Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; OncoRay-National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, and Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany; Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology - OncoRay, Dresden, Germany.
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Nov 1;99(3):738-749. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.06.017. Epub 2017 Jun 20.
To compare the difference in robustness of single-field optimized (SFO) and robust multifield optimized (rMFO) proton plans for oropharynx carcinoma patients by an improved robustness analysis.
We generated rMFO proton plans for 11 patients with oropharynx carcinoma treated with SFO intensity modulated proton therapy with simultaneous integrated boost prescription. Doses from both planning approaches were compared for the initial plans and the worst cases from 20 optimization scenarios of setup errors and range uncertainties. Expected average dose distributions per range uncertainty were obtained by weighting the contributions from the respective scenarios with their expected setup error probability, and the spread of dose parameters for different range uncertainties were quantified. Using boundary dose distributions created from 56 combined setup error and range uncertainty scenarios and considering the vanishing influence of setup errors after 30 fractions, we approximated realistic worst-case values for the total treatment course. Error bar metrics derived from these boundary doses are reported for the clinical target volumes (CTVs) and organs at risk (OARs).
The rMFO plans showed improved CTV coverage and homogeneity while simultaneously reducing the average mean dose to the constrictor muscles, larynx, and ipsilateral middle ear by 5.6 Gy, 2.0 Gy, and 3.9 Gy, respectively. We observed slightly larger differences during robustness evaluation, as well as a significantly higher average brainstem maximum and ipsilateral parotid mean dose for SFO plans. For rMFO plans, the range uncertainty-related spread in OAR dose parameters and many error bar metrics were found to be superior. The SFO plans showed a lower global maximum dose for single-scenario worst cases and a slightly lower mean oral cavity dose throughout.
An enhanced robustness analysis has been proposed and implemented into clinical systems. The benefit of better CTV coverage and OAR dose sparing in oropharynx carcinoma patients by rMFO compared with SFO proton plans is preserved in a robustness analysis with consideration of setup error and range uncertainty.
通过改进的稳健性分析,比较口咽癌患者单野优化(SFO)和稳健多野优化(rMFO)质子计划的稳健性差异。
我们为 11 例接受 SFO 强度调制质子治疗同时进行适形调强推量照射的口咽癌患者生成了 rMFO 质子计划。对比了两种计划方法在初始计划和 20 种不同的摆位误差和射程不确定性优化场景下最坏情况下的剂量。通过用各自场景的预期摆位误差概率对相应场景的贡献进行加权,得到了每个射程不确定性的预期平均剂量分布,并量化了不同射程不确定性的剂量参数的离散程度。利用 56 个综合摆位误差和射程不确定性场景的边界剂量分布,并考虑到 30 次分割后摆位误差的影响逐渐消失,我们近似得到了整个治疗过程的真实最坏情况值。对于临床靶区(CTV)和危及器官(OAR),报告了这些边界剂量得出的误差棒指标。
rMFO 计划在提高 CTV 覆盖度和均匀性的同时,分别将缩咽肌、喉和同侧中耳的平均平均剂量降低了 5.6Gy、2.0Gy 和 3.9Gy。在稳健性评估中观察到了略大的差异,并且 SFO 计划的脑干最大平均剂量和同侧腮腺平均剂量明显更高。对于 rMFO 计划,OAR 剂量参数的范围不确定性相关离散度和许多误差棒指标均表现更好。SFO 计划在单个场景最坏情况下的全局最大剂量较低,整个口腔剂量略低。
提出并实施了一种增强的稳健性分析。在考虑摆位误差和射程不确定性的稳健性分析中,rMFO 与 SFO 质子计划相比,口咽癌患者的 CTV 覆盖度和 OAR 剂量节省得到了更好的改善。