Literature DB >> 31773006

Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Adaptive Planning for Patients with Oropharyngeal Cancer.

Richard Y Wu1, Amy Y Liu1, Terence T Sio2,3, Pierre Blanchard2,4, Cody Wages5, Mayankkumar V Amin5, Gary B Gunn2, Uwe Titt1, Rong Ye2, Kazumichi Suzuki1, Michael T Gillin1, Xiaorong R Zhu1, Radhe Mohan1, Steven J Frank2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The authors aimed to illustrate the potential dose differences to clinical target volumes (CTVs) and organs-at-risk (OARs) volumes after proton adaptive treatment planning was used. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 10 patients with oropharyngeal cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Each patient's treatment plan was generated by using the Eclipse treatment planning system. Verification computed tomography (CT) scan was performed during the fourth week of treatment. Deformable image registrations were performed between the 2 CT image sets, and the CTVs and major OARs were transferred to the verification CT images to generate the adaptive plan. We compared the accumulated doses to CTVs and OARs between the original and adaptive plans, as well as between the adaptive and verification plans to simulate doses that would have been delivered if the adaptive plans were not used.
RESULTS: Body contours were different on planning and week-4 verification CTs. Mean volumes of all CTVs were reduced by 4% to 8% (P ≤ .04), and the volumes of left and right parotid glands also decreased (by 11% to 12%, P ≤ .004). Brainstem and oral cavity volumes did not significantly differ (all P ≥ .14). All mean doses to the CTV were decreased for up to 7% (P ≤ .04), whereas mean doses to the right parotid and oral cavity increased from a range of 5% to 8% (P ≤ .03), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Verification and adaptive planning should be recommended during the course of proton therapy for patients with head and neck cancer to ensure adequate dose deliveries to the planned CTVs, while safe doses to OARs can be respected. © Copyright 2017 International Journal of Particle Therapy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adaptive planning; deformable image registration; dose uncertainty; intensity-modulated proton therapy; oropharyngeal cancer

Year:  2017        PMID: 31773006      PMCID: PMC6871549          DOI: 10.14338/IJPT-17-00010.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Part Ther        ISSN: 2331-5180


  22 in total

1.  Intensity modulated proton therapy treatment planning using single-field optimization: the impact of monitor unit constraints on plan quality.

Authors:  X R Zhu; N Sahoo; X Zhang; D Robertson; H Li; S Choi; A K Lee; M T Gillin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Repeat CT imaging and replanning during the course of IMRT for head-and-neck cancer.

Authors:  Eric K Hansen; M Kara Bucci; Jeanne M Quivey; Vivian Weinberg; Ping Xia
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2005-10-26       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  The need for application-based adaptation of deformable image registration.

Authors:  Neil Kirby; Cynthia Chuang; Utako Ueda; Jean Pouliot
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy to account for anatomy changes in lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Heng Li; Xiaodong Zhang; Peter Park; Wei Liu; Joe Chang; Zhongxing Liao; Steve Frank; Yupeng Li; Falk Poenisch; Radhe Mohan; Michael Gillin; Ronald Zhu
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  Clinical study of the necessity of replanning before the 25th fraction during the course of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Haihua Yang; Wei Hu; Guoping Shan; Weijun Ding; Changhui Yu; Biyun Wang; Xufeng Wang; Qianyi Xu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-02-06       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Quantification of volumetric and geometric changes occurring during fractionated radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer using an integrated CT/linear accelerator system.

Authors:  Jerry L Barker; Adam S Garden; K Kian Ang; Jennifer C O'Daniel; He Wang; Laurence E Court; William H Morrison; David I Rosenthal; K S Clifford Chao; Susan L Tucker; Radhe Mohan; Lei Dong
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2004-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Effectiveness of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy planning for head and neck cancers.

Authors:  Wei Liu; Steven J Frank; Xiaoqiang Li; Yupeng Li; Peter C Park; Lei Dong; X Ronald Zhu; Radhe Mohan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  A dosimetric comparison of two-phase adaptive intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer.

Authors:  Imjai Chitapanarux; Kittisak Chomprasert; Wannapa Nobnaop; Somsak Wanwilairat; Ekasit Tharavichitkul; Somvilai Jakrabhandu; Wimrak Onchan; Patrinee Traisathit; Dirk Van Gestel
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2015-02-08       Impact factor: 2.724

9.  Quantitative evaluation of a cone-beam computed tomography-planning computed tomography deformable image registration method for adaptive radiation therapy.

Authors:  Joshua D Lawson; Eduard Schreibmann; Ashesh B Jani; Tim Fox
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2007-11-05       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  A measure to evaluate deformable registration fields in clinical settings.

Authors:  Eduard Schreibmann; Paul Pantalone; Anthony Waller; Tim Fox
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2012-09-06       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Adaptive proton therapy.

Authors:  Harald Paganetti; Pablo Botas; Gregory C Sharp; Brian Winey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  The Importance of Verification CT-QA Scans in Patients Treated with IMPT for Head and Neck Cancers.

Authors:  Jaden D Evans; Riley H Harper; Molly Petersen; William S Harmsen; Aman Anand; Ashley Hunzeker; Noelle C Deiter; Heather Schultz; Krishan R Jethwa; Scott C Lester; David M Routman; Daniel J Ma; Yolanda I Garces; Michelle A Neben-Wittich; Nadia N Laack; Chris J Beltran; Samir H Patel; Lisa A McGee; Jean-Claude M Rwigema; Daniel W Mundy; Robert L Foote
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2020-08-03

3.  Intensity-modulated proton therapy for oropharyngeal cancer reduces rates of late xerostomia.

Authors:  Jianzhong Cao; Xiaodong Zhang; Bo Jiang; Jiayun Chen; Xiaochun Wang; Li Wang; Narayan Sahoo; X Ronald Zhu; Rong Ye; Pierre Blanchard; Adam S Garden; C David Fuller; G Brandon Gunn; Steven J Frank
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 6.901

4.  Analysis of the Rate of Re-planning in Spot-Scanning Proton Therapy.

Authors:  Yue-Houng Hu; Riley H Harper; Noelle C Deiter; Jaden D Evans; Anita Mahajan; Jon J Kruse; Daniel W Mundy
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2022-06-28

Review 5.  Proton Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Consensus Statement From the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Breast Cancer Subcommittee.

Authors:  Robert W Mutter; J Isabelle Choi; Rachel B Jimenez; Youlia M Kirova; Marcio Fagundes; Bruce G Haffty; Richard A Amos; Julie A Bradley; Peter Y Chen; Xuanfeng Ding; Antoinette M Carr; Leslie M Taylor; Mark Pankuch; Raymond B Mailhot Vega; Alice Y Ho; Petra Witt Nyström; Lisa A McGee; James J Urbanic; Oren Cahlon; John H Maduro; Shannon M MacDonald
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 8.013

6.  Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer: A 12-Year, Single-Institution Experience.

Authors:  G Brandon Gunn; Adam S Garden; Rong Ye; Noveen Ausat; Kristina R Dahlstrom; William H Morrison; C David Fuller; Jack Phan; Jay P Reddy; Shalin J Shah; Lauren L Mayo; Stephen G Chun; Gregory M Chronowski; Amy C Moreno; Jeffery N Myers; Ehab Y Hanna; Bita Esmaeli; Maura L Gillison; Renata Ferrarotto; Katherine A Hutcheson; Mark S Chambers; Lawrence E Ginsberg; Adel K El-Naggar; David I Rosenthal; Xiaorong Ronald Zhu; Steven J Frank
Journal:  Int J Part Ther       Date:  2021-06-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.