Cone beam CT-based adaptive intensity modulated proton therapy assessment using automated planning for head-and-neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: To assess the feasibility of CBCT-based adaptive intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using automated planning for treatment of head and neck (HN) cancers. METHODS: Twenty HN cancer patients who received radiotherapy and had pretreatment CBCTs were included in this study. Initial IMPT plans were created using automated planning software for all patients. Synthetic CTs (sCT) were then created by deforming the planning CT (pCT) to the pretreatment CBCTs. To assess dose calculation accuracy on sCTs, repeat CTs (rCTs) were deformed to the pretreatment CBCT obtained on the same day to create deformed rCT (rCTdef), serving as gold standard. The dose recalculated on sCT and on rCTdef were compared by using Gamma analysis. The accuracy of DIR generated contours was also assessed. To explore the potential benefits of adaptive IMPT, two sets of plans were created for each patient, a non-adapted IMPT plan and an adapted IMPT plan calculated on weekly sCT images. The weekly doses for non-adaptive and adaptive IMPT plans were accumulated on the pCT, and the accumulated dosimetric parameters of two sets were compared. RESULTS: Gamma analysis of the dose recalculated on sCT and rCTdef resulted in a passing rate of 97.9% ± 1.7% using 3 mm/3% criteria. With the physician-corrected contours on the sCT, the dose deviation range of using sCT to estimate mean dose for the most organ at risk (OARs) can be reduced to (- 2.37%, 2.19%) as compared to rCTdef, while for V95 of primary or secondary CTVs, the deviation can be controlled within (- 1.09%, 0.29%). Comparison of the accumulated doses from the adaptive planning against the non-adaptive plans reduced mean dose to constrictors (- 1.42 Gy ± 2.79 Gy) and larynx (- 2.58 Gy ± 3.09 Gy). The reductions result in statistically significant reductions in the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of larynx edema by 7.52% ± 13.59%. 4.5% of primary CTVs, 4.1% of secondary CTVs, and 26.8% tertiary CTVs didn't meet the V95 > 95% constraint on non-adapted IMPT plans. All adaptive plans were able to meet the coverage constraint. CONCLUSION: sCTs can be a useful tool for accurate proton dose calculation. Adaptive IMPT resulted in better CTV coverage, OAR sparing and lower NTCP for some OARs as compared with non-adaptive IMPT.

Bone marrow sparing in prostate cancer patients treated with Post-operative pelvic nodal radiotherapy - A proton versus photon comparison.

PURPOSE: Extending salvage radiotherapy to treat the pelvic lymph nodes (PLNRT) improves oncologic outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa). However, a larger treatment volume increases the extent of bone marrow (BM) exposure, which is associated with hematologic toxicity (HT). Given the potential long-term impact of BM dose in PCa, clinical studies on BM sparing (BMS) are warranted. Herein, we dosimetrically compared photon and proton plans for BMS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Treatment plans of 20 post-operative PCa patients treated with volumetric-modulated arc photon therapy (VMAT) PLNRT were retrospectively identified. Contours were added for the whole pelvis BM (WPBM) and BM sub-volumes: lumbar-sacral (LSBM), iliac (ILBM), and lower pelvis (LPBM). Three additional plans were created: VMAT_BMS, intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), and IMPT_BMS. Normal tissue complication probabilities (NTCP) for grade >3 hematologic toxicity (HT3+) were calculated for the WPBM volumes. RESULTS: Compared to the original VMAT plan, mean doses to all BM sub-volumes were statistically significantly lower for VMAT_BMS, IMPT, and IMPT_BMS resulting in average NTCP percentages of 20.5 ± 5.9, 10.7 ± 4.2, 6.1 ± 2.0, and 2.5 ± 0.6, respectively. IMPT_BMS had significantly lower low dose metrics (V300cGy-V2000cGy) for WPBM and sub-volumes except for LPBM V2000cGy compared to VMAT_BMS and ILBM V20Gy compared to IMPT. In most cases, V4000cGy and V5000cGy within ILBM and LSBM were significantly higher for IMPT plans compared to VMAT plans. CONCLUSIONS: BMS plans are achievable with VMAT and IMPT without compromising target coverage or OARs constraints. IMPT plans were overall better at reducing mean and NTCP for HT3+ as well as low dose volumes to BM. However, IMPT had larger high dose volumes within LSBM and ILBM. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the clinical implications of these findings.

Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of systematic setup and range uncertainties for robustly optimized (RO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans in patients with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Twenty-six localized prostate patients previously treated with VMAT (CTV to PTV expansion of 3-5 mm) were re-planned with RO-IMPT with 3 mm and 5 mm geometrical uncertainties coupled with 3% range uncertainties. Robust evaluations (RE) accounting for the geometrical uncertainties of 3 and 5 mm were evaluated for the IMPT and VMAT plans. Clinical target volume (CTV), anorectum, and bladder dose metrics were analyzed between the nominal plans and their uncertainty perturbations. RESULTS: With geometric uncertainties of 5 mm and accounting for potential inter-fractional perturbations, RO-IMPT provided statistically significant (p < 0.05) sparing at intermediate doses (V4000cGy) to the anorectum and bladder and high dose sparring (V8000cGy) to the bladder compared to VMAT. Decreasing the RO and RE parameters to 3 mm improved IMPT sparing over VMAT at all OAR dose levels investigated while maintaining equivalent coverage to the CTV. CONCLUSIONS: For localized prostate treatments, if geometric uncertainties can be maintained at or below 3 mm, RO-IMPT provides clear dosimetric advantages in anorectum and bladder sparing compared to VMAT. This advantage remains even under uncertainty scenarios. As geometric uncertainties increase to 5 mm, RO-IMPT still provides dosimetric advantages, but to a smaller magnitude.

Assessment of intra-fraction motion during automated linac-based SRS treatment delivery with an open face mask system.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: To evaluate intra-fraction target shift during automated mono-isocentric linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery with open-face mask system and optical real-time tracking. MATERIALS/METHODS: Ninety-five patients were treated using automated linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery in 1-5 fractions with single isocenter for a total of 195 fractions. During treatment, patient positioning was tracked real-time with optical surface guidance and immobilized with a rigid open-face mask. Patients were re-positioned if optical surface guidance error exceeded 1 mm magnitude or 1°. Translational and rotational intra-fractional changes were determined by post-treatment CBCT matched to the planning CT. Target specific error was calculated by translation and rotation matrices applied to isocenter and target spatial coordinates. RESULTS: For 132 fractions with isocenter within a single target, the median shift magnitude was 0.40 mm with a maximum shift of 1.17 mm. A total of 398 targets treated for plans having multiple or single targets that lied outside isocenter, resulted in a median shift magnitude of 0.46 mm, with median translational shifts of 0.20 mm and 0.20° rotational shifts. A 1 mm PTV margin was insufficient in 18% of targets at a distance greater than 6 cm away from isocenter, but sufficient for 96% of targets within 6 cm. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study support 1 mm PTV expansion due to intra-fraction motion to ensure target coverage for plans with isocenter placement less than 6 cm away from the targets.

Knowledge-Based Planning for Robustly Optimized Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy of Head and Neck Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: To assess the performance of a proton-specific knowledge-based planning (KBP) model in the creation of robustly optimized intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans for treatment of advanced head and neck (HN) cancer patients. METHODS: Seventy-three patients diagnosed with advanced HN cancer previously treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were selected and replanned with robustly optimized IMPT. A proton-specific KBP model, RapidPlanPT (RPP), was generated using 53 patients (20 unilateral cases and 33 bilateral cases). The remaining 20 patients (10 unilateral and 10 bilateral cases) were used for model validation. The model was validated by comparing the target coverage and organ at risk (OAR) sparing in the RPP-generated IMPT plans with those in the expert plans. To account for the robustness of the plan, all uncertainty scenarios were included in the analysis. RESULTS: All the RPP plans generated were clinically acceptable. For unilateral cases, RPP plans had higher CTV_primary V100 (1.59% ± 1.24%) but higher homogeneity index (HI) (0.7 ± 0.73) than had the expert plans. In addition, the RPP plans had better ipsilateral cochlea Dmean (-5.76 ± 6.11 Gy), with marginal to no significant difference between RPP plans and expert plans for all other OAR dosimetric indices. For the bilateral cases, the V100 for all clinical target volumes (CTVs) was higher for the RPP plans than for the expert plans, especially the CTV_primary V100 (5.08% ± 3.02%), with no significant difference in the HI. With respect to OAR sparing, RPP plans had a lower spinal cord Dmax (-5.74 ± 5.72 Gy), lower cochlea Dmean (left, -6.05 ± 4.33 Gy; right, -4.84 ± 4.66 Gy), lower left and right parotid V20Gy (left, -6.45% ± 5.32%; right, -6.92% ± 3.45%), and a lower integral dose (-0.19 ± 0.19 Gy). However, RPP plans increased the Dmax in the body outside of CTV (body-CTV) (1.2 ± 1.43 Gy), indicating a slightly higher hotspot produced by the RPP plans. CONCLUSION: IMPT plans generated by a broad-scope RPP model have a quality that is, at minimum, comparable with, and at times superior to, that of the expert plans. The RPP plans demonstrated a greater robustness for CTV coverage and better sparing for several OARs.

CBCT-Based Adaptive Assessment Workflow for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer.

PURPOSE: Anatomical changes and patient setup uncertainties during intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) of head and neck (HN) cancers demand frequent evaluation of delivered dose. This work investigated a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and deformable image registration based therapy workflow to demonstrate the feasibility of proton dose calculation on synthetic computed tomography (sCT) for adaptive IMPT treatment of HN cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with HN cancer were enrolled in this study, a retrospective institutional review board protocol. They had previously been treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy and had daily iterative CBCT. For each patient, robust optimization (RO) IMPT plans were generated using ±3 mm patient setup and ±3% proton range uncertainties. The sCTs were created and the weekly delivered dose was recalculated using an adaptive dose accumulation workflow in which the planning computed tomography (CT) was deformably registered to CBCTs and Hounsfield units transferred from the planning CT. Accumulated doses from ±3 mm/±3% RO-IMPT plans were evaluated using clinical dose-volume constraints for targets (clinical target volume, or CTV) and organs at risk. RESULTS: Evaluation of weekly recalculated dose on sCTs showed that most of the patient plans maintained target dose coverage. The primary CTV remained covered by the V95 > 95% (95% of the volume receiving more than 95% of the prescription dose) worst-case scenario for 84.5% of the weekly fractions. The oral cavity accumulated mean dose remained lower than the worst-case scenario for all patients. Parotid accumulated mean dose remained within the uncertainty bands for 18 of the 21 patients, and all were kept lower than RO-IMPT worst-case scenario for 88.7% and 84.5% for left and right parotids, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that RO-IMPT plans account for most setup and anatomical uncertainties, except for large weight-loss changes that need to be tracked throughout the treatment course. We showed that sCTs could be a powerful decision tool for adaptation of these cases in order to reduce workload when using repeat CTs.