Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Proton Versus Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy: First Dosimetric Comparison for Total Scalp Irradiation.
Sharma, Ankur Markand; Kowalski, Emily; McGovern, Nathan; Zhu, Mingyao; Mishra, Mark Vikas.
Affiliation
  • Sharma AM; Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Kowalski E; Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
  • McGovern N; Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Zhu M; Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Mishra MV; Maryland Proton Treatment Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Int J Part Ther ; 6(3): 19-26, 2020.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32582811
PURPOSE: Total scalp irradiation (TSI) is used to treat malignancies of the scalp and face, including angiosarcomas, nonmelanoma skin cancers, and cutaneous lymphomas. Owing to the irregularity of the scalp contour and the presence of underlying critical organs at risk (OARs), radiation planning is challenging and technically difficult. To address these complexities, several different radiation therapy techniques have been used. These include the combined lateral photon-electron technique (3DRT), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), helical tomotherapy (HT), and mold-based high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR BT). However, the use of proton radiation therapy (PRT) has never been documented. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 71-year-old, immunosuppressed man presented with recurrent nonmelanoma skin cancer of the scalp. He was successfully treated at our center with PRT to deliver TSI. A comparative VMAT treatment plan was generated and dose to critical OARs was compared. RESULTS: We present the first clinical case report of PRT for TSI and dosimetric comparison to a VMAT plan. The PRT and VMAT plans provided equivalent target volume coverage; however, the PRT plan significantly reduced dose to the brain, hippocampi, and optical apparatus. CONCLUSION: TSI planned with PRT is relatively straightforward from a planning perspective and does not require a bolus. It also has the potential to decrease radiation therapy-related toxicity. However, PRT is relatively expensive and not universally available. The uncertainty surrounding the end-range of the proton beam is a consideration. Although there are potential disadvantages to using PRT for TSI, its use should be considered by treating radiation oncologists and referring physicians.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Int J Part Ther Year: 2020 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: Int J Part Ther Year: 2020 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States Country of publication: United States