Sophie Taylor1, Pei Lim2, Reem Ahmad1, Ammar Alhadi1, William Harris1, Vasilis Rompokos3, Derek D'Souza3, Mark Gaze2, Jennifer Gains2, Catarina Veiga1. 1. Centre for Medical Image Computing, Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK. 2. Department of Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 3. Radiotherapy Physics Services, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: State-of-the-art radiotherapy modalities have the potential of reducing late effects of treatment in childhood cancer survivors. Our aim was to investigate the carcinogenic risk associated with 3D conformal (photon) radiation (3D-CRT), intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) and pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT) in the treatment of paediatric abdominal neuroblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The risk of radiation-induced second malignant neoplasm (SMN) was estimated using the concept of organ equivalent dose (OED) for eleven organs (lungs, rectum, colon, stomach, small intestine, liver, bladder, skin, central nervous system (CNS), bone, and soft tissues). The risk ratio (RR) between radiotherapy modalities and lifetime absolute risks (LAR) were reported for twenty abdominal neuroblastoma patients (median, 4y; range, 1-9y) historically treated with 3D-CRT that were also retrospectively replanned for IMAT and PBS-PT. RESULTS: The risk of SMN due to primary radiation was reduced in PBS-PT against 3D-CRT and IMAT for most patients and organs. The RR across all organs ranged from 0.38 ± 0.22 (bladder) to 0.98 ± 0.04 (CNS) between PBS-PT and IMAT, and 0.12 ± 0.06 (rectum and bladder) to 1.06 ± 0.43 (bone) between PBS-PT and 3D-CRT. The LAR for most organs was within 0.01-1% (except the colon) with a cumulative risk of 21 ± 13%, 35 ± 14% and 35 ± 16% for PBS-PT, IMAT and 3D-CRT, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PBS-PT was associated with the lowest risk of radiation-induced SMN compared to IMAT and 3D-CRT in abdominal neuroblastoma treatment. Other clinical endpoints and plan robustness should also be considered for optimal plan selection.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: State-of-the-art radiotherapy modalities have the potential of reducing late effects of treatment in childhood cancer survivors. Our aim was to investigate the carcinogenic risk associated with 3D conformal (photon) radiation (3D-CRT), intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT) and pencil beam scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT) in the treatment of paediatric abdominal neuroblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The risk of radiation-induced second malignant neoplasm (SMN) was estimated using the concept of organ equivalent dose (OED) for eleven organs (lungs, rectum, colon, stomach, small intestine, liver, bladder, skin, central nervous system (CNS), bone, and soft tissues). The risk ratio (RR) between radiotherapy modalities and lifetime absolute risks (LAR) were reported for twenty abdominal neuroblastoma patients (median, 4y; range, 1-9y) historically treated with 3D-CRT that were also retrospectively replanned for IMAT and PBS-PT. RESULTS: The risk of SMN due to primary radiation was reduced in PBS-PT against 3D-CRT and IMAT for most patients and organs. The RR across all organs ranged from 0.38 ± 0.22 (bladder) to 0.98 ± 0.04 (CNS) between PBS-PT and IMAT, and 0.12 ± 0.06 (rectum and bladder) to 1.06 ± 0.43 (bone) between PBS-PT and 3D-CRT. The LAR for most organs was within 0.01-1% (except the colon) with a cumulative risk of 21 ± 13%, 35 ± 14% and 35 ± 16% for PBS-PT, IMAT and 3D-CRT, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PBS-PT was associated with the lowest risk of radiation-induced SMN compared to IMAT and 3D-CRT in abdominal neuroblastoma treatment. Other clinical endpoints and plan robustness should also be considered for optimal plan selection.
Authors: W P Segars; Hannah Norris; Gregory M Sturgeon; Yakun Zhang; Jason Bond; Anum Minhas; Daniel J Tward; J T Ratnanather; M I Miller; D Frush; E Samei Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: M L Tas; A M J Reedijk; H E Karim-Kos; L C M Kremer; C P van de Ven; M P Dierselhuis; N K A van Eijkelenburg; M van Grotel; K C J M Kraal; A M L Peek; J W W Coebergh; G O R Janssens; B de Keizer; R R de Krijger; R Pieters; G A M Tytgat; M M van Noesel Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Christine Hill-Kayser; Zelig Tochner; Stefan Both; Robert Lustig; Anne Reilly; Naomi Balamuth; Richard Womer; John Maris; Stephen Grupp; Rochelle Bagatell Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2013-06-04 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: J P Neglia; D L Friedman; Y Yasui; A C Mertens; S Hammond; M Stovall; S S Donaldson; A T Meadows; L L Robison Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2001-04-18 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: P S Lim; A Pica; J Hrbacek; B Bachtiary; M Walser; A J Lomax; D C Weber Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 4.126