scholarly journals Dosimetric Results for Adjuvant Proton Radiation Therapy of HPV-Associated Oropharynx Cancer

Author(s):  
Christopher M. Wright ◽  
Jonathan Baron ◽  
Daniel Y. Lee ◽  
Michele Kim ◽  
Andrew R. Barsky ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose One significant advantage of proton therapy is its ability to improve normal tissue sparing and toxicity mitigation, which is relevant in the treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Here, we report our institutional experience and dosimetric results with adjuvant proton radiation therapy (PRT) versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for Human Papilloma Virus (HPV)-associated OPSCC. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective, single institutional study of all patients treated with adjuvant PRT for HPV-associated OPSCC from 2015 to 2019. Each patient had a treatment-approved equivalent IMRT plan to serve as a reference. Endpoints included dosimetric outcomes to the organs at risk (OARs), local regional control (LRC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Descriptive statistics, a 2-tailed paired t test for dosimetric comparisons, and the Kaplan-Meier method for disease outcomes were used. Results Fifty-three patients were identified. Doses delivered to OARs compared favorably for PRT versus IMRT, particularly for the pharyngeal constrictors, esophagus, larynx, oral cavity, and submandibular and parotid glands. The achieved normal tissue sparing did not negatively impact disease outcomes, with 2-year LRC, PFS, and OS of 97.0%, 90.3%, and 97.5%, respectively. Conclusion Our study suggests that meaningful normal tissue sparing in the postoperative setting is achievable with PRT, without impacting disease outcomes.

Author(s):  
Bing-Hao Chiang ◽  
Erich Schnell ◽  
Kerry Hibbitts ◽  
Terence Herman ◽  
Salahuddin Ahmad

Abstract Aim: This study dosimetrically compared volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT) for patients with liver carcinoma. Materials and methods: Ten patients with liver carcinoma previously treated with IMRT or VMAT were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient received a total dose of 54 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. Dosimetric evaluations for each patient were performed using the dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OAR). All dosimetric parameters were statistically analysed using mean values, standard deviations and p-values for determining the significance. The conformality index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated and compared. For efficiency evaluation, monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOT) were recorded. Results: Compared to IMRT, VMAT plans showed significant differences in the heterogeneity with p < 0·01 and insignificant differences in both conformality and normal tissue sparing. VMAT required marginally fewer mean MU and shorter BOT when compared to IMRT with insignificant differences. Conclusions: For radiation therapy treatment of liver carcinoma, IMRT and VMAT can achieve similar PTV coverage and normal tissue sparing. Treatment time is only marginally shorter with VMAT versus IMRT with insignificant differences.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adil S. Akthar ◽  
Anthony C. Wong ◽  
Akash D. Parekh ◽  
Greg Hubert ◽  
Christina H. Son ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document