Steven J Frank1, James D Cox2, Michael Gillin3, Radhe Mohan3, Adam S Garden2, David I Rosenthal2, G Brandon Gunn2, Randal S Weber4, Merrill S Kies5, Jan S Lewin4, Mark F Munsell6, Matthew B Palmer2, Narayan Sahoo3, Xiaodong Zhang3, Wei Liu3, X Ronald Zhu3. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: sjfrank@mdanderson.org. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 3. Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 4. Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 5. Department of Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. 6. Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We report the first clinical experience and toxicity of multifield optimization (MFO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for patients with head and neck tumors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen consecutive patients with head and neck cancer underwent MFO-IMPT with active scanning beam proton therapy. Patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) had comprehensive treatment extending from the base of the skull to the clavicle. The doses for chemoradiation therapy and radiation therapy alone were 70 Gy and 66 Gy, respectively. The robustness of each treatment plan was also analyzed to evaluate sensitivity to uncertainties associated with variations in patient setup and the effect of uncertainties with proton beam range in patients. Proton beam energies during treatment ranged from 72.5 to 221.8 MeV. Spot sizes varied depending on the beam energy and depth of the target, and the scanning nozzle delivered the spot scanning treatment "spot by spot" and "layer by layer." RESULTS: Ten patients presented with SCC and 5 with adenoid cystic carcinoma. All 15 patients were able to complete treatment with MFO-IMPT, with no need for treatment breaks and no hospitalizations. There were no treatment-related deaths, and with a median follow-up time of 28 months (range, 20-35 months), the overall clinical complete response rate was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 68.1%-99.8%). Xerostomia occurred in all 15 patients as follows: grade 1 in 10 patients, grade 2 in 4 patients, and grade 3 in 1 patient. Mucositis within the planning target volumes was seen during the treatment of all patients: grade 1 in 1 patient, grade 2 in 8 patients, and grade 3 in 6 patients. No patient experienced grade 2 or higher anterior oral mucositis. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first clinical report of MFO-IMPT for head and neck tumors. Early clinical outcomes are encouraging and warrant further investigation of proton therapy in prospective clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: We report the first clinical experience and toxicity of multifield optimization (MFO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for patients with head and neck tumors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen consecutive patients with head and neck cancer underwent MFO-IMPT with active scanning beam proton therapy. Patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) had comprehensive treatment extending from the base of the skull to the clavicle. The doses for chemoradiation therapy and radiation therapy alone were 70 Gy and 66 Gy, respectively. The robustness of each treatment plan was also analyzed to evaluate sensitivity to uncertainties associated with variations in patient setup and the effect of uncertainties with proton beam range in patients. Proton beam energies during treatment ranged from 72.5 to 221.8 MeV. Spot sizes varied depending on the beam energy and depth of the target, and the scanning nozzle delivered the spot scanning treatment "spot by spot" and "layer by layer." RESULTS: Ten patients presented with SCC and 5 with adenoid cystic carcinoma. All 15 patients were able to complete treatment with MFO-IMPT, with no need for treatment breaks and no hospitalizations. There were no treatment-related deaths, and with a median follow-up time of 28 months (range, 20-35 months), the overall clinical complete response rate was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 68.1%-99.8%). Xerostomia occurred in all 15 patients as follows: grade 1 in 10 patients, grade 2 in 4 patients, and grade 3 in 1 patient. Mucositis within the planning target volumes was seen during the treatment of all patients: grade 1 in 1 patient, grade 2 in 8 patients, and grade 3 in 6 patients. No patient experienced grade 2 or higher anterior oral mucositis. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first clinical report of MFO-IMPT for head and neck tumors. Early clinical outcomes are encouraging and warrant further investigation of proton therapy in prospective clinical trials.
Authors: K S Chao; J O Deasy; J Markman; J Haynie; C A Perez; J A Purdy; D A Low Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Shravan Kandula; Xiaorong Zhu; Adam S Garden; Michael Gillin; David I Rosenthal; Kie-Kian Ang; Radhe Mohan; Mayankkumar V Amin; John A Garcia; Richard Wu; Narayan Sahoo; Steven J Frank Journal: Med Dosim Date: 2013-08-02 Impact factor: 1.482
Authors: Terence T Sio; Huei-Kai Lin; Qiuling Shi; G Brandon Gunn; Charles S Cleeland; J Jack Lee; Mike Hernandez; Pierre Blanchard; Nikhil G Thaker; Jack Phan; David I Rosenthal; Adam S Garden; William H Morrison; C David Fuller; Tito R Mendoza; Radhe Mohan; Xin Shelley Wang; Steven J Frank Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David G Pfister; Sharon Spencer; David M Brizel; Barbara Burtness; Paul M Busse; Jimmy J Caudell; Anthony J Cmelak; A Dimitrios Colevas; Frank Dunphy; David W Eisele; Robert L Foote; Jill Gilbert; Maura L Gillison; Robert I Haddad; Bruce H Haughey; Wesley L Hicks; Ying J Hitchcock; Antonio Jimeno; Merrill S Kies; William M Lydiatt; Ellie Maghami; Thomas McCaffrey; Loren K Mell; Bharat B Mittal; Harlan A Pinto; John A Ridge; Cristina P Rodriguez; Sandeep Samant; Jatin P Shah; Randal S Weber; Gregory T Wolf; Frank Worden; Sue S Yom; Nicole McMillian; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Li Liao; Gino J Lim; Yupeng Li; Juan Yu; Narayan Sahoo; Heng Li; Michael Gillin; X Ronald Zhu; Anita Mahajan; Steven J Frank; David R Grosshans; Quynh-Nhu Nguyen; Daniel Gomez; Xiaodong Zhang Journal: Int J Part Ther Date: 2016-12-30
Authors: G Brandon Gunn; Pierre Blanchard; Adam S Garden; X Ronald Zhu; C David Fuller; Abdallah S Mohamed; William H Morrison; Jack Phan; Beth M Beadle; Heath D Skinner; Erich M Sturgis; Merrill S Kies; Kate A Hutcheson; David I Rosenthal; Radhe Mohan; Michael T Gillin; Steven J Frank Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2016-02-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Pierre Blanchard; Andrew J Wong; G Brandon Gunn; Adam S Garden; Abdallah S R Mohamed; David I Rosenthal; Joseph Crutison; Richard Wu; Xiaodong Zhang; X Ronald Zhu; Radhe Mohan; Mayankkumar V Amin; C David Fuller; Steven J Frank Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-09-15 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Pierre Blanchard; Adam S Garden; G Brandon Gunn; David I Rosenthal; William H Morrison; Mike Hernandez; Joseph Crutison; Jack J Lee; Rong Ye; C David Fuller; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Kate A Hutcheson; Emma B Holliday; Nikhil G Thaker; Erich M Sturgis; Merrill S Kies; X Ronald Zhu; Radhe Mohan; Steven J Frank Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-06-21 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: G Brandon Gunn; Chase C Hansen; Adam S Garden; Clifton D Fuller; Abdallah S R Mohamed; William H Morrison; Steven J Frank; Beth M Beadle; Jack Phan; Gregory M Chronowski; Erich M Sturgis; Carol M Lewis; Charles Lu; Kate A Hutcheson; Tito R Mendoza; Charles S Cleeland; David I Rosenthal Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2015-09-21 Impact factor: 6.280