Comparison of proton therapy techniques for treatment of the whole brain as a component of craniospinal radiation

Radiation Oncology

David R Grosshans²  Anita Mahajan²  Smruti Rath²  X Ronald Zhu¹  Narayan Sahoo¹  Rola H Georges¹  Joshua Stoker¹  Jeffrey Dinh² 

[1] Departments of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA;Departments of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1150, Houston, TX 77030, USA

关键词: IMPT;    Proton therapy;    Spot scanning;    Passive scattering proton therapy;    Compensator;    Whole brain;    CSI;    Protons;   

Others  :  829480
DOI  :  10.1186/1748-717X-8-289

 received in 2013-09-09, accepted in 2013-11-08,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

For treatment of the entire cranium using passive scattering proton therapy (PSPT) compensators are often employed in order to reduce lens and cochlear exposure. We sought to assess the advantages and consequences of utilizing compensators for the treatment of the whole brain as a component of craniospinal radiation (CSI) with PSPT. Moreover, we evaluated the potential benefits of spot scanning beam delivery in comparison to PSPT.

Methods

Planning computed tomography scans for 50 consecutive CSI patients were utilized to generate passive scattering proton therapy treatment plans with and without Lucite compensators (PSW and PSWO respectively). A subset of 10 patients was randomly chosen to generate scanning beam treatment plans for comparison. All plans were generated using an Eclipse treatment planning system and were prescribed to a dose of 36 Gy(RBE), delivered in 20 fractions, to the whole brain PTV. Plans were normalized to ensure equal whole brain target coverage. Dosimetric data was compiled and statistical analyses performed using a two-tailed Student’s t-test with Bonferroni corrections to account for multiple comparisons.

Results

Whole brain target coverage was comparable between all methods. However, cribriform plate coverage was superior in PSWO plans in comparison to PSW (V95%; 92.9 ± 14 vs. 97.4 ± 5, p < 0.05). As predicted, PSWO plans had significantly higher lens exposure in comparison to PSW plans (max lens dose Gy(RBE): left; 24.8 ± 0.8 vs. 22.2 ± 0.7, p < 0.05, right; 25.2 ± 0.8 vs. 22.8 ± 0.7, p < 0.05). However, PSW plans demonstrated no significant cochlear sparing vs. PSWO (mean cochlea dose Gy(RBE): 36.4 ± 0.2 vs. 36.7 ± 0.1, p = NS). Moreover, dose homogeneity was inferior in PSW plans in comparison to PSWO plans as reflected by significant alterations in both whole brain and brainstem homogeneity index (HI) and inhomogeneity coefficient (IC). In comparison to both PSPT techniques, multi-field optimized intensity modulated (MFO-IMPT) spot scanning treatment plans displayed superior sparing of both lens and cochlea (max lens: 12.5 ± 0.6 and 12.9 ± 0.7 right and left respectively; mean cochlea 28.6 ± 0.5 and 27.4 ± 0.2), although heterogeneity within target volumes was comparable to PSW plans.

Conclusions

For PSPT treatments, the addition of a compensator imparts little clinical advantage. In contrast, the incorporation of spot scanning technology as a component of CSI treatments, offers additional normal tissue sparing which is likely of clinical significance.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Dinh et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Brown AP, Barney CL, Grosshans DR, McAleer MF, de Groot JF, Puduvalli VK, Tucker SL, Crawford CN, Khan M, Khatua S: Proton beam craniospinal irradiation reduces acute toxicity for adults with medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013, 86:277-284. Doi: 210.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.1001.1014
• [2]St Clair WH, Adams JA, Bues M, Fullerton BC, La Shell S, Kooy HM, Loeffler JS, Tarbell NJ: Advantage of protons compared to conventional X-ray or IMRT in the treatment of a pediatric patient with medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004, 58:727-734.
• [3]Amsbaugh MJ, Grosshans DR, McAleer MF, Zhu R, Wages C, Crawford CN, Palmer M, De Gracia B, Woo S, Mahajan A: Proton therapy for spinal ependymomas: planning, acute toxicities, and preliminary outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012, 83:1419-1424. Doi: 1410.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.1410.1034
• [4]Lin R, Hug EB, Schaefer RA, Miller DW, Slater JM, Slater JD: Conformal proton radiation therapy of the posterior fossa: a study comparing protons with three-dimensional planned photons in limiting dose to auditory structures. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 48:1219-1226.
• [5]DeLaney TF: Proton therapy in the clinic. Front Radiat Ther Oncol 2011, 43:465-485.
• [6]Jin H, Hsi W, Yeung D, Li Z, Mendenhall NP, Marcus RB Jr: Dosimetric characterization of whole brain radiotherapy of pediatric patients using modulated proton beams. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2011, 12:3308.
• [7]Hall EJ: Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, protons, and the risk of second cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006, 65:1-7.
• [8]Delaney TF, Kooy HM: Proton and Charged Particle Radiotherapy. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
• [9]Haberer T, Becher W, Schardt D, Kraft G: Magnetic scanning system for heavy ion therapy. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 1993, 330:296-305.
• [10]ICRU: Prescribing, Recording, and Reporting Proton-Beam Therapy. Washington DC: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements; 2007.
• [11]Pedroni E, Bacher R, Blattmann H, Bohringer T, Coray A, Lomax A, Lin S, Munkel G, Scheib S, Schneider U, et al.: The 200-MeV proton therapy project at the Paul Scherrer Institute: conceptual design and practical realization. Med Phys 1995, 22:37-53.
• [12]Giebeler A, Newhauser WD, Amos RA, Mahajan A, Homann K, Howell RM: Standardized treatment planning methodology for passively scattered proton craniospinal irradiation. Radiat Oncol 2013, 8:32. BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Cochran DM, Yock TI, Adams JA, Tarbell NJ: Radiation dose to the lens during craniospinal irradiation-an improvement in proton radiotherapy technique. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008, 70:1336-1342. Epub 2007 Oct 1329
• [14]Zhang X, Li Y, Pan X, Xiaoqiang L, Mohan R, Komaki R, Cox JD, Chang JY: Intensity-modulated proton therapy reduces the dose to normal tissue compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy or passive scattering proton therapy and enables individualized radical radiotherapy for extensive stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a virtual clinical study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 77:357-366. Doi: 310.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.1004.1028. Epub 2009 Aug 1015
• [15]Liu W, Li Y, Li X, Cao W, Zhang X: Influence of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy with different dose delivery techniques. Med Phys 2012, 39:3089-3101.
• [16]Zhu XR, Sahoo N, Zhang X, Robertson D, Li H, Choi S, Lee AK, Gillin MT: Intensity modulated proton therapy treatment planning using single-field optimization: the impact of monitor unit constraints on plan quality. Med Phys 2010, 37:1210-1219.
• [17]Kataria T, Sharma K, Subramani V, Karrthick KP, Bisht SS: Homogeneity index: an objective tool for assessment of conformal radiation treatments. J Med Phys 2012, 37:207-213. Doi: 210.4103/0971-6203.103606
• [18]Boehling NS, Grosshans DR, Bluett JB, Palmer MT, Song X, Amos RA, Sahoo N, Meyer JJ, Mahajan A, Woo SY: Dosimetric comparison of three-dimensional conformal proton radiotherapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for treatment of pediatric craniopharyngiomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 27:27.
• [19]Halperin EC: Impact of radiation technique upon the outcome of treatment for medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996, 36:233-239.
• [20]Robison LL, Armstrong GT, Boice JD, Chow EJ, Davies SM, Donaldson SS, Green DM, Hammond S, Meadows AT, Mertens AC: The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study: a National Cancer Institute-supported resource for outcome and intervention research. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:2308-2318. Epub 2009 Apr 2313
• [21]Ellenberg L, Liu Q, Gioia G, Yasui Y, Packer RJ, Mertens A, Donaldson SS, Stovall M, Kadan-Lottick N, Armstrong G, et al.: Neurocognitive status in long-term survivors of childhood CNS malignancies: a report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Neuropsychology 2009, 23:705-717.
• [22]Bhandare N, Jackson A, Eisbruch A, Pan CC, Flickinger JC, Antonelli P, Mendenhall WM: Radiation therapy and hearing loss. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 76:S50-57. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.1004.1096
• [23]Hua C, Bass JK, Khan R, Kun LE, Merchant TE: Hearing loss after radiotherapy for pediatric brain tumors: effect of cochlear dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008, 72:892-899. Doi: 810.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.1001.1050. Epub 2008 Apr 1018
• [24]Honore HB, Bentzen SM, Moller K, Grau C: Sensori-neural hearing loss after radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: individualized risk estimation. Radiother Oncol 2002, 65:9-16.
• [25]Knight KR, Kraemer DF, Neuwelt EA: Ototoxicity in children receiving platinum chemotherapy: underestimating a commonly occurring toxicity that may influence academic and social development. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:8588-8596.
• [26]Kolinsky DC, Hayashi SS, Karzon R, Mao J, Hayashi RJ: Late onset hearing loss: a significant complication of cancer survivors treated with Cisplatin containing chemotherapy regimens. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2010, 32:119-123. Doi: 110.1097/MPH.1090b1013e3181cb8593
• [27]Moeller BJ, Chintagumpala M, Philip JJ, Grosshans DR, McAleer MF, Woo SY, Gidley PW, Vats TS, Mahajan A: Low early ototoxicity rates for pediatric medulloblastoma patients treated with proton radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 2011, 6:58. BioMed Central Full Text
• [28]Paulino AC, Lobo M, Teh BS, Okcu MF, South M, Butler EB, Su J, Chintagumpala M: Ototoxicity after intensity-modulated radiation therapy and cisplatin-based chemotherapy in children with medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010, 78:1445-1450. Doi: 1410.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.1409.1031. Epub 2010 Mar 1416
• [29]Polkinghorn WR, Dunkel IJ, Souweidane MM, Khakoo Y, Lyden DC, Gilheeney SW, Becher OJ, Budnick AS, Wolden SL: Disease control and ototoxicity using intensity-modulated radiation therapy tumor-bed boost for medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011, 81:e15-20. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.1011.1081. Epub 2011 Apr 1012
• [30]Osman IM, Abouzeid H, Balmer A, Gaillard MC, Othenin-Girard P, Pica A, Moeckli R, Schorderet DF, Munier FL: Modern cataract surgery for radiation-induced cataracts in retinoblastoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2011, 95:227-230. Doi: 210.1136/bjo.2009.173401. Epub 172010 Jun 173424
• [31]Merriam GR Jr, Focht EF, Parsons RW: The relative radiosensitivity of the young and the adult lens. Radiology 1969, 92:1114.
• [32]Britten MJ, Halnan KE, Meredith WJ: Radiation cataract–new evidence on radiation dosage to the lens. Br J Radiol 1966, 39:612-617.
• [33]Deeg HJ, Flournoy N, Sullivan KM, Sheehan K, Buckner CD, Sanders JE, Storb R, Witherspoon RP, Thomas ED: Cataracts after total body irradiation and marrow transplantation: a sparing effect of dose fractionation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1984, 10:957-964.
• [34]Henk JM, Whitelocke RA, Warrington AP, Bessell EM: Radiation dose to the lens and cataract formation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993, 25:815-820.
• [35]Howell RM, Giebeler A, Koontz-Raisig W, Mahajan A, Etzel CJ, D’Amelio AM Jr, Homann KL, Newhauser WD: Comparison of therapeutic dosimetric data from passively scattered proton and photon craniospinal irradiations for medulloblastoma. Radiat Oncol 2012, 7:116. 10.1186/1748-1717X-1187-1116 BioMed Central Full Text
• [36]Jimenez RB, Sethi R, Depauw N, Pulsifer MB, Adams J, McBride SM, Ebb D, Fullerton BC, Tarbell NJ, Yock TI, Macdonald SM: Proton radiation therapy for pediatric medulloblastoma and supratentorial primitive neuroectodermal tumors: outcomes for very young children treated with upfront chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013, 21:017.