Can We Advance Proton Therapy for Prostate? Considering Alternative Beam Angles and Relative Biological Effectiveness Variations When Comparing Against Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: For prostate treatments, robust evidence regarding the superiority of either intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or proton therapy is currently lacking. In this study we investigated the circumstances under which proton therapy should be expected to outperform IMRT, particularly the proton beam orientations and relative biological effectiveness (RBE) assumptions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 8 patients, 4 treatment planning strategies were considered: (A) IMRT; (B) passively scattered standard bilateral (SB) proton beams; (C) passively scattered anterior oblique (AO) proton beams, and (D) AO intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT). For modalities (B)-(D) the dose and linear energy transfer (LET) distributions were simulated using the TOPAS Monte Carlo platform and RBE was calculated according to 3 different models. RESULTS: Assuming a fixed RBE of 1.1, our implementation of IMRT outperformed SB proton therapy across most normal tissue metrics. For the scattered AO proton plans, application of the variable RBE models resulted in substantial hotspots in rectal RBE weighted dose. For AO IMPT, it was typically not possible to find a plan that simultaneously met the tumor and rectal constraints for both fixed and variable RBE models. CONCLUSION: If either a fixed RBE of 1.1 or a variable RBE model could be validated in vivo, then it would always be possible to use AO IMPT to dose-boost the prostate and improve normal tissue sparing relative to IMRT. For a cohort without rectum spacer gels, this study (1) underlines the importance of resolving the question of proton RBE within the framework of an IMRT versus proton debate for the prostate and (2) highlights that without further LET/RBE model validation, great care must be taken if AO proton fields are to be considered for prostate treatments.

Technology for Innovation in Radiation Oncology.

Radiation therapy is an effective, personalized cancer treatment that has benefited from technological advances associated with the growing ability to identify and target tumors with accuracy and precision. Given that these advances have played a central role in the success of radiation therapy as a major component of comprehensive cancer care, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop entitled "Technology for Innovation in Radiation Oncology," which took place at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, on June 13 and 14, 2013. The purpose of this workshop was to discuss emerging technology for the field and to recognize areas for greater research investment. Expert clinicians and scientists discussed innovative technology in radiation oncology, in particular as to how these technologies are being developed and translated to clinical practice in the face of current and future challenges and opportunities. Technologies encompassed topics in functional imaging, treatment devices, nanotechnology, and information technology. The technical, quality, and safety performance of these technologies were also considered. A major theme of the workshop was the growing importance of innovation in the domain of process automation and oncology informatics. The technologically advanced nature of radiation therapy treatments predisposes radiation oncology research teams to take on informatics research initiatives. In addition, the discussion on technology development was balanced with a parallel conversation regarding the need for evidence of efficacy and effectiveness. The linkage between the need for evidence and the efforts in informatics research was clearly identified as synergistic.

Comparing gold nano-particle enhanced radiotherapy with protons, megavoltage photons and kilovoltage photons: a Monte Carlo simulation.

Gold nanoparticles (GNPs) have shown potential to be used as a radiosensitizer for radiation therapy. Despite extensive research activity to study GNP radiosensitization using photon beams, only a few studies have been carried out using proton beams. In this work Monte Carlo simulations were used to assess the dose enhancement of GNPs for proton therapy. The enhancement effect was compared between a clinical proton spectrum, a clinical 6 MV photon spectrum, and a kilovoltage photon source similar to those used in many radiobiology lab settings. We showed that the mechanism by which GNPs can lead to dose enhancements in radiation therapy differs when comparing photon and proton radiation. The GNP dose enhancement using protons can be up to 14 and is independent of proton energy, while the dose enhancement is highly dependent on the photon energy used. For the same amount of energy absorbed in the GNP, interactions with protons, kVp photons and MV photons produce similar doses within several nanometers of the GNP surface, and differences are below 15% for the first 10 nm. However, secondary electrons produced by kilovoltage photons have the longest range in water as compared to protons and MV photons, e.g. they cause a dose enhancement 20 times higher than the one caused by protons 10 µm away from the GNP surface. We conclude that GNPs have the potential to enhance radiation therapy depending on the type of radiation source. Proton therapy can be enhanced significantly only if the GNPs are in close proximity to the biological target.