Dataset Information

Encouraging early outcomes with image guided pencil beam proton therapy for cranio-spinal irradiation: first report from India.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To report our experience with image guided pencil beam proton beam therapy (PBT) for craniospinal irradiation (CSI).

Materials and methods

Between January 2019 and December 2021, we carried out a detailed audit of the first forty patients treated with PBT. We had recorded acute toxicities, reporting early outcomes and discuss limitations of current contouring guidelines during CSI PBT planning.

Results

Median age of the patient cohort was 8 years, and histologies include 20 medulloblastoma, 7 recurrent ependymoma, 3 pineoblastoma, 3 were germ cell tumors and remaining 7 constituted other diagnoses. Forty percent patients received concurrent chemotherapy. Median CSI dose was 23.4 Gy (Gray; range 21.6-35 Gy). Thirty-five patients (87.5%) completed their CSI without interruption, 5 required hospital admission. No patient had grade 2/ > weight loss during the treatment. Forty-five percent (18) developed grade 1 haematological toxicities and 20% (8) developed grade 2 or 3 toxicities; none had grade 4 toxicities. At median follow up of 12 months, 90% patients are alive of whom 88.9% are having local control. Special consideration with modification in standard contouring used at our institute helped in limiting acute toxicities in paediatric CSI patients.

Conclusion

Our preliminary experience with modern contemporary PBT using pencil beam technology and daily image guidance in a range of tumours suitable for CSI is encouraging. Patients tolerated the treatment well with acceptable acute toxicity and expected short-term survival outcome. In paediatric CSI patients, modification in standard contouring guidelines required to achieve better results with PBT.

SUBMITTER: Gaikwad U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9248189 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Proton radiotherapy using minibeams of sub-millimeter dimensions reduces side effects in comparison to conventional proton therapy due to spatial fractionation. Since the proton minibeams widen with depth, the homogeneous irradiation of a tumor can be ensured by adjusting the beam distances to tumor size and depth to maintain tumor control as in conventional proton therapy. The inherent advantages of protons in comparison to photons like a limited range that prevents a dosage of distal tissues are maintained by proton minibeams and can even be exploited for interlacing from different beam directions. A first animal study was conducted to systematically investigate and quantify the tissue-sparing effects of proton pencil minibeams as a function of beam size and dose distributions, using beam widths between ? = 95, 199, 306, 411, 561 and 883 ?m (standard deviation) at a defined center-to-center beam distance (ctc) of 1.8 mm. The average dose of 60 Gy was distributed in 4x4 minibeams using 20 MeV protons (LET ~ 2.7 keV/?m). The induced radiation toxicities were measured by visible skin reactions and ear swelling for 90 days after irradiation. The largest applied beam size to ctc ratio (?/ctc = 0.49) is similar to a homogeneous irradiation and leads to a significant 3-fold ear thickness increase compared to the control group. Erythema and desquamation was also increased significantly 3-4 weeks after irradiation. With decreasing beam sizes and thus decreasing ?/ctc, the maximum skin reactions are strongly reduced until no ear swelling or other visible skin reactions should occur for ?/ctc < 0.032 (extrapolated from data). These results demonstrate that proton pencil minibeam radiotherapy has better tissue-sparing for smaller ?/ctc, corresponding to larger peak-to-valley dose ratios PVDR, with the best effect for ?/ctc < 0.032. However, even quite large ?/ctc (e.g. ?/ctc = 0.23 or 0.31, i.e. PVDR = 10 or 2.7) show less acute side effects than a homogeneous dose distribution. This suggests that proton minibeam therapy spares healthy tissue not only in the skin but even for dose distributions appearing in deeper layers close to the tumor enhancing its benefits for clinical proton therapy.

Project description:BackgroundProton pencil beam (PB) dose calculation algorithms have limited accuracy within heterogeneous tissues of lung cancer patients, which may be addressed by modern commercial Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms. We investigated clinical pencil beam scanning (PBS) dose differences between PB and MC-based treatment planning for lung cancer patients.MethodsWith IRB approval, a comparative dosimetric analysis between RayStation MC and PB dose engines was performed on ten patient plans. PBS gantry plans were generated using single-field optimization technique to maintain target coverage under range and setup uncertainties. Dose differences between PB-optimized (PBopt), MC-recalculated (MCrecalc), and MC-optimized (MCopt) plans were recorded for the following region-of-interest metrics: clinical target volume (CTV) V95, CTV homogeneity index (HI), total lung V20, total lung VRX (relative lung volume receiving prescribed dose or higher), and global maximum dose. The impact of PB-based and MC-based planning on robustness to systematic perturbation of range (±3% density) and setup (±3 mm isotropic) was assessed. Pairwise differences in dose parameters were evaluated through non-parametric Friedman and Wilcoxon sign-rank testing.ResultsIn this ten-patient sample, CTV V95 decreased significantly from 99-100% for PBopt to 77-94% for MCrecalc and recovered to 99-100% for MCopt (P<10-5). The median CTV HI (D95/D5) decreased from 0.98 for PBopt to 0.91 for MCrecalc and increased to 0.95 for MCopt (P<10-3). CTV D95 robustness to range and setup errors improved under MCopt (ΔD95 =-1%) compared to MCrecalc (ΔD95 =-6%, P=0.006). No changes in lung dosimetry were observed for large volumes receiving low to intermediate doses (e.g., V20), while differences between PB-based and MC-based planning were noted for small volumes receiving high doses (e.g., VRX). Global maximum patient dose increased from 106% for PBopt to 109% for MCrecalc and 112% for MCopt (P<10-3).ConclusionsMC dosimetry revealed a reduction in target dose coverage under PB-based planning that was regained under MC-based planning along with improved plan robustness. MC-based optimization and dose calculation should be integrated into clinical planning workflows of lung cancer patients receiving actively scanned proton therapy.