Evaluation of Proton Therapy Reirradiation for Patients With Recurrent Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: Use of proton therapy reirradiation (PT-ReRT) for head and neck cancer is increasing; however, reports are heterogenous and outcomes can be difficult to interpret. Objective: To evaluate outcomes and toxic effects following PT-ReRT in a uniform and consecutive cohort of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included patients with recurrent primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who were treated with PT-ReRT from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020, at a single institution. Patient, clinical, and treatment characteristics were obtained, and multidisciplinary review was performed to record and grade early and late toxic effects. Exposures: Proton therapy reirradiation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Follow-up was defined from the start of PT-ReRT. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for outcomes of interest, including local control (LC), locoregional control, distant metastatic control, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to assess associations of covariates with OS. Results: A total of 242 patients (median [range] age, 63 [21-96] years; 183 [75.6%] male) were included. Of these patients, 231 (95.9%) had a Karnofsky performance status score of 70 or higher, and 145 (59.9%) had at least a 10-pack-year smoking history. Median (range) follow-up was 12.0 (5.8-26.0) months for all patients and 24.5 (13.8-37.8) months for living patients. A total of 206 patients (85.1%) had recurrent disease vs second primary or residual disease. The median (range) interval between radiation courses was 22 (1-669) months. Median PT-ReRT dose was 70 cobalt gray equivalents (CGE) for the fractionated cohort and 44.4 CGE for the quad shot cohort. For the fractionated cohort, the 1-year LC was 71.8% (95% CI, 62.8%-79.0%) and the 1-year OS was 66.6% (95% CI, 58.1%-73.8%). For the quad shot cohort, the 1-year LC was 61.6% (95% CI, 46.4%-73.6%) and the 1-year OS was 28.5% (95% CI, 19.4%-38.3%). Higher Karnofsky performance status scores (hazard ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-0.99; P = .046) and receipt of salvage surgery prior to PT-ReRT (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.84; P = .005) were associated with improved OS, whereas receipt of quad shot (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.36-2.86; P < .001) was associated with worse OS. There were a total of 73 grade 3 and 6 grade 4 early toxic effects. There were 79 potential grade 3, 4 grade 4, and 5 grade 5 late toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that, compared with previous reports with photon-based reirradiation, patients are living longer with aggressive PT-ReRT; however, surviving patients remain at risk of early and late complications.

Vital organ sparing with proton therapy for pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma: Toxicity and outcomes in 50 patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: With high survival rates for pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), attention has turned to minimizing treatment-related morbidity and mortality. Chemotherapy and dose of radiation to organs at risk (OARs) contribute to elevated risks of secondary malignancy and cardiopulmonary disease. We sought to characterize the radiation dose to OARs, toxicities, and outcomes for pediatric HL patients treated with proton therapy (PT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients aged 11-21 with HL consecutively treated with PT were evaluated 1-2 months following completion of PT and every 6 months thereafter. Acute and late toxicities were captured retrospectively using CTCAE v5. Patterns of relapse were characterized, and survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Most (47, 94%) patients received PT to the mediastinum. Median mean heart dose was 4.3 Gy (RBE) and median bilateral lung V20Gy was 5.8%. Median integral dose was 1.7 Gy. For the 27 female patients, a median mean dose of 0.4 and 0.3 Gy (RBE) was delivered to ipsilateral and contralateral breast tissue, respectively. No on-treatment grade 3-5 toxicities were seen. At a median follow-up of 5.3 years, no PT-related grade 3-5 toxicities or secondary malignancies developed. Five patients relapsed at a median time of 9.2 months after PT (range 2.5-24.9 months; 5-year recurrence free survival 90%). Recurrences were both in- and out-of-field in all 5 cases with no marginal failures. All relapsed patients were successfully salvaged (5-year overall survival 100%). CONCLUSION: For pediatric HL patients, proton treatment resulted in marked dose sparing of OARs with low rates of toxicity, no marginal failures, and excellent 5-year survival.

Toxicity Profiles and Survival Outcomes Among Patients With Nonmetastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treated With Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy vs Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy.

Importance: Patients with nonmetastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are primarily treated by radiotherapy with curative intent with or without chemotherapy and often experience substantial treatment-related toxic effects even with modern radiation techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) may improve the toxicity profile; however, there is a paucity of data given the limited availability of IMPT in regions with endemic NPC. Objective: To compare toxic effects and oncologic outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic NPC when treated with IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 77 patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic NPC who received curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT at a tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019. Forty-eight patients with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-positive tumors were included in a 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis for survival outcomes. The end of the follow-up period was March 31, 2021. Exposures: IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the incidence of acute and chronic treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and oncologic outcomes, including locoregional failure-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: We identified 77 patients (25 [32.5%] women; 52 [67.5%] men; median [interquartile range] age, 48.7 [42.2-60.3] years), among whom 28 (36.4%) were treated with IMPT and 49 (63.6%) were treated with IMRT. Median (interquartile range) follow-up was 30.3 (17.9-41.5) months. On multivariable logistic regression analyses, IMPT was associated with lower likelihood of developing grade 2 or higher acute AEs compared with IMRT (odds ratio [OR], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.60; P = .01). Only 1 case (3.8%) of a chronic grade 3 or higher AE occurred in the IMPT group compared with 8 cases (16.3%) in the IMRT group (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-1.21; P = .15). Propensity score matching generated a balanced cohort of 48 patients (24 IMPT vs 24 IMRT) and found similar PFS in the IMPT and IMRT groups (2-year PFS, 95.7% [95% CI, 87.7%-100%] vs 76.7% [95% CI, 60.7%-97.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.07-1.47; P = .14). No locoregional recurrence or death was observed in the IMPT group from the matched cohort. Two-year LRFS was 100% (95% CI, 100%-100%) in the IMPT group and 86.2% (95% CI, 72.8%-100%) in the IMRT group (P = .08). Three-year OS was 100% (95% CI, 100%-100%) in the IMPT group and 94.1% (95% CI, 83.6%-100%) in the IMRT group (P = .42). Smoking history was the only clinical factor significantly associated with both poor LRFS (HR, 63.37; 95% CI, 3.25-1236.13; P = .006) and poor PFS (HR, 6.33; 95% CI, 1.16-34.57; P = .03) on multivariable analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT for nonmetastatic NPC was associated with significantly reduced acute toxicity burden in comparison with IMRT, with rare late complications and excellent oncologic outcomes, including 100% locoregional control at 2 years. Prospective trials are warranted to direct the optimal patient selection for IMPT as the primary radiotherapy modality for nonmetastatic NPC.

Development of a Comprehensive, Contour-Based, Peer Review Workflow at a Community Proton Center.

PURPOSE: Quality assurance and continuing quality improvement are integral parts of any radiation oncology practice. With increasingly conformal radiation treatments, it has become critical to focus on every slice of the target contour to ensure adequate tumor coverage and optimal normal tissue sparing. Proton therapy centers open internationally with increasing frequency, and radiation oncologists with varying degrees of subspecialization apply proton therapy in daily practice. Precise treatment with proton therapy allows us to limit toxicity but requires in-depth knowledge of the unique properties of proton beam delivery. To address this need at our proton therapy center, we developed a comprehensive peer review program to help improve the quality of care that we were providing for our patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We implemented a policy of comprehensive peer review for all patients treated at our community proton facility starting in January 2013. Peer review begins at the time of referral with prospective cases being reviewed for appropriateness for proton therapy at daily rounds. There is then biweekly review of target contouring and treatment plans. RESULTS: During a 6-month period from June 2013 to November 2013, a total of 223 new patients were treated. Documentation of peer review at chart rounds was completed for 222 of the 223 patients (99.6%). An average of 10.7 cases were reviewed in each biweekly chart rounds session, with a total of 560 case presentations. The average time required for contour review was 145 seconds (±71 seconds) and plan review was 120 seconds (±64 seconds). Modifications were suggested for 21 patients (7.9%) during contour review and for 19 patients (6.4%) during treatment plan review. An average of 4 physicians were present at each session. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that the implementation of a comprehensive, prospective peer review program is feasible in the community setting. This article can serve as a framework for future quality assurance programs.

Temporal Lobe Necrosis in Head and Neck Cancer Patients after Proton Therapy to the Skull Base.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate temporal lobe necrosis (TLN) rate and clinical/dose-volume factors associated with TLN in radiation-naïve patients with head and neck cancer treated with proton therapy where the field of radiation involved the skull base. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records and dosimetric data for radiation-naïve patients with head and neck cancer receiving proton therapy to the skull base were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with <3 months of follow-up, receiving <45 GyRBE or nonconventional fractionation, and/or no follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were excluded. TLN was determined using MRI and graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0. Clinical (gender, age, comorbidities, concurrent chemotherapy, smoking, radiation techniques) and dose-volume parameters were analyzed for TLN correlation. The receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC) were performed to determine the cutoff points of significant dose-volume parameters. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2019, 234 patients were included. The median follow-up time was 22.5 months (range = 3.2-69.3). Overall TLN rates of any grade, ≥ grade 2, and ≥ grade 3 were 5.6% (N = 13), 2.1%, and 0.9%, respectively. The estimated 2-year TLN rate was 4.6%, and the 2-year rate of any brain necrosis was 6.8%. The median time to TLN was 20.9 months from proton completion. Absolute volume receiving 40, 50, 60, and 70 GyRBE (absolute volume [aV]); mean and maximum dose received by the temporal lobe; and dose to the 0.5, 1, and 2 cm3 volume receiving the maximum dose (D0.5cm3, D1cm3, and D2cm3, respectively) of the temporal lobe were associated with greater TLN risk while clinical parameters showed no correlation. Among volume parameters, aV50 gave maximum AUC (0.921), and D2cm3 gave the highest AUC (0.935) among dose parameters. The 11-cm3 cutoff value for aV50 and 62 GyRBE for D2cm3 showed maximum specificity and sensitivity. CONCLUSION: The estimated 2-year TLN rate was 4.6% with a low rate of toxicities ≥grade 3; aV50 ≤11 cm3, D2cm3 ≤62 GyRBE and other cutoff values are suggested as constraints in proton therapy planning to minimize the risk of any grade TLN. Patients whose temporal lobe(s) unavoidably receive higher doses than these thresholds should be carefully followed with MRI after proton therapy.

Outcomes and toxicities of definitive radiotherapy and reirradiation using 3-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated (pencil beam) proton therapy for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Proton therapy (PT) improves outcomes in patients with nasal cavity (NC) and paranasal sinus (PNS) cancers. Herein, the authors have reported to their knowledge the largest series to date using intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in the treatment of these patients. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2018, a total of 86 consecutive patients (68 of whom were radiation-naive and 18 of whom were reirradiated) received PT to median doses of 70 grays and 67 grays relative biological effectiveness, respectively. Approximately 53% received IMPT. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 23.4 months (range, 1.7-69.3 months) for all patients and 28.1 months (range, 2.3-69.3 months) for surviving patients. The 2-year local control (LC), distant control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 83%, 84%, 74%, and 81%, respectively, for radiation-naive patients and 77%, 80%, 54%, and 66%, respectively for reirradiated patients. Among radiation-naive patients, when compared with 3-dimensional conformal proton technique, IMPT significantly improved LC (91% vs 72%; P < .01) and independently predicted LC (hazard ratio, 0.14; P = .01). Sixteen radiation-naive patients (24%) experienced acute grade 3 toxicities; 4 (6%) experienced late grade 3 toxicities (osteoradionecrosis, vision loss, soft-tissue necrosis, and soft tissue fibrosis) (grading was performed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 5.0]). Slightly inferior LC was noted for patients undergoing reirradiation with higher complications: 11% experienced late grade 3 toxicities (facial pain and brain necrosis). Patients treated with reirradiation had more grade 1 to 2 radionecrosis than radiation-naive patients (brain: 33% vs 7% and osteoradionecrosis: 17% vs 3%). CONCLUSIONS: PT achieved remarkable LC for patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinus cancers with lower grade 3 toxicities relative to historical reports. IMPT has the potential to improve the therapeutic ratio in these malignancies and is worthy of further investigation.

Organ preservation for patients with anterior mucosal squamous cell carcinoma of the nasal cavity: Rhinectomy-free survival in those refusing surgery.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the anterior nasal mucosa is surgical resection with or without postoperative radiation. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients diagnosed with SCC of the nasal cavity between January 2000 and July 2018 who refused total rhinectomy and who were treated with radiation with or without chemotherapy with curative intent. RESULTS: Eleven patients were identified, 73% had stage III or stage IV disease. Four patients were treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy and seven with intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy was used in nine patients (82%). With a median follow-up of 15 months (3-124 months), two patients experienced recurrence and one developed distant metastasis and died from disease. The 2-year rhinectomy-free survival rate was 88%. Two-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were 100% and 75%, respectively. CONCLUSION: A radiation-based approach for SCC of the nasal cavity mucosa is a valid option for selected patients who refuse up-front surgery.

Endoscopic Resection Followed by Proton Therapy With Pencil Beam Scanning for Skull Base Tumors.

For patients who require postoperative radiotherapy after endoscopic resection of skull base tumors, proton therapy with pencil beam scanning (PBS) may allow sparing of normal tissue compared to intensity-modulated photon radiation (IMRT). We compared PBS and IMRT radiation plans in the preoperative and postoperative settings for two patients with advanced skull base tumors following endoscopic resection. The benefits of PBS over IMRT appear greater in the postoperative setting following endoscopic resection with improved sparing of critical organs at risk. The multidisciplinary approach of endoscopic resection followed by PBS represents a treatment paradigm with potential for improvements in toxicity reduction. Laryngoscope, 129:1313-1317, 2019.

Contour-based lung dose prediction for breast proton therapy.

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the feasibility of lung dose prediction based on target contour and patient anatomy for breast patients treated with proton therapy. METHODS: Fifty-two randomly selected patients were included in the cohort, who were treated to 50.4-66.4 Gy(RBE) to the left (36), right (15), or bilateral (1) breast with uniform scanning (32) or pencil beam scanning (20). Anterior-oblique beams were used for each patient. The prescription doses were all scaled to 50.4 Gy(RBE) for the current analysis. Isotropic expansions of the planning target volume of various margins m were retrospectively generated and compared with isodose volumes in the ipsilateral lung. The fractional volume V of each expansion contour within the ipsilateral lung was compared with dose-volume data of clinical plans to establish the relationship between the margin m and dose D for the ipsilateral lung such that VD  = V(m). This relationship enables prediction of dose-volume VD from V(m), which could be derived from contours before any plan is generated, providing a goal of plan quality. Lung V20 Gy( RBE ) and V5 Gy( RBE ) were considered for this pilot study, while the results could be generalized to other dose levels and/or other organs. RESULTS: The actual V20 Gy( RBE ) ranged from 6% to 23%. No statistically significant difference in V20 Gy( RBE ) was found between breast irradiation and chest wall irradiation (P = 0.8) or between left-side and right-side treatment (P = 0.9). It was found that V(1.1 cm) predicted V20 Gy( RBE ) to within 5% root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) and V(2.2 cm) predicted V5 Gy( RBE ) to within 6% RMSD. CONCLUSION: A contour-based model was established to predict dose to ipsilateral lung in breast treatment. Clinically relevant accuracy was demonstrated. This model facilitates dose prediction before treatment planning. It could serve as a guide toward realistic clinical goals in the planning stage.

Early Axial Growth Outcomes of Pediatric Patients Receiving Proton Craniospinal Irradiation.

Guidelines on proton craniospinal irradiation (p-CSI) target volume selection in children are lacking. We examined the impact of target volume selection on growth of children receiving p-CSI at a institution. Records of 58 patients who received p-CSI were reviewed. Median age at treatment initiation was 8 years (range, 2 to 18 y). Spinal target volumes included whole vertebral body (WVB) in 67% and partial vertebral body (PVB) in 33%. Height z-scores before and after p-CSI were assessed using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stature-for-age charts. Maximal Cobb angle and height z-score change were compared for WVB versus PVB p-CSI using a t test. Among 93% of patients with detailed data, median follow-up was 19 months (range, 2 to 58 mo) after radiation therapy initiation. Quantitative growth evaluations were available for 64% of patients. Median change in height z-score was -0.5 (range, -2.1 to +0.7) after treatment, representing a decrease (P<0.001) in age-adjusted height. WVB patients had significantly greater reduction in height z-score versus PVB patients (P=0.004) but no difference in Cobb angle change (P>0.05). Despite reluctance surrounding its use in younger patients, PVB p-CSI was associated with similar spinal curvature and less growth suppression as compared with WVB p-CSI; a trial comparing WVB versus PVB in children may be warranted.

Comparison of mean radiation dose and dosimetric distribution to tooth-bearing regions of the mandible associated with proton beam radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for ipsilateral head and neck tumor.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the dosimetric distribution of ipsilateral proton beam radiation therapy (PBRT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the tooth-bearing region of the mandible in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). STUDY DESIGN: The mandibular dosimetric distribution in patients with head and neck cancer treated with ≥60 Gy relative biologic equivalent PBRT was evaluated. The mean radiation doses were calculated in 5 regions: ipsilateral molar, ipsilateral premolar, anterior, contralateral premolar, and contralateral molar (CM) regions. CM was used as the reference region for comparative analysis. The mandibular dosimetric distribution in patients treated with PBRT was compared with that in IMRT patients with similar tumor sites and planning target volumes. RESULTS: The mean radiation dose to the contralateral regions was lower in patients treated with PBRT compared with those treated with IMRT. The average mean radiation doses to the reference region (CM) in patients treated with PBRT (relative biologic equivalent) versus IMRT were oropharynx (2.2 Gy vs 23.2 Gy; P < .00002), parotid (0 Gy vs 11.8 Gy; P = .01), and oral cavity (0.4 Gy vs 15.6 Gy; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the effective tissue-sparing capability of PBRT compared with IMRT. Utilization of PBRT could translate to less radiation-related toxicity.

Proton Beam Reirradiation for Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer: Multi-institutional Report on Feasibility and Early Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Reirradiation therapy (re-RT) is the only potentially curative treatment option for patients with locally recurrent head and neck cancer (HNC). Given the significant morbidity with head and neck re-RT, interest in proton beam radiation therapy (PBRT) has increased. We report the first multi-institutional clinical experience using curative-intent PBRT for re-RT in recurrent HNC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective analysis of ongoing prospective data registries from 2 hybrid community practice and academic proton centers was conducted. Patients with recurrent HNC who underwent at least 1 prior course of definitive-intent external beam radiation therapy (RT) were included. Acute and late toxicities were assessed with the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group late radiation morbidity scoring system, respectively. The cumulative incidence of locoregional failure was calculated with death as a competing risk. The actuarial 12-month freedom-from-distant metastasis and overall survival rates were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Ninety-two consecutive patients were treated with curative-intent re-RT with PBRT between 2011 and 2014. Median follow-up among surviving patients was 13.3 months and among all patients was 10.4 months. The median time between last RT and PBRT was 34.4 months. There were 76 patients with 1 prior RT course and 16 with 2 or more courses. The median PBRT dose was 60.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness, [RBE]). Eighty-five percent of patients underwent prior HNC RT for an oropharynx primary, and 39% underwent salvage surgery before re-RT. The cumulative incidence of locoregional failure at 12 months, with death as a competing risk, was 25.1%. The actuarial 12-month freedom-from-distant metastasis and overall survival rates were 84.0% and 65.2%, respectively. Acute toxicities of grade 3 or greater included mucositis (9.9%), dysphagia (9.1%), esophagitis (9.1%), and dermatitis (3.3%). There was 1 death during PBRT due to disease progression. Grade 3 or greater late skin and dysphagia toxicities were noted in 6 patients (8.7%) and 4 patients (7.1%), respectively. Two patients had grade 5 toxicity due to treatment-related bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Proton beam re-RT of the head and neck can provide effective tumor control with acceptable acute and late toxicity profiles likely because of the decreased dose to the surrounding normal, albeit previously irradiated, tissue, although longer follow-up is needed to confirm these findings.

Proton beam radiation therapy results in significantly reduced toxicity compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy for head and neck tumors that require ipsilateral radiation.

BACKGROUND: As proton beam radiation therapy (PBRT) may allow greater normal tissue sparing when compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), we compared the dosimetry and treatment-related toxicities between patients treated to the ipsilateral head and neck with either PBRT or IMRT. METHODS: Between 01/2011 and 03/2014, 41 consecutive patients underwent ipsilateral irradiation for major salivary gland cancer or cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. The availability of PBRT, during this period, resulted in an immediate shift in practice from IMRT to PBRT, without any change in target delineation. Acute toxicities were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. RESULTS: Twenty-three (56.1%) patients were treated with IMRT and 18 (43.9%) with PBRT. The groups were balanced in terms of baseline, treatment, and target volume characteristics. IMRT plans had a greater median maximum brainstem (29.7 Gy vs. 0.62 Gy (RBE), ​P < 0.001), maximum spinal cord (36.3 Gy vs. 1.88 Gy (RBE), ​P < 0.001), mean oral cavity (20.6 Gy vs. 0.94 Gy (RBE), ​P < 0.001), mean contralateral parotid (1.4 Gy vs. 0.0 Gy (RBE), P<0.001), and mean contralateral submandibular (4.1 Gy vs. 0.0 Gy (RBE), ​P < 0.001) dose when compared to PBRT plans. PBRT had significantly lower rates of grade 2 or greater acute dysgeusia (5.6% vs. 65.2%, P<0.001), mucositis (16.7% vs. 52.2%, P=0.019), and nausea (11.1% vs. 56.5%, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The unique properties of PBRT allow greater normal tissue sparing without sacrificing target coverage when irradiating the ipsilateral head and neck. This dosimetric advantage seemingly translates into lower rates of acute treatment-related toxicity.