TY - JOUR
T1 - Passive proton therapy vs. IMRT planning study with focal boost for prostate cancer
AU - Yeo, Inhwan
AU - Nookala, Prashanth
AU - Gordon, Ian
AU - Schulte, Reinhard
AU - Barnes, Stanley
AU - Ghebremedhin, Abiel
AU - Wang, Ning
AU - Yang, Gary
AU - Ling, Ted
AU - Bush, David
AU - Slater, Jerry
AU - Patyal, Baldev
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Yeo et al.
PY - 2015/10/24
Y1 - 2015/10/24
N2 - Background: Exploiting biologic imaging, studies have been performed to boost dose to gross intraprostatic tumor volumes (GTV) while reducing dose elsewhere in the prostate. Interest in proton beams has increased due to superior normal-tissue sparing they afford. Our goal was to dosimetrically compare 3D conformal proton boost plans with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans with respect to target coverage and avoiding organs at risk. Methods: Treatment planning computer tomography scans of ten patients were selected. For each patient, two hypothetical but realistic GTVs each with a fixed volume were contoured in different anatomical locations of the prostate. IMRT and proton beam plans were created with a prescribed dose of 50.4Gy to the initial planning target volume (PTV) including the PTV of the seminal vesicles (PSV), 70.2Gy to the PTV of the prostate (PPS), and 90Gy to the PTV of the gross tumor volumes (PGTVs). For proton plans, uncertainties of range and patient setup were accounted for; apertures were adjusted until the dose-volume coverage of PTVs matched that of the IMRT plan. For both plans, prescribed PTV doses were made identical to allow for comparing normal-tissue doses. Results: Protons delivered more homogeneous but less conformal doses to PGTVs than IMRT did and comparable doses to PSV and PPS. Volumes of bladder and rectum receiving doses higher than 65Gy were similar for both plans. However, volumes receiving less than 65Gy were significantly reduced, i.e., protons reduced integral dose by 45.6% and 26.5% for rectum and bladder, respectively. This volume-sparing was also seen in femoral heads and penile bulb. Conclusions: Protons delivered comparable doses to targets in dose homogeneity and conformity and spared normal tissues from intermediate-to-low doses better than IMRT did. Further improvement of dose sparing and changes in homogeneity and conformity may be achieved by reducing proton range uncertainties and from implementing intensity modulation.
AB - Background: Exploiting biologic imaging, studies have been performed to boost dose to gross intraprostatic tumor volumes (GTV) while reducing dose elsewhere in the prostate. Interest in proton beams has increased due to superior normal-tissue sparing they afford. Our goal was to dosimetrically compare 3D conformal proton boost plans with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans with respect to target coverage and avoiding organs at risk. Methods: Treatment planning computer tomography scans of ten patients were selected. For each patient, two hypothetical but realistic GTVs each with a fixed volume were contoured in different anatomical locations of the prostate. IMRT and proton beam plans were created with a prescribed dose of 50.4Gy to the initial planning target volume (PTV) including the PTV of the seminal vesicles (PSV), 70.2Gy to the PTV of the prostate (PPS), and 90Gy to the PTV of the gross tumor volumes (PGTVs). For proton plans, uncertainties of range and patient setup were accounted for; apertures were adjusted until the dose-volume coverage of PTVs matched that of the IMRT plan. For both plans, prescribed PTV doses were made identical to allow for comparing normal-tissue doses. Results: Protons delivered more homogeneous but less conformal doses to PGTVs than IMRT did and comparable doses to PSV and PPS. Volumes of bladder and rectum receiving doses higher than 65Gy were similar for both plans. However, volumes receiving less than 65Gy were significantly reduced, i.e., protons reduced integral dose by 45.6% and 26.5% for rectum and bladder, respectively. This volume-sparing was also seen in femoral heads and penile bulb. Conclusions: Protons delivered comparable doses to targets in dose homogeneity and conformity and spared normal tissues from intermediate-to-low doses better than IMRT did. Further improvement of dose sparing and changes in homogeneity and conformity may be achieved by reducing proton range uncertainties and from implementing intensity modulation.
KW - IMRT plan
KW - Intraprostatic boost
KW - Proton plan
KW - Radiotherapy Dosage
KW - Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy
KW - Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/methods
KW - Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/methods
KW - Humans
KW - Proton Therapy/methods
KW - Male
KW - Radiotherapy, Conformal/methods
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945129738&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945129738&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/ba2e2bb7-ccbf-387f-a706-733eb0355567/
U2 - 10.1186/s13014-015-0522-5
DO - 10.1186/s13014-015-0522-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 26499318
SN - 1748-717X
VL - 10
SP - 213
JO - Radiation Oncology
JF - Radiation Oncology
IS - 1
M1 - 213
ER -