Research Article

Adaptive planning and toxicities of uniform scanning proton therapy for lung Cancer patients

Yuanshui Zheng*, Hardev Singh, Suresh Rana, Gary Larson, Prabhu Kiran, Lucius Doh and James Wong

Published: 09/13/2018 | Volume 2 - Issue 3 | Pages: 055-061

Abstract

Purpose: Adaptive planning is often needed in lung cancer proton therapy to account for geometrical variations, such as tumor shrinkage and other anatomical changes.The purpose of this study is to present our findings in adaptive radiotherapy for lung cancer using uniform scanning proton beams, including clinical workflow, adaptation strategies and considerations, and toxicities.

Methods: We analyzed 165 lung patients treated using uniform scanning proton beams at our center. Quality assurance (QA) plans were generated after repeated computerized tomography (CT) scan to evaluate anatomic and dosimetric change during the course of treatment. Plan adaptation was determined mutually by physicists and physicians after QA plan evaluation, based on several clinical and practical considerations including potential clinical benefit and associated cost in plan adaption. Detailed analysis was performed for all patients with a plan adaptation, including the type of anatomy change, at which fraction the adaption was made, and the strategy for adaptation. Toxicities were compared between patients with and without plan adaptation.

Conclusion: Adaptive planning is necessary in proton therapy to account for anatomy change and its effect on proton penetration depth during the course of treatment. It is important to take practical considerations into account and fully understand the limitations of plan adaptation process and tools to make wise decision on adaptive planning. USPT is a safe treatment for lung cancer patients with no Grade 4 toxicity.

Results: In total, 32 adaptive plans were made for 31 patients out of 165 patients, with one patient undergoing adaptive planning twice. Anatomy changes leading to plan adaptation included tumor shrinkage (17), pleural effusion (3), patient weight loss (2), and tumor growth or other anatomy change (9). The plan adaptation occurred at the 15th fraction on average and ranged from the 1st to 31st fraction. Strategies of plan adaptation included range change only (18), re-planning with new patient-specific hardware (9), and others (5). Most toxicities were Grade 1 or 2, with dermatitis the highest toxicity rate.

Conclusion: Adaptive planning is necessary in proton therapy to account for anatomy change and its effect on proton penetration depth during the course of treatment. It is important to take practical considerations into account and fully understand the limitations of plan adaptation process and tools to make wise decision on adaptive planning. USPT is a safe treatment for lung cancer patients with no Grade 4 toxicity.

Read Full Article HTML DOI: 10.29328/journal.jro.1001023 Cite this Article

References

  1. DeLaney TF, Kooy HM. Proton and Charged Particle Radiotherapy. 2015: Wolters Kluwer Health.
  2. Paganetti H. Proton Therapy Physics. 2011: Taylor & Francis. Ref.: https://goo.gl/dSHSA5
  3. Zheng Y, Ramirez E, Mascia A, Ding X, Okoth B, et al. Commissioning of output factors for uniform scanning proton beams. Med Phys. 2011; 38: 2299-2306. Ref.: https://goo.gl/5A11nN
  4. Cushman TR, Verma V, Rwigema JM. Comparison of proton therapy and intensity modulated photon radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: considerations for optimal trial design. J Thorac Dis. 2018; 10(Suppl 9): S988-S990. Ref.: https://goo.gl/hDJ5cw
  5. Wu CT, Motegi A, Motegi K, Hotta K, Kohno R, et al. Dosimetric comparison between proton beam therapy and photon radiation therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2016; Ref.: https://goo.gl/zRAoAi
  6. Ohno T, Oshiro Y, Mizumoto M, Numajiri H, Ishikawa H, et al. Comparison of dose-volume histograms between proton beam and X-ray conformal radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Radiat Res. 2015; 56: 128-133. Ref.: https://goo.gl/ZAEV5J
  7. Stuschke M, Kaiser A, Pöttgen C, Lübcke W, Farr J. Potentials of robust intensity modulated scanning proton plans for locally advanced lung cancer in comparison to intensity modulated photon plans. Radiother Oncol. 2012; 104: 45-51. Ref.: https://goo.gl/vR3bxv
  8. Seco J, Panahandeh HR, Westover K, Adams J, Willers H. Treatment of non-small cell lung cancer patients with proton beam-based stereotactic body radiotherapy: dosimetric comparison with photon plans highlights importance of range uncertainty. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 83: 354-361. Ref.: https://goo.gl/9qDbxL
  9. Hoppe BS, Huh S, Flampouri S, Nichols RC, Oliver KR, et al. Double-scattered proton-based stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage I lung cancer: a dosimetric comparison with photon-based stereotactic body radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2010; 97: 425-430. Ref.: https://goo.gl/fC33ym
  10. Kadoya N, Obata Y, Kato T, Kagiya M, Nakamura T, et al. Dose-volume comparison of proton radiotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011; 79: 1225-1231. Ref.: https://goo.gl/PfccUY
  11. Chang JY, Zhang X, Wang X, Kang Y, Riley B. et al. Significant reduction of normal tissue dose by proton radiotherapy compared with three-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated radiation therapy in Stage I or Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65: 1087-1096. Ref.: https://goo.gl/CFxHxe
  12. Veiga C, Janssens G, Teng CL, Baudier T, Hotoiu L, et al. First Clinical Investigation of Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Deformable Registration for Adaptive Proton Therapy for Lung Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 95: 549-559. Ref.: https://goo.gl/EoS9hd
  13. Zhang X1, Li Y, Pan X, Xiaoqiang L, Mohan R, et al. Intensity-modulated proton therapy reduces the dose to normal tissue compared with intensity-modulated radiation therapy or passive scattering proton therapy and enables individualized radical radiotherapy for extensive stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a virtual clinical study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 77: 357-366. Ref.: https://goo.gl/iDdbVs
  14. Zheng Y. Adaptive Radiotherapy for Lung Cancer Using Uniform Scanning Proton Beams, in Radiotherapy, C. Onal, Editor. 2017; IntechOpen. Ref.: https://goo.gl/kbSt3v
  15. Zhang M, Zou W, Teo BK. Image guidance in proton therapy for lung cancer. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2018; 7: 160-170. Ref.: https://goo.gl/vSfn6B
  16. Koay EJ, Lege D, Mohan R, Komaki R, Cox JD, et al. Adaptive/nonadaptive proton radiation planning and outcomes in a phase II trial for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 84: 1093-1000. Ref.: https://goo.gl/bqi4TP
  17. Chang JY, Li H, Zhu XR, Liao Z, Zhao L, et al. Clinical implementation of intensity modulated proton therapy for thoracic malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014; 90: 809-818. Ref.: https://goo.gl/sQLNjc
  18. Chang JY, Komaki R, Wen HY, De Gracia B, Bluett JB, et al. Toxicity and patterns of failure of adaptive/ablative proton therapy for early-stage, medically inoperable non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011; 80: 1350-1357. Ref.: https://goo.gl/cjm9G4
  19. Hua C, Yao W, Kidani T, Tomida K, Ozawa S, et al. A robotic C-arm cone beam CT system for image-guided proton therapy: design and performance. Br J Radiol. 2017. 90: 20170266. Ref.: https://goo.gl/XvBRjW