Treatment planning comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π radiotherapy for prostate cases

被引:69
|
作者
Tran, Angelia [1 ]
Zhang, Jingjing [2 ]
Woods, Kaley [1 ]
Yu, Victoria [1 ]
Dan Nguyen [1 ]
Gustafson, Gary [2 ]
Rosen, Lane [3 ]
Sheng, Ke [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Radiat Oncol, 200 Med Plaza Way,Suite B265, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[2] Beaumont Hlth Syst, Dept Radiat Oncol, Royal Oak, MI USA
[3] Willis Knighton Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Shreveport, LA USA
来源
Radiation Oncology | 2017年 / 12卷
关键词
Prostate cancer; 4 pi radiotherapy; Intensity modulated proton therapy; Volumetric modulated arc therapy; BODY RADIATION-THERAPY; PROTON THERAPY; HELICAL TOMOTHERAPY; DOSE-ESCALATION; CANCER; IMRT; MODULATION; DELIVERY; SYSTEM; TUMORS;
D O I
10.1186/s13014-016-0761-0
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), non-coplanar 4 pi intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) represent the most advanced treatment methods based on heavy ion and X-rays, respectively. Here we compare their performance for prostate cancer treatment. Methods: Ten prostate patients were planned using IMPT with robustness optimization, VMAT, and 4 pi to an initial dose of 54 Gy to a clinical target volume (CTV) that encompassed the prostate and seminal vesicles, then a boost prescription dose of 25.2 Gy to the prostate for a total dose of 79.2 Gy. The IMPT plans utilized two coplanar, oblique scanning beams 10 degrees posterior of the lateral beam positions. Range uncertainties were taken into consideration in the IMPT plans. VMAT plans used two full, coplanar arcs to ensure sufficient PTV coverage. 4 pi plans were created by inversely selecting and optimizing 30 beams from 1162 candidate non-coplanar beams using a greedy column generation algorithm. CTV doses, bladder and rectum dose volumes (V40, V45, V60, V65, V70, V75, and V80), R100, R50, R10, and CTV homogeneity index (D95/D5) were evaluated. Results: Compared to IMPT, 4p resulted in lower anterior rectal wall mean dose as well as lower rectum V40, V45, V60, V65, V70, and V75. Due to the opposing beam arrangement, IMPT resulted in significantly (p < 0.05) greater femoral head doses. However, IMPT plans had significantly lower bladder, rectum, and anterior rectal wall max dose. IMPT doses were also significantly more homogeneous than 4 pi and VMAT doses. Conclusion: Compared to the VMAT and 4 pi plans, IMPT treatment plans are superior in CTV homogeneity and maximum point organ-at-risk (OAR) doses with the exception of femur heads. IMPT is inferior in rectum and bladder volumes receiving intermediate to high doses, particularly to the 4 pi plans, but significantly reduced low dose spillage and integral dose, which are correlated to secondary cancer for patients with expected long survival. The dosimetric benefits of 4 pi plans over VMAT are consistent with the previous publication.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Treatment planning comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π radiotherapy for prostate cases
    Angelia Tran
    Jingjing Zhang
    Kaley Woods
    Victoria Yu
    Dan Nguyen
    Gary Gustafson
    Lane Rosen
    Ke Sheng
    Radiation Oncology, 12
  • [2] Automatic Treatment Planning for IMRT, VMAT and IMPT
    Zhang, X.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (06) : 4008 - 4008
  • [3] Comparison of IMPT and VMAT for diffusion tensor image guided treatment planning of gliomas
    Petersen, J. B.
    Lukacova, S.
    Jensen, M.
    Guldberg, T.
    Harboll, A.
    Kallehauge, J.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2018, 127 : S111 - S112
  • [4] Response to “in regard to “Tran A, Zhang J, Woods K, Yu V, Nguyen D, Gustafson G, Rosen L, Sheng K. Treatment planning comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π radiotherapy for prostate cases””
    Ke Sheng
    Radiation Oncology, 13
  • [5] Response to "in regard to "Tran A, Zhang J, Woods K, Yu V, Nguyen D, Gustafson G, Rosen L, Sheng K. Treatment planning comparison of IMPT, VMAT and 4π radiotherapy for prostate cases""
    Sheng, Ke
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2018, 13
  • [6] Treatment Planning Comparison of SFUD Proton and elk Radiotherapy for Prostate Cases
    Tran, A.
    Zhang, J.
    Woods, K.
    Yu, V.
    Nguyen, D.
    Sheng, K.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3513 - 3513
  • [7] IMPT Vs. VMAT: A Treatment Planning Study for High-Risk Prostate Cancer
    Rana, S.
    Zheng, Y.
    Cheng, C.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3444 - 3444
  • [8] A Treatment Planning Study of Normal Tissue Sparing with Robustness Optimized IMPT, 4Pi IMRT, and VMAT for Head and Neck Cases
    Zhang, J.
    Nguyen, D.
    Woods, K.
    Tran, A.
    Li, X.
    Ding, X.
    Kabolizadeh, P.
    Guerrero, T.
    Sheng, K.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2016, 43 (06) : 3504 - 3504
  • [9] IMPT versus VMAT for Pelvic Nodal Irradiation in Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Comparison
    Whitaker, Thomas J.
    Routman, David M.
    Schultz, Heather
    Harmsen, William S.
    Corbin, Kimberly S.
    Wong, William W.
    Choo, Richard
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PARTICLE THERAPY, 2019, 5 (03): : 11 - 23
  • [10] IMPT and VMAT treatments: a comparison of plan robustness
    Casiraghi, M.
    Albertini, F.
    Radice, A.
    Mariani, E.
    Lomax, A. J.
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2012, 188 (08) : 756 - 756