Emmanuelle Fleury , Jean-Philippe Pignol , Emine Kiliç , Maaike Milder , Caroline van Rij , Nicole Naus , Serdar Yavuzyigitoglu , Wilhelm den Toom , Andras Zolnay , Kees Spruijt , Marco van Vulpen , Petra Trnková , Mischa Hoogeman
{"title":"Comparison of stereotactic radiotherapy and protons for uveal melanoma patients","authors":"Emmanuelle Fleury , Jean-Philippe Pignol , Emine Kiliç , Maaike Milder , Caroline van Rij , Nicole Naus , Serdar Yavuzyigitoglu , Wilhelm den Toom , Andras Zolnay , Kees Spruijt , Marco van Vulpen , Petra Trnková , Mischa Hoogeman","doi":"10.1016/j.phro.2024.100605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><p>Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary ocular malignancy. We compared fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) with proton therapy, including toxicity risks for UM patients.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>For a total of 66 UM patients from a single center, SRT dose distributions were compared to protons using the same planning CT. Fourteen dose-volume parameters were compared in 2-Gy equivalent dose per fraction (EQD2). Four toxicity profiles were evaluated: maculopathy, optic-neuropathy, visual acuity impairment (Profile I); neovascular glaucoma (Profile II); radiation-induced retinopathy (Profile III); and dry-eye syndrome (Profile IV). For Profile III, retina Mercator maps were generated to visualize the geographical location of dose differences.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In 9/66 cases, (14 %) proton plans were superior for all dose-volume parameters. Higher T stages benefited more from protons in Profile I, especially tumors located within 3 mm or less from the optic nerve. In Profile II, only 9/66 cases resulted in a better proton plan. In Profile III, better retina volume sparing was always achievable with protons, with a larger gain for T3 tumors. In Profile IV, protons always reduced the risk of toxicity with a median RBE-weighted EQD2 reduction of 15.3 Gy.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study reports the first side-by-side imaging-based planning comparison between protons and SRT for UM patients. Globally, while protons appear almost always better regarding the risk of optic-neuropathy, retinopathy and dry-eye syndrome, for other toxicity like neovascular glaucoma, a plan comparison is warranted. Choice would depend on the prioritization of risks.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36850,"journal":{"name":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624000757/pdfft?md5=31bfef88b971c8f260126a467af2f91c&pid=1-s2.0-S2405631624000757-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631624000757","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and purpose
Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary ocular malignancy. We compared fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) with proton therapy, including toxicity risks for UM patients.
Materials and methods
For a total of 66 UM patients from a single center, SRT dose distributions were compared to protons using the same planning CT. Fourteen dose-volume parameters were compared in 2-Gy equivalent dose per fraction (EQD2). Four toxicity profiles were evaluated: maculopathy, optic-neuropathy, visual acuity impairment (Profile I); neovascular glaucoma (Profile II); radiation-induced retinopathy (Profile III); and dry-eye syndrome (Profile IV). For Profile III, retina Mercator maps were generated to visualize the geographical location of dose differences.
Results
In 9/66 cases, (14 %) proton plans were superior for all dose-volume parameters. Higher T stages benefited more from protons in Profile I, especially tumors located within 3 mm or less from the optic nerve. In Profile II, only 9/66 cases resulted in a better proton plan. In Profile III, better retina volume sparing was always achievable with protons, with a larger gain for T3 tumors. In Profile IV, protons always reduced the risk of toxicity with a median RBE-weighted EQD2 reduction of 15.3 Gy.
Conclusions
This study reports the first side-by-side imaging-based planning comparison between protons and SRT for UM patients. Globally, while protons appear almost always better regarding the risk of optic-neuropathy, retinopathy and dry-eye syndrome, for other toxicity like neovascular glaucoma, a plan comparison is warranted. Choice would depend on the prioritization of risks.