乳房切除术后放疗的乳腺癌患者的体积调制电弧治疗和质子治疗的治疗方案比较。

Margaret Hernandez, Rui Zhang, Mary Sanders, Wayne Newhauser
{"title":"乳房切除术后放疗的乳腺癌患者的体积调制电弧治疗和质子治疗的治疗方案比较。","authors":"Margaret Hernandez,&nbsp;Rui Zhang,&nbsp;Mary Sanders,&nbsp;Wayne Newhauser","doi":"10.14319/jpt.11.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been shown to improve disease-free survival and overall survival for locally advanced breast cancer. However, long term survivors may develop life threatening acute and chronic treatment-related toxicities after radiotherapy, like cardiac toxicity and second cancers. The more advanced techniques like volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), and proton therapy have the potential to improve treatment outcome by constraining doses to radiosensitive organs, but evidence from outcome study will not be available until years or decades later. Furthermore, the literature is largely incomplete regarding systematic comparison of potential benefits of advanced technologies for PMRT. The purpose of this study was to compare proton therapy, both passively scattered (PSPT) and intensity modulated (IMPT), to VMAT and develop an evidence-based rationale for selecting a treatment modality for left sided post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) patients. Eight left-sided PMRT patients previously treated with VMAT were included in this study. Planning target volumes (PTV) included the chest wall and regional lymph nodes. PSPT and IMPT plans were created using a commercial proton treatment planning system. The resulting plans were compared to the corresponding VMAT on the basis of dosimetric and radiobiological endpoints. The uncertainties in risk from proton range, set-up errors, and dose-response models were also evaluated. All modalities produced clinically acceptable treatment plans with nearly 100% tumor control probability. Both proton techniques provided significantly lower normal tissue complication probability values for the heart (<i>p</i> < 0.02) and lung (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Patient-averaged second cancer risk for the contralateral breast and lungs were also significantly lower (<i>p</i> < 0.001) with protons compared to VMAT. The findings of this study were upheld by the uncertainty analysis. All three techniques provided acceptable PMRT treatment plans. Proton therapy showed significant advantages in terms of predicted normal tissue sparing compared to VMAT, taking into account possible uncertainties.</p>","PeriodicalId":92083,"journal":{"name":"Journal of proton therapy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5669383/pdf/nihms879412.pdf","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton therapy for a sample of breast cancer patients treated with post-mastectomy radiotherapy.\",\"authors\":\"Margaret Hernandez,&nbsp;Rui Zhang,&nbsp;Mary Sanders,&nbsp;Wayne Newhauser\",\"doi\":\"10.14319/jpt.11.9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been shown to improve disease-free survival and overall survival for locally advanced breast cancer. However, long term survivors may develop life threatening acute and chronic treatment-related toxicities after radiotherapy, like cardiac toxicity and second cancers. The more advanced techniques like volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), and proton therapy have the potential to improve treatment outcome by constraining doses to radiosensitive organs, but evidence from outcome study will not be available until years or decades later. Furthermore, the literature is largely incomplete regarding systematic comparison of potential benefits of advanced technologies for PMRT. The purpose of this study was to compare proton therapy, both passively scattered (PSPT) and intensity modulated (IMPT), to VMAT and develop an evidence-based rationale for selecting a treatment modality for left sided post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) patients. Eight left-sided PMRT patients previously treated with VMAT were included in this study. Planning target volumes (PTV) included the chest wall and regional lymph nodes. PSPT and IMPT plans were created using a commercial proton treatment planning system. The resulting plans were compared to the corresponding VMAT on the basis of dosimetric and radiobiological endpoints. The uncertainties in risk from proton range, set-up errors, and dose-response models were also evaluated. All modalities produced clinically acceptable treatment plans with nearly 100% tumor control probability. Both proton techniques provided significantly lower normal tissue complication probability values for the heart (<i>p</i> < 0.02) and lung (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Patient-averaged second cancer risk for the contralateral breast and lungs were also significantly lower (<i>p</i> < 0.001) with protons compared to VMAT. The findings of this study were upheld by the uncertainty analysis. All three techniques provided acceptable PMRT treatment plans. Proton therapy showed significant advantages in terms of predicted normal tissue sparing compared to VMAT, taking into account possible uncertainties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":92083,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of proton therapy\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5669383/pdf/nihms879412.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of proton therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14319/jpt.11.9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of proton therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14319/jpt.11.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

摘要

乳房切除术后放射治疗(PMRT)已被证明可以改善局部晚期乳腺癌的无病生存率和总生存率。然而,长期幸存者在放射治疗后可能出现危及生命的急性和慢性治疗相关毒性,如心脏毒性和第二种癌症。更先进的技术,如体积电弧治疗(VMAT)和质子治疗有可能通过限制放射敏感器官的剂量来改善治疗结果,但结果研究的证据要到几年或几十年后才能获得。此外,关于先进技术对PMRT的潜在益处的系统比较,文献在很大程度上是不完整的。本研究的目的是比较质子治疗,被动分散(PSPT)和强度调节(IMPT),与VMAT,并为左侧乳房切除术后放疗(PMRT)患者选择治疗方式提供循证理论依据。本研究纳入了8例先前接受VMAT治疗的左侧PMRT患者。计划靶体积(PTV)包括胸壁和区域淋巴结。PSPT和IMPT计划是使用商业质子治疗计划系统创建的。在剂量学和放射生物学终点的基础上,将所得方案与相应的VMAT进行比较。风险的不确定性来自质子范围,设置误差和剂量-反应模型也进行了评估。所有的治疗方式都产生了临床可接受的治疗方案,肿瘤控制概率接近100%。两种质子技术对心脏(p < 0.02)和肺(p < 0.001)的正常组织并发症概率值均显著降低。与VMAT相比,质子治疗对侧乳房和肺部的患者平均秒癌风险也显著降低(p < 0.001)。不确定性分析支持了本研究的结果。这三种技术都提供了可接受的PMRT治疗方案。考虑到可能的不确定性,质子治疗在预测正常组织保留方面比VMAT显示出显著的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton therapy for a sample of breast cancer patients treated with post-mastectomy radiotherapy.

A treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton therapy for a sample of breast cancer patients treated with post-mastectomy radiotherapy.

A treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and proton therapy for a sample of breast cancer patients treated with post-mastectomy radiotherapy.

Post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been shown to improve disease-free survival and overall survival for locally advanced breast cancer. However, long term survivors may develop life threatening acute and chronic treatment-related toxicities after radiotherapy, like cardiac toxicity and second cancers. The more advanced techniques like volumetric arc therapy (VMAT), and proton therapy have the potential to improve treatment outcome by constraining doses to radiosensitive organs, but evidence from outcome study will not be available until years or decades later. Furthermore, the literature is largely incomplete regarding systematic comparison of potential benefits of advanced technologies for PMRT. The purpose of this study was to compare proton therapy, both passively scattered (PSPT) and intensity modulated (IMPT), to VMAT and develop an evidence-based rationale for selecting a treatment modality for left sided post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) patients. Eight left-sided PMRT patients previously treated with VMAT were included in this study. Planning target volumes (PTV) included the chest wall and regional lymph nodes. PSPT and IMPT plans were created using a commercial proton treatment planning system. The resulting plans were compared to the corresponding VMAT on the basis of dosimetric and radiobiological endpoints. The uncertainties in risk from proton range, set-up errors, and dose-response models were also evaluated. All modalities produced clinically acceptable treatment plans with nearly 100% tumor control probability. Both proton techniques provided significantly lower normal tissue complication probability values for the heart (p < 0.02) and lung (p < 0.001). Patient-averaged second cancer risk for the contralateral breast and lungs were also significantly lower (p < 0.001) with protons compared to VMAT. The findings of this study were upheld by the uncertainty analysis. All three techniques provided acceptable PMRT treatment plans. Proton therapy showed significant advantages in terms of predicted normal tissue sparing compared to VMAT, taking into account possible uncertainties.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信