Literature DB >> 25979039

Motion mitigation for lung cancer patients treated with active scanning proton therapy.

Clemens Grassberger1, Stephen Dowdell2, Greg Sharp2, Harald Paganetti2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Motion interplay can affect the tumor dose in scanned proton beam therapy. This study assesses the ability of rescanning and gating to mitigate interplay effects during lung treatments.
METHODS: The treatments of five lung cancer patients [48 Gy(RBE)/4fx] with varying tumor size (21.1-82.3 cm(3)) and motion amplitude (2.9-30.6 mm) were simulated employing 4D Monte Carlo. The authors investigated two spot sizes (σ ∼ 12 and ∼ 3 mm), three rescanning techniques (layered, volumetric, breath-sampled volumetric) and respiratory gating with a 30% duty cycle.
RESULTS: For 4/5 patients, layered rescanning 6/2 times (for the small/large spot size) maintains equivalent uniform dose within the target >98% for a single fraction. Breath sampling the timing of rescanning is ∼ 2 times more effective than the same number of continuous rescans. Volumetric rescanning is sensitive to synchronization effects, which was observed in 3/5 patients, though not for layered rescanning. For the large spot size, rescanning compared favorably with gating in terms of time requirements, i.e., 2x-rescanning is on average a factor ∼ 2.6 faster than gating for this scenario. For the small spot size however, 6x-rescanning takes on average 65% longer compared to gating. Rescanning has no effect on normal lung V20 and mean lung dose (MLD), though it reduces the maximum lung dose by on average 6.9 ± 2.4/16.7 ± 12.2 Gy(RBE) for the large and small spot sizes, respectively. Gating leads to a similar reduction in maximum dose and additionally reduces V20 and MLD. Breath-sampled rescanning is most successful in reducing the maximum dose to the normal lung.
CONCLUSIONS: Both rescanning (2-6 times, depending on the beam size) as well as gating was able to mitigate interplay effects in the target for 4/5 patients studied. Layered rescanning is superior to volumetric rescanning, as the latter suffers from synchronization effects in 3/5 patients studied. Gating minimizes the irradiated volume of normal lung more efficiently, while breath-sampled rescanning is superior in reducing maximum doses to organs at risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25979039      PMCID: PMC4409624          DOI: 10.1118/1.4916662

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  22 in total

1.  Effects of respiratory motion on dose uniformity with a charged particle scanning method.

Authors:  M H Phillips; E Pedroni; H Blattmann; T Boehringer; A Coray; S Scheib
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Moving target irradiation with fast rescanning and gating in particle therapy.

Authors:  Takuji Furukawa; Taku Inaniwa; Shinji Sato; Toshiyuki Shirai; Shinichiro Mori; Eri Takeshita; Kota Mizushima; Takeshi Himukai; Koji Noda
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Comparative study of layered and volumetric rescanning for different scanning speeds of proton beam in liver patients.

Authors:  K Bernatowicz; A J Lomax; A Knopf
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Respiratory motion management in particle therapy.

Authors:  Eike Rietzel; Christoph Bert
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Results of a Phase I trial of concurrent chemotherapy and escalating doses of radiation for unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Steven E Schild; William L McGinnis; David Graham; Shauna Hillman; Tom R Fitch; Donald Northfelt; Yolanda I Garces; Homayoon Shahidi; Loren K Tschetter; Paul L Schaefer; Alex Adjei; James Jett
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2006-05-26       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Intensity-modulated proton therapy reduces the dose to normal tissue compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy or passive scattering proton therapy and enables individualized radical radiotherapy for extensive stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a virtual clinical study.

Authors:  Xiaodong Zhang; Yupeng Li; Xiaoning Pan; Li Xiaoqiang; Radhe Mohan; Ritsuko Komaki; James D Cox; Joe Y Chang
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-08-05       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Dose- and LET-painting with particle therapy.

Authors:  Niels Bassler; Oliver Jäkel; Christian Skou Søndergaard; Jørgen B Petersen
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.089

8.  Interplay effects in proton scanning for lung: a 4D Monte Carlo study assessing the impact of tumor and beam delivery parameters.

Authors:  S Dowdell; C Grassberger; G C Sharp; H Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-05-20       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Quantification of proton dose calculation accuracy in the lung.

Authors:  Clemens Grassberger; Juliane Daartz; Stephen Dowdell; Thomas Ruggieri; Greg Sharp; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Motion interplay as a function of patient parameters and spot size in spot scanning proton therapy for lung cancer.

Authors:  Clemens Grassberger; Stephen Dowdell; Antony Lomax; Greg Sharp; James Shackleford; Noah Choi; Henning Willers; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 7.038

View more
  18 in total

1.  [Proton therapy not superior to IMRT in locally advanced NSCLC].

Authors:  Almut Dutz; Esther G C Troost; Steffen Löck
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Reducing Dose Uncertainty for Spot-Scanning Proton Beam Therapy of Moving Tumors by Optimizing the Spot Delivery Sequence.

Authors:  Heng Li; X Ronald Zhu; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 3.  Considerations when treating lung cancer with passive scatter or active scanning proton therapy.

Authors:  Sara St James; Clemens Grassberger; Hsiao-Ming Lu
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2018-04

4.  Proton therapy posterior beam approach with pencil beam scanning for esophageal cancer : Clinical outcome, dosimetry, and feasibility.

Authors:  Yue-Can Zeng; Shilpa Vyas; Quang Dang; Lindsay Schultz; Stephen R Bowen; Veena Shankaran; Farhood Farjah; Brant K Oelschlager; Smith Apisarnthanarax; Jing Zeng
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2016-09-05       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  Density overwrites of internal tumor volumes in intensity modulated proton therapy plans for mobile lung tumors.

Authors:  Pablo Botas; Clemens Grassberger; Gregory Sharp; Harald Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Impact of Spot Size and Spacing on the Quality of Robustly Optimized Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy Plans for Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Chenbin Liu; Steven E Schild; Joe Y Chang; Zhongxing Liao; Shawn Korte; Jiajian Shen; Xiaoning Ding; Yanle Hu; Yixiu Kang; Sameer R Keole; Terence T Sio; William W Wong; Narayan Sahoo; Martin Bues; Wei Liu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 7.  Physics of Particle Beam and Hypofractionated Beam Delivery in NSCLC.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Clemens Grassberger; Gregory C Sharp
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 5.421

8.  Four-dimensional Plan Optimization for the Treatment of Lung Tumors Using Pencil-beam Scanning Proton Radiotherapy.

Authors:  David Cummings; Shikui Tang; William Ichter; Peng Wang; Jared D Sturgeon; Andrew K Lee; Chang Chang
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-08-23

9.  Scanning Beam Proton Therapy versus Photon IMRT for Stage III Lung Cancer: Comparison of Dosimetry, Toxicity, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Zhenwei Zou; Stephen R Bowen; Hannah M T Thomas; Balu Krishna Sasidharan; Ramesh Rengan; Jing Zeng
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-03-20

10.  Comparative photon and proton dosimetry for patients with mediastinal lymphoma in the era of Monte Carlo treatment planning and variable relative biological effectiveness.

Authors:  Yolanda D Tseng; Shadonna M Maes; Gregory Kicska; Patricia Sponsellor; Erik Traneus; Tony Wong; Robert D Stewart; Jatinder Saini
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.