Multifield Optimization Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Tumors: A Translation to Practice

被引:122
作者
Frank, Steven J. [1 ]
Cox, James D. [1 ]
Gillin, Michael [2 ]
Mohan, Radhe [2 ]
Garden, Adam S. [1 ]
Rosenthal, David I. [1 ]
Gunn, G. Brandon [1 ]
Weber, Randal S. [3 ]
Kies, Merrill S. [4 ]
Lewin, Jan S. [3 ]
Munsell, Mark F. [5 ]
Palmer, Matthew B. [1 ]
Sahoo, Narayan [2 ]
Zhang, Xiaodong [2 ]
Liu, Wei [2 ]
Zhu, X. Ronald [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Phys, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[3] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Head & Neck Surg, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[4] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Head & Neck Med Oncol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[5] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Biostat, Houston, TX 77030 USA
来源
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS | 2014年 / 89卷 / 04期
关键词
RADIATION-THERAPY; PHOTON; CANCER; RADIOTHERAPY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.04.019
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 [肿瘤学];
摘要
Background: We report the first clinical experience and toxicity of multifield optimization (MFO) intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for patients with head and neck tumors. Methods and Materials: Fifteen consecutive patients with head and neck cancer underwent MFO-IMPT with active scanning beam proton therapy. Patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) had comprehensive treatment extending from the base of the skull to the clavicle. The doses for chemoradiation therapy and radiation therapy alone were 70 Gy and 66 Gy, respectively. The robustness of each treatment plan was also analyzed to evaluate sensitivity to uncertainties associated with variations in patient setup and the effect of uncertainties with proton beam range in patients. Proton beam energies during treatment ranged from 72.5 to 221.8 MeV. Spot sizes varied depending on the beam energy and depth of the target, and the scanning nozzle delivered the spot scanning treatment "spot by spot" and "layer by layer." Results: Ten patients presented with SCC and 5 with adenoid cystic carcinoma. All 15 patients were able to complete treatment with MFO-IMPT, with no need for treatment breaks and no hospitalizations. There were no treatment-related deaths, and with a median follow-up time of 28 months (range, 20-35 months), the overall clinical complete response rate was 93.3% (95% confidence interval, 68.1%-99.8%). Xerostomia occurred in all 15 patients as follows: grade 1 in 10 patients, grade 2 in 4 patients, and grade 3 in 1 patient. Mucositis within the planning target volumes was seen during the treatment of all patients: grade 1 in 1 patient, grade 2 in 8 patients, and grade 3 in 6 patients. No patient experienced grade 2 or higher anterior oral mucositis. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first clinical report of MFO-IMPT for head and neck tumors. Early clinical outcomes are encouraging and warrant further investigation of proton therapy in prospective clinical trials. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:846 / 853
页数:8
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]
Uncertainty incorporated beam angle optimization for IMPT treatment planning [J].
Cao, Wenhua ;
Lim, Gino J. ;
Lee, Andrew ;
Li, Yupeng ;
Liu, Wei ;
Zhu, X. Ronald ;
Zhang, Xiaodong .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (08) :5248-5256
[2]
A prospective study of salivary function sparing in patients with head-and-neck cancers receiving intensity-modulated or three-dimensional radiation therapy: Initial results [J].
Chao, KSC ;
Deasy, JO ;
Markman, J ;
Haynie, J ;
Perez, CA ;
Purdy, JA ;
Low, DA .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2001, 49 (04) :907-916
[3]
A treatment planning comparison of 3D conformal therapy, intensity modulated photon therapy and proton therapy for treatment of advanced head and neck tumours [J].
Cozzi, L ;
Fogliata, A ;
Lomax, A ;
Bolsi, A .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2001, 61 (03) :287-297
[4]
INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY FOR SINONASAL CANCER: IMPROVED OUTCOME COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL RADIOTHERAPY [J].
Dirix, Piet ;
Vanstraelen, Bianca ;
Jorissen, Mark ;
Vander Poorten, Vincent ;
Nuyts, Sandra .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2010, 78 (04) :998-1004
[5]
MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL TRIAL OF ACCELERATED HYPOFRACTIONATED INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY FOR EARLY-STAGE OROPHARYNGEAL CANCER (RTOG 00-22) [J].
Eisbruch, Avraham ;
Harris, Jonathan ;
Garden, Adam S. ;
Chao, Clifford K. S. ;
Straube, William ;
Harari, Paul M. ;
Sanguineti, Giuseppe ;
Jones, Christopher U. ;
Bosch, Walter R. ;
Ang, K. Kian .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2010, 76 (05) :1333-1338
[6]
Commissioning of the discrete spot scanning proton beam delivery system at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Proton Therapy Center, Houston [J].
Gillin, Michael T. ;
Sahoo, Narayan ;
Bues, Martin ;
Ciangaru, George ;
Sawakuchi, Gabriel ;
Poenisch, Falk ;
Arjomandy, Bijan ;
Martin, Craig ;
Titt, Uwe ;
Suzuki, Kazumichi ;
Smith, Alfred R. ;
Zhu, X. Ronald .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (01) :154-163
[7]
Spot-scanning beam proton therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy for ipsilateral head and neck malignancies: A treatment planning comparison [J].
Kandula, Shravan ;
Zhu, Xiaorong ;
Garden, Adam S. ;
Gillin, Michael ;
Rosenthal, David I. ;
Ang, Kie-Kian ;
Mohan, Radhe ;
Amin, Mayankkumar V. ;
Garcia, John A. ;
Wu, Richard ;
Sahoo, Narayah ;
Frank, Steven J. .
MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2013, 38 (04) :390-394
[8]
Effectiveness of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy planning for head and neck cancers [J].
Liu, Wei ;
Frank, Steven J. ;
Li, Xiaoqiang ;
Li, Yupeng ;
Park, Peter C. ;
Dong, Lei ;
Zhu, X. Ronald ;
Mohan, Radhe .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 40 (05)
[9]
PTV-based IMPT optimization incorporating planning risk volumes vs robust optimization [J].
Liu, Wei ;
Frank, Steven J. ;
Li, Xiaoqiang ;
Li, Yupeng ;
Zhu, Ron. X. ;
Mohan, Radhe .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 40 (02)
[10]
Robust optimization of intensity modulated proton therapy [J].
Liu, Wei ;
Zhang, Xiaodong ;
Li, Yupeng ;
Mohan, Radhe .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (02) :1079-1091