Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of early stage prostate cancer: A treatment planning comparison

被引:28
|
作者
Schwarz, Marco [1 ]
Pierelli, Alessio [2 ]
Fiorino, Claudio [2 ]
Fellin, Francesco [1 ]
Cattaneo, Giovanni Mauro [2 ]
Cozzarini, Cesare [2 ]
Di Muzio, Nadia [2 ]
Calandrino, Riccardo [2 ]
Widesott, Lamberto [1 ]
机构
[1] Agenzia Prov Protonterapia, I-38122 Trento, Italy
[2] Ist Sci San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
关键词
IMPT; Tomotherapy; Prostate; Planning comparison; DOSE-ESCALATION TRIAL; X-RAY THERAPY; CONFORMAL RADIOTHERAPY; IMAGE-GUIDANCE; VOLUME; IMRT; OPTIMIZATION; MULTICENTER; ISSUES; TUMORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2010.10.027
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To compare helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) on early stage prostate cancer treatments delivered with simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in moderate hypofractionation. Material/methods: Eight patients treated with HT were replanned with two-field IMPT (2fIMPT) and five-field IMPT (5fIMPT), using a small pencil beam size (3 mm sigma). The prescribed dose was 74.3 Gy in 28 fractions on PTV1 (prostate) and PTV2 (proximal seminal vesicles), 65.5 Gy on PTV3 (distal seminal vesicles) and on the overlap between rectum and PTVs. Results: IMPT and HT achieved similar target coverage and dose homogeneity, with 5fIMPT providing the best results. The conformity indexes of IMPT were significantly lower for PTV1+2 and PTV3. Above 65 Gy, HT and IMPT were equivalent in the rectum, while IMPT spared the bladder and the penile bulb from 0 to 70 Gy. From 0 up to 60 Gy, IMPT dosimetric values were (much) lower for all OARs except the femur heads, where HT was better than 2fIMPT in the 25-35 Gy dose range. OARs mean doses were typically reduced by 30-50% by IMPT. NTCPs for the rectum were within 1% between the two techniques, except when the endpoint was stool frequency, where IMPT showed a small (though statistically significant) benefit. Conclusions: HT and IMPT produce similar dose distributions in the target volume. The current knowledge on dose-effect relations does not allow to quantify the clinical impact of the large sparing of IMPT at medium-to-low doses. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 98 (2011) 74-80
引用
收藏
页码:74 / 80
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy
    Martin Stuschke
    Andreas Kaiser
    Jehad Abu-Jawad
    Christoph Pöttgen
    Sabine Levegrün
    Jonathan Farr
    Radiation Oncology, 8
  • [22] Re-irradiation of recurrent head and neck carcinomas: comparison of robust intensity modulated proton therapy treatment plans with helical tomotherapy
    Stuschke, Martin
    Kaiser, Andreas
    Abu-Jawad, Jehad
    Poettgen, Christoph
    Levegruen, Sabine
    Farr, Jonathan
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2013, 8
  • [23] Treatment of prostate cancer with photon IMRT and proton therapy: a treatment planning comparison
    Trofimov, A.
    Nguyen, P. L.
    Coen, J. J.
    Doppke, K. P.
    Schneider, R. J.
    Adams, J. A.
    Bortfeld, T. R.
    Zietman, A. L.
    DeLaney, T. F.
    Shipley, W. U.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2006, 66 (03): : S389 - S390
  • [24] Helical tomotherapy or intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of anal cancer: experience of Geneva and Lausanne
    Ozsahin, M.
    Casanova, N.
    Pachoud, M.
    Moeckli, R.
    Dipasquale, G.
    Nouet, P.
    Rouzaud, M.
    Allal, A.
    Zouhair, A.
    Zilli, T.
    EJC SUPPLEMENTS, 2009, 7 (02): : 329 - 329
  • [25] A Treatment Planning Comparison of Proton Therapy and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Prostate Cancer Using the Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP)
    Fischer-Valuck, B. W.
    Mazur, T. R.
    Gay, H. A.
    Olsen, L. A.
    Altman, M. B.
    Michalski, J. M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2016, 96 (02): : E274 - E274
  • [26] TOMOTHERAPY AND INTENSITY MODULATED PROTON THERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF DOMINANT INTRAPROSTATIC LESION.
    Fellin, F.
    Azzeroni, R.
    Fiorino, C.
    Lorentini, S.
    Schwarz, M.
    Cozzarini, C.
    Di Muzio, N.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2011, 99 : S100 - S101
  • [27] Dosimetric Comparison Between Intensity-Modulated Arc Therapy and Helical Tomotherapy Plans for Simultaneous Boost Treatment of Esophageal Cancer
    Han, C.
    Chen, Y.
    Liu, A.
    Schultheiss, T.
    Wong, J.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (06)
  • [28] Intensity-modulated radiation therapy of nasopharyngeal cancer using helical tomotherapy: A planning study
    Sterzing, F.
    Taheri, Kadkhoda Z.
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2007, 183 : 35 - 35
  • [29] A treatment planning study of urethra-sparing intensity-modulated proton therapy for localized prostate cancer
    Yoshimura, Takaaki
    Nishioka, Kentaro
    Hashimoto, Takayuki
    Seki, Kazuya
    Kogame, Shouki
    Tanaka, Sodai
    Kanehira, Takahiro
    Tamura, Masaya
    Takao, Seishin
    Matsuura, Taeko
    Kobashi, Keiji
    Kato, Fumi
    Aoyama, Hidefumi
    Shimizu, Shinichi
    PHYSICS & IMAGING IN RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2021, 20 : 23 - 29
  • [30] Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy, Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy, and Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Angiosarcoma of the Scalp
    Mizuno, Tomoki
    Tomita, Natsuo
    Takaoka, Taiki
    Tomida, Masashi
    Fukuma, Hiroshi
    Tsuchiya, Takahiro
    Shibamoto, Yuta
    TECHNOLOGY IN CANCER RESEARCH & TREATMENT, 2021, 20