton therapy, there are potential disadvantages. Expected benefits include reduced radiation-induced cancer and circulatory complications, while avoiding small brain volumes of dose in-homogeneity when compared with conventional X-rays. Several aspects of proton therapy might contribute to reduced tumour control due to (a) the use of more homogenous dose levels which can result in under-dosage, (b) differences in relative biological effectiveness (RBE) between that prescription RBE of 1.1 and the RBE of brain and spinal cord (likely to exceed 1.1) and in medulloblastoma cells (where RBE is likely to be below 1.1). Such changes, although speculative for RBE, might result in potential underdosage of tumour cells and a higher bio-effect in brain tissue. METHODS: Dose distributions for X-ray and proton treatment are compared, with allocation of likely RBE values for fast growing medullolastoma cells and stable central nervous system tissue. RESULTS: These physical and radiobiological factors are shown to combine to give a higher risk of tumour recurrence with further risks on tumour control when dose reduction schedules used for X-ray therapy are replicated for proton therapy for "low-risk" patients. CONCLUSION: The dose distributions and prescribed doses of proton therapy, taking into account RBE, in children and adults with medulloblastoma, need to be reconsidered.
OBJECTIVE: To improve medulloblastoma proton therapy. Although considered ideal for proton therapy, there are potential disadvantages. Expected benefits include reduced radiation-induced cancer and circulatory complications, while avoiding small brain volumes of dose in-homogeneity when compared with conventional X-rays. Several aspects of proton therapy might contribute to reduced tumour control due to (a) the use of more homogenous dose levels which can result in under-dosage, (b) differences in relative biological effectiveness (RBE) between that prescription RBE of 1.1 and the RBE of brain and spinal cord (likely to exceed 1.1) and in medulloblastoma cells (where RBE is likely to be below 1.1). Such changes, although speculative for RBE, might result in potential underdosage of tumour cells and a higher bio-effect in brain tissue. METHODS: Dose distributions for X-ray and proton treatment are compared, with allocation of likely RBE values for fast growing medullolastoma cells and stable central nervous system tissue. RESULTS: These physical and radiobiological factors are shown to combine to give a higher risk of tumour recurrence with further risks on tumour control when dose reduction schedules used for X-ray therapy are replicated for proton therapy for "low-risk" patients. CONCLUSION: The dose distributions and prescribed doses of proton therapy, taking into account RBE, in children and adults with medulloblastoma, need to be reconsidered.
Authors: Catherine T Lee; Stephen D Bilton; Robin M Famiglietti; Beverly A Riley; Anita Mahajan; Eric L Chang; Moshe H Maor; Shiao Y Woo; James D Cox; Alfred R Smith Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Harald Paganetti; Andrzej Niemierko; Marek Ancukiewicz; Leo E Gerweck; Michael Goitein; Jay S Loeffler; Herman D Suit Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J O del Charco; T W Bolek; W M McCollough; B L Maria; A Kedar; R C Braylan; J P Mickle; J M Buatti; N P Mendenhall; R B Marcus Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1998-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: W H St Clair; J A Adams; M Bues; B C Fullerton; Sean La Shell; H M Kooy; J S Loeffler; N J Tarbell Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michael Baumann; Mechthild Krause; Jens Overgaard; Jürgen Debus; Søren M Bentzen; Juliane Daartz; Christian Richter; Daniel Zips; Thomas Bortfeld Journal: Nat Rev Cancer Date: 2016-03-18 Impact factor: 60.716
Authors: Christian L Barney; Aaron P Brown; David R Grosshans; Mary Frances McAleer; John F de Groot; Vinay Puduvalli; Susan L Tucker; Cody N Crawford; Mark R Gilbert; Paul D Brown; Anita Mahajan Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: J L Lopez Guerra; I Marrone; J Jaen; M Bruna; C Sole; A Sanchez-Reyes; E Rivin; M J Ortiz; F Calvo; R Matute Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2013-04-30 Impact factor: 3.405