Range optimization for target and organs at risk in dynamic adaptive passive scattering proton beam therapy – A proof of concept |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Doctoral Program in Biomedical Sciences, Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8577, Japan;2. Division of Radiation Oncology and Particle Therapy, Exploratory Oncology Research & Clinical Trial Center, National Cancer Center, Chiba 277-8577, Japan;3. Radiation Safety and Quality Assurance Division, Hospital East, National Cancer Center, Chiba 277-8577, Japan;4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital East, National Cancer Center, Chiba 277-8577, Japan;1. Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX;2. Department of Urology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY;3. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX;4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX;1. Azienda Provinciale per i Servizi Sanitari (APSS) Protontherapy Department, Trento, Italy;2. Università degli studi di Roma ‘La Sapienza’, Roma, Italy;3. INFN-TIFPA, Trento, Italy;1. Gunma University Heavy Ion Medical Center, Graduate School of Medicine, Gunma University, 3-39-22 Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan;2. Takasaki Advanced Radiation Research Institute, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, 1233 Watanuki-machi, Takasaki, Gunma, Japan;3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Gunma University, 3-39-22 Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan;1. Department of Radiation Convergence Engineering, Research Institute of Health Science, Yonsei University, 1 Yonseidae-gil, Wonju, Gangwon 220-710, Republic of Korea;2. Department of Radiological Science, College of Health Science, Yonsei University, 1 Yonseidae-gil, Wonju, Gangwon 220-710, Republic of Korea;1. Dip. Fisica, Sapienza Univ. di Roma, Roma, Italy;2. Centro Cientifico Tecnologico de Valparaso-CCTVal, Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria, Chile;3. Dip. Neurochirurgia, Fondazione Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milano, Italy;4. INFN Sezione di Roma, Roma, Italy;5. Divisione di Medicina Nucleare, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milano, Italy;6. Dip. Scienze di Base e Applicate per l’Ingegneria, Sapienza Univ. di Roma, Roma, Italy;7. Unità Ricerca sulle Radiazioni, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milano, Italy;8. Servizio Fisica Sanitaria, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milano, Italy;9. Trial Activation and Reporting - Data Management – Clinical Trial Office Direzione Scientifica, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milano, Italy;10. Museo Storico della Fisica e Centro Studi e Ricerche ”E. Fermi”, Roma, Italy;11. Unità Produzione Radiofarmaci, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Milano, Italy;12. U.O. Anatomia Patologica, Fondazione Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milano, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | PurposeThe purpose of this study was to design and develop a new range optimization for target and organs at risk (OARs) in dynamic adaptive proton beam therapy (PBT).MethodsThe new range optimization for target and OARs (RO-TO) was optimized to maintain target dose coverage but not to increase the dose exposure of OARs, while the other procedure, range optimization for target (RO-T), only focused on target dose coverage. A retrospective analysis of a patient who received PBT for abdominal lymph node metastases was performed to show the effectiveness of our new approach. The original plan (OP), which had a total dose of 60 Gy (relative biological effectiveness; RBE), was generated using six treatment fields. Bone-based registration (BR) and tumor-based registration (TR) were performed on each pretreatment daily CT image dataset acquired once every four fractions, to align the isocenter.ResultsBoth range adaptive approaches achieved better coverage (D95%) and homogeneity (D5%?D95%) than BR and TR only. However, RO-T showed the greatest increases in D2cc and Dmean values of the small intestine and stomach and exceeded the limitations of dose exposure for those OARs. RO-TO showed comparable or superior dose sparing compared with the OP for all OARs.ConclusionsOur results suggest that BR and TR alone may reduce target dose coverage, and that RO-T may increase the dose exposure to the OARs. RO-TO may achieve the planned dose delivery to the target and OARs more efficiently than the OP. The technique requires testing on a large clinical dataset. |
| |
| Keywords: | Proton beam therapy Range optimization Image guidance Adaptive therapy Abdominal cancer |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
