Bobić Mislav, Lalonde Arthur, Nesteruk Konrad P, Lee Hoyeon, Nenoff Lena, Gorissen Bram L, Bertolet Alejandro, Busse Paul M, Chan Annie W, Winey Brian A, Sharp Gregory C, Verburg Joost M, Lomax Antony J, Paganetti Harald
Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Department of Physics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2023 Mar 31;40:100625. doi: 10.1016/j.ctro.2023.100625. eCollection 2023 May.
This work evaluates an online adaptive (OA) workflow for head-and-neck (H&N) intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and compares it with full offline replanning (FOR) in patients with large anatomical changes.
IMPT treatment plans are created retrospectively for a cohort of eight H&N cancer patients that previously required replanning during the course of treatment due to large anatomical changes. Daily cone-beam CTs (CBCT) are acquired and corrected for scatter, resulting in 253 analyzed fractions. To simulate the FOR workflow, nominal plans are created on the planning-CT and delivered until a repeated-CT is acquired; at this point, a new plan is created on the repeated-CT. To simulate the OA workflow, nominal plans are created on the planning-CT and adapted at each fraction using a simple beamlet weight-tuning technique. Dose distributions are calculated on the CBCTs with Monte Carlo for both delivery methods. The total treatment dose is accumulated on the planning-CT.
Daily OA improved target coverage compared to FOR despite using smaller target margins. In the high-risk CTV, the median D degradation was 1.1 % and 2.1 % for OA and FOR, respectively. In the low-risk CTV, the same metrics yield 1.3 % and 5.2 % for OA and FOR, respectively. Smaller setup margins of OA reduced the dose to all OARs, which was most relevant for the parotid glands.
Daily OA can maintain prescription doses and constraints over the course of fractionated treatment, even in cases of large anatomical changes, reducing the necessity for manual replanning in H&N IMPT.
本研究评估了头颈(H&N)调强质子治疗(IMPT)的在线自适应(OA)工作流程,并将其与存在较大解剖结构变化的患者的完全离线重新计划(FOR)进行比较。
回顾性地为一组8名头颈部癌症患者创建IMPT治疗计划,这些患者先前在治疗过程中因较大的解剖结构变化而需要重新计划。每天采集锥束CT(CBCT)并进行散射校正,共得到253个分析分次。为模拟FOR工作流程,在计划CT上创建标称计划并进行照射,直到获取重复CT;此时,在重复CT上创建新计划。为模拟OA工作流程,在计划CT上创建标称计划,并在每个分次使用简单的子野权重调整技术进行调整。两种照射方式均在CBCT上使用蒙特卡罗方法计算剂量分布。总治疗剂量在计划CT上累积。
尽管OA使用的靶区边界较小,但与FOR相比,每日OA改善了靶区覆盖。在高危临床靶区(CTV),OA和FOR的中位剂量下降分别为1.1%和2.1%。在低危CTV中,OA和FOR的相同指标分别为1.3%和5.2%。OA较小的摆位边界降低了所有危及器官(OAR)的剂量,这对腮腺最为显著。
即使在存在较大解剖结构变化的情况下,每日OA也可在分次治疗过程中维持处方剂量和限制条件,减少头颈部IMPT中手动重新计划的必要性。