scholarly journals A Probability-Based Investigation on the Setup Robustness of Pencil-beam Proton Radiation Therapy for Skull-Base Meningioma

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 34-45
Author(s):  
Wei Zou ◽  
Goldie Kurtz ◽  
Mayisha Nakib ◽  
Brendan Burgdorf ◽  
Murat Alp ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The intracranial skull-base meningioma is in proximity to multiple critical organs and heterogeneous tissues. Steep dose gradients often result from avoiding critical organs in proton treatment plans. Dose uncertainties arising from setup errors under image-guided radiation therapy are worthy of evaluation. Patients and Methods Fourteen patients with skull-base meningioma were retrospectively identified and planned with proton pencil beam scanning (PBS) single-field uniform dose (SFUD) and multifield optimization (MFO) techniques. The setup uncertainties were assigned a probability model on the basis of prior published data. The impact on the dose distribution from nominal 1-mm and large, less probable setup errors, as well as the cumulative effect, was analyzed. The robustness of SFUD and MFO planning techniques in these scenarios was discussed. Results The target coverage was reduced and the plan dose hot spot increased by all setup uncertainty scenarios regardless of the planning techniques. For 1 mm nominal shifts, the deviations in clinical target volume (CTV) coverage D99% was −11 ± 52 cGy and −45 ± 147 cGy for SFUD and MFO plans. The setup uncertainties affected the organ at risk (OAR) dose both positively and negatively. The statistical average of the setup uncertainties had <100 cGy impact on the plan qualities for all patients. The cumulative deviations in CTV D95% were 1 ± 34 cGy and −7 ± 18 cGy for SFUD and MFO plans. Conclusion It is important to understand the impact of setup uncertainties on skull-base meningioma, as the tumor target has complex shape and is in proximity to multiple critical organs. Our work evaluated the setup uncertainty based on its probability distribution and evaluated the dosimetric consequences. In general, the SFUD plans demonstrated more robustness than the MFO plans in target coverages and brainstem dose. The probability-weighted overall effect on the dose distribution is small compared to the dosimetric shift during single fraction.

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii460-iii460
Author(s):  
Matthew Deek ◽  
Matthew Ladra ◽  
Lan Lin ◽  
Yimei Li ◽  
Yuanyuan Han ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Recently published data demonstrated proton therapy (PRT) significantly reduced cognitive decline relative to photons for pediatric medulloblastoma. These findings imply that reductions in dose to critical CNS structures during the boost phase may account for better outcomes over time. Here, we examine differences in dosimetric data for medulloblastoma patients treated on ACNS0331 with photon (Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy, 3D-Conformal Radiation Therapy) vs PRT to identify potential structures responsible for cognitive benefit. METHODS COG ACNS0331 was a randomized trial examining the impact of reduced craniospinal irradiation (CSI) dose (standard vs low dose, in patients aged 3–7) and volume (whole posterior fossa vs involved field) in pediatric medulloblastoma patients. We identified 136 patients (IMRT=95, 3DCRT=28, Proton=13) enrolled on ACNS0331 with complete radiation and imaging data and re-contoured 10 critical brain structures to calculate dose. RESULTS Proton therapy significantly reduced the dose to critical structures. For example, temporal lobe mean dose and V30 were 30Gy/38% (PRT), 40Gy/89% (IMRT), 41Gy/84% (3DCRT)), hippocampi mean dose were 51 Gy (IMRT), 52 Gy (3DCRT), and 44Gy (PRT) and cochlear mean dose were 43 Gy (IMRT), 49 Gy (3DCRT), and 31Gy (PRT). Dose to several other critical structures were also significantly reduced including the whole brain, supratentorium, cerebellum, and pituitary. CONCLUSIONS Proton therapy greatly reduces dose to critical CNS structures when compared to IMRT or 3DCRT. Further studies are needed to correlate dose reductions in these structures with improved cognitive outcomes.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 587-595
Author(s):  
Youssef Brahimi ◽  
Delphine Antoni ◽  
Robin Srour ◽  
François Proust ◽  
Alicia Thiery ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document