1
|
Hsuan Chen Y, Kroesen M, Hoogeman M, Versteegh M, Uyl-de Groot C, Blommestein HM. Treatment-related toxicity, utility and patient-reported outcomes of head and neck cancer patients treated with proton therapy: A longitudinal study. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2025; 51:100913. [PMID: 39898329 PMCID: PMC11787426 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2025.100913] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2024] [Revised: 11/29/2024] [Accepted: 01/05/2025] [Indexed: 02/04/2025] Open
Abstract
Objective In comparison to current standard photon irradiation, proton therapy (PT) significantly reduces dose to the surrounding normal tissue and therefore is expected to reduce toxicity and improve health related quality of life (HRQoL). Despite the high expectations of PT, there is very limited data on patients' HRQoL after radiotherapy. This study evaluated HRQoL in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients receiving PT and established a robust benchmark for future comparison of PT and the radiotherapy advancements. Method A questionnaire-based (consisting of EORTC-QLQ-C30, EQ-5D, and EORTC-H&N-35) prospective cohort study was performed in a Dutch proton therapy center. HNC patients who received PT between January 2020 to December 2022 were enrolled in this study. The questionnaires were distributed pre-treatment, and 0, 6, 12, 24 months post-treatment. The generalized estimating equations method was used to analyze the utility change and negative impact of the radiation-related toxicities. Results 119 HNC patients were included in the study. Symptom and function scores showed the deterioration of all reported functions during the period of treatment. Most of the functions recovered within six months and improved beyond baseline. At the end of PT, the patients' utility decreased significantly (0.12 points) compared to the baseline. The loss in utility was recovered after six months and a further improvement was seen one year after the treatment. This study further provided the estimation of the disutility of each radiation related toxicity. Conclusion The present study presented the impact of toxicity on patient's utility over time and further confirmed it with the results of patient-reported symptom and function. This study provided estimation of each radiation-related toxicity, including xerostomia, dysphagia, mucositis, and dermatitis, which could contribute to the value assessment through economic evaluations of PT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Hsuan Chen
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands
| | - Michiel Kroesen
- Department of Medical Physics and Informatics HollandPTC Delft the Netherlands
- Department of Radiotherapy Erasmus MC Cancer Institute University Medical Center Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands
| | - Mischa Hoogeman
- Department of Medical Physics and Informatics HollandPTC Delft the Netherlands
- Department of Radiotherapy Erasmus MC Cancer Institute University Medical Center Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands
| | - Matthijs Versteegh
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50 3062 PA Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carin Uyl-de Groot
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands
| | - Hedwig M. Blommestein
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Frank SJ, Das IJ, Simone CB, Davis BJ, Deville C, Liao Z, Lo SS, McGovern SL, Parikh RR, Reilly M, Small W, Schechter NR. ACR-ARS Practice Parameter for the Performance of Proton Beam Therapy. Int J Part Ther 2024; 13:100021. [PMID: 39347377 PMCID: PMC11437389 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/15/2024] [Indexed: 10/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose This practice parameter for the performance of proton beam radiation therapy was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR) and the American Radium Society (ARS). This practice parameter was developed to serve as a tool in the appropriate application of proton therapy in the care of cancer patients or other patients with conditions in which radiation therapy is indicated. It addresses clinical implementation of proton radiation therapy, including personnel qualifications, quality assurance (QA) standards, indications, and suggested documentation. Materials and Methods This practice parameter for the performance of proton beam radiation therapy was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters - Radiation Oncology of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the ARS. Results The qualifications and responsibilities of personnel, such as the proton center Chief Medical Officer or Medical Director, Radiation Oncologist, Radiation Physicist, Dosimetrist and Therapist, are outlined, including the necessity for continuing medical education. Proton therapy standard clinical indications and methodologies of treatment management are outlined by disease site and treatment group (e.g. pediatrics) including documentation and the process of proton therapy workflow and equipment specifications. Additionally, this proton therapy practice parameter updates policies and procedures related to a quality assurance and performance improvement program (QAPI), patient education, infection control, and safety. Conclusion As proton therapy becomes more accessible to cancer patients, policies and procedures as outlined in this practice parameter will help ensure quality and safety programs are effectively implemented to optimize clinical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven J. Frank
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Indra J. Das
- Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | | | | | - Curtiland Deville
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA
| | - Zhongxing Liao
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Simon S. Lo
- University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Susan L. McGovern
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Rahul R. Parikh
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA
| | | | - William Small
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Stritch School of Medicine, Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Maguire Center, Maywood, IL 60153, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lillo S, Mirandola A, Vai A, Camarda AM, Ronchi S, Bonora M, Ingargiola R, Vischioni B, Orlandi E. Current Status and Future Directions of Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2085. [PMID: 38893203 PMCID: PMC11171191 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16112085] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2024] [Revised: 05/28/2024] [Accepted: 05/29/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
The growing interest in proton therapy (PT) in recent decades is justified by the evidence that protons dose distribution allows maximal dose release at the tumor depth followed by sharp distal dose fall-off. But, in the holistic management of head and neck cancer (HNC), limiting the potential of PT to a mere dosimetric advantage appears reductive. Indeed, the precise targeting of PT may help evaluate the effectiveness of de-escalation strategies, especially for patients with human papillomavirus associated-oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) and nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). Furthermore, PT could have potentially greater immunogenic effects than conventional photon therapy, possibly enhancing both the radiotherapy (RT) capability to activate anti-tumor immune response and the effectiveness of immunotherapy drugs. Based on these premises, the aim of the present paper is to conduct a narrative review reporting the safety and efficacy of PT compared to photon RT focusing on NPC and OPC. We also provide a snapshot of ongoing clinical trials comparing PT with photon RT for these two clinical scenarios. Finally, we discuss new insights that may further develop clinical research on PT for HNC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Lillo
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
| | - Alfredo Mirandola
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.); (A.V.)
| | - Alessandro Vai
- Medical Physics Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.); (A.V.)
| | - Anna Maria Camarda
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
| | - Sara Ronchi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
| | - Maria Bonora
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
| | - Rossana Ingargiola
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
| | - Barbara Vischioni
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
| | - Ester Orlandi
- Radiation Oncology Unit, Clinical Department, National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO), 27100 Pavia, Italy; (A.M.C.); (S.R.); (M.B.); (R.I.); (B.V.); (E.O.)
- Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic, and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Chung CF, Huang BS, Wang YM, Huang YT, Chen SC. Quality of life in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma receiving IMRT vs IMPT: a multicenter prospective longitudinal study. Support Care Cancer 2024; 32:203. [PMID: 38430411 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08412-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 02/26/2024] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients may experience symptom distress and depression during and after radiation therapy, which negatively impacts quality of life (QOL). We sought to identify trajectories of symptom distress, depression, social support, and QOL in patients with NPC receiving intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) vs intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). METHODS A multicenter prospective longitudinal study recruited NPC patients from two leading medical centers in Taiwan. The 121 NPC patients were followed from before RT (T0), at 4 weeks after beginning RT (T1), at 6 weeks of RT or the end of treatment (T2), and at 4 weeks post-RT (T3). Generalized estimating equation analysis was used to identify the factors related to QOL. RESULTS Patients' symptom distress and depression increased from T0, peaked at T2, and decreased at T3. Physical-QOL and psychosocial-QOL decreased from T0 to T2, then increased by T3. Patients who had early-stage cancer, received a lower RT dose, had less symptom distress, and had less depression were more likely to have better QOL. Greater physical-QOL was associated with IMPT receipt, higher education level, early cancer stage, lower radiation dose, less symptom distress, and less depression. Patients who had good physical performance, received a lower radiation dose, had less symptom distress, and had less depression were more likely to have better psychosocial-QOL. CONCLUSION Radiation dose, symptom distress, and depression were the most important factors affecting QOL in patients with NPC. Understanding the factors associated with the trajectory of QOL can guide care during radiation treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ching-Fang Chung
- Department of Nursing, Chang Gung Medical Foundation, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Bing-Shen Huang
- School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Chang Gung Medical Foundation, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Yu-Ming Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Chang Gung Medical Foundation, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, Republic of China
- Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, Republic of China
- School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Yu-Tung Huang
- Center for Big Data Analytics and Statistics, Chang Gung Medical Foundation, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Shu-Ching Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, and Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Chang Gung Medical Foundation, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China.
- School of Nursing and Geriatric and Long-Term Care Research Center, College of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China.
- School of Nursing, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Choi JI, Simone CB, Lozano A, Frank SJ. Advances and Challenges in Conducting Clinical Trials With Proton Beam Therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 2023; 33:407-415. [PMID: 37684070 PMCID: PMC10503212 DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2023.06.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/10/2023]
Abstract
Advances in proton therapy have garnered much attention and speculation in recent years as the indications for proton therapy have grown beyond pediatric, prostate, spine, and ocular tumors. To achieve and maintain consistent access to this cancer treatment and to ensure the future viability and availability of proton centers in the United States, a call for evidence has been heard and answered by proton radiation oncologists. Answers provided in this review include the evolution of proton therapy research, rationale for proton clinical trial design, challenges in and barriers to the conduct of proton therapy research, and other unique considerations for the study of proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Isabelle Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.; New York Proton Center, New York, NY..
| | - Charles B Simone
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.; New York Proton Center, New York, NY
| | - Alicia Lozano
- Center for Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Department of Statistics, Virginia Tech, Roanoke, VA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Trotter J, Lin A. Advances in Proton Therapy for the Management of Head and Neck Tumors. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:587-598. [PMID: 37182994 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2023.03.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/08/2023]
Abstract
Proton therapy (PBRT) is a form of external beam radiotherapy with several dosimetric advantages compared with conventional photon (x-ray) radiotherapy. Unlike x-rays, protons deposit most of their dose over a finite range, with no exit dose, in a pattern known as the Bragg peak. Clinically, this can be exploited to optimize dose to tumors while delivering a lower integral dose to normal tissues. However, the optimal role of PBRT is not as well-defined as advanced x-ray-based techniques such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy.
Collapse
|
7
|
Chen Z, Dominello MM, Joiner MC, Burmeister JW. Proton versus photon radiation therapy: A clinical review. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1133909. [PMID: 37064131 PMCID: PMC10091462 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1133909] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2022] [Accepted: 03/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/31/2023] Open
Abstract
While proton radiation therapy offers substantially better dose distribution characteristics than photon radiation therapy in certain clinical applications, data demonstrating a quantifiable clinical advantage is still needed for many treatment sites. Unfortunately, the number of patients treated with proton radiation therapy is still comparatively small, in some part due to the lack of evidence of clear benefits over lower-cost photon-based treatments. This review is designed to present the comparative clinical outcomes between proton and photon therapies, and to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of proton radiation therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhe Chen
- School of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, United States
- *Correspondence: Zhe Chen,
| | - Michael M. Dominello
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States
| | - Michael C. Joiner
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States
| | - Jay W. Burmeister
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Chang S, Liu G, Zhao L, Zheng W, Yan D, Chen P, Li X, Deraniyagala R, Stevens C, Grills I, Chinnaiyan P, Li X, Ding X. Introduce a rotational robust optimization framework for spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy. Phys Med Biol 2022; 68. [PMID: 36546347 DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aca874] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Objective. Proton dosimetric uncertainties resulting from the patient's daily setup errors in rotational directions exist even with advanced image-guided radiotherapy techniques. Thus, we developed a new rotational robust optimization SPArc algorithm (SPArcrot) to mitigate the dosimetric impact of the rotational setup error in Raystation ver. 6.02 (RaySearch Laboratory AB, Stockholm, Sweden).Approach.The initial planning CT was rotated ±5° simulating the worst-case setup error in the roll direction. The SPArcrotuses a multi-CT robust optimization framework by taking into account of such rotational setup errors. Five cases representing different disease sites were evaluated. Both SPArcoriginaland SPArcrotplans were generated using the same translational robust optimized parameters. To quantitatively investigate the mitigation effect from the rotational setup errors, all plans were recalculated using a series of pseudo-CT with rotational setup error (±1°/±2°/±3°/±5°). Dosimetric metrics such as D98% of CTV, and 3D gamma analysis were used to assess the dose distribution changes in the target and OARs.Main results.The magnitudes of dosimetric changes in the targets due to rotational setup error were significantly reduced by the SPArcrotcompared to SPArc in all cases. The uncertainties of the max dose to the OARs, such as brainstem, spinal cord and esophagus were significantly reduced using SPArcrot. The uncertainties of the mean dose to the OARs such as liver and oral cavity, parotid were comparable between the two planning techniques. The gamma passing rate (3%/3 mm) was significantly improved for CTV of all tumor sites through SPArcrot.Significance.Rotational setup error is one of the major issues which could lead to significant dose perturbations. SPArcrotplanning approach can consider such rotational error from patient setup or gantry rotation error by effectively mitigating the dose uncertainties to the target and in the adjunct series OARs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sheng Chang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wuhan University, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan, 430060 Hubei Province, People's Republic of China.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Gang Liu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America.,Cancer Center, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430023, People's Republic of China
| | - Lewei Zhao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Weili Zheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Di Yan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Peter Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Xiangpan Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Wuhan University, Renmin Hospital, Wuhan, 430060 Hubei Province, People's Republic of China
| | - Rohan Deraniyagala
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Craig Stevens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Inga Grills
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Prakash Chinnaiyan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Xiaoqiang Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| | - Xuanfeng Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48074, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ng WT, But B, Wong CH, Choi CW, Chua ML, Blanchard P, Lee AW. Particle beam therapy for nasopharyngeal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2022; 37:41-56. [PMID: 36065359 PMCID: PMC9440257 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2022.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2022] [Revised: 08/10/2022] [Accepted: 08/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Particle beam therapy yields excellent short-term treatment outcomes among NPC patients. Particle beam therapy is generally safe in primary and recurrent NPC patients, with ≥G3 late toxicity rates of 20 % or less. An approximately 5% mortality rate was reported among recurrent NPC patients.
Background/purpose A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to better understand the benefits of particle beam therapy for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) treatment. The survival outcomes and toxicity of primary and recurrent NPC patients treated with proton or carbon ion beam therapy were investigated. Method PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched between 1 January 2007 to 3 November 2021. The inclusion and exclusion criteria included studies with either primary or recurrent NPC patients, sample size of ≥10 patients, and proton or carbon ion beam therapy as interventions. Twenty-six eligible studies with a total of 1502 patients were included. We used a random-effect meta-analysis to examine the impact of particle beam therapy on primary NPC patients and qualitatively described the results among recurrent patients. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), while secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), local control (LC) and toxicity. Results The pooled OS at 1-year, 2-year and 3-year and 5-year for primary NPC patients who received particle beam therapy were 96 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) = 92 %-98 %), 93 % (95 % CI = 83 %-97 %), 90 % (95 % CI = 73 %-97 %) and 73 % (95 % CI = 52 %-87 %) respectively. The pooled 1-year and 2-year PFS, and LC for these patients were above 90 %. For locally recurrent NPC patients, the 1-year OS rate ranged from 65 % to 92 %, while the 1-year LC rate ranged from 80 % to 88 %. Both proton and carbon ion beam therapy were generally safe among primary and recurrent patients, with ≥G3 late toxicity rates of 20 % or less. Approximately a 5 % mortality rate was reported among recurrent patients. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated particle beam therapy has great potential in treating NPC, yielding excellent survival outcomes with low toxicity. However, further investigations are needed to assess the long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness of this newer form of radiotherapy.
Collapse
|
10
|
Fang K, Lee C, Chuang H, Huang T, Chien C, Tsai W, Fang F. Acute radiation dermatitis among patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with proton beam therapy: Prognostic factors and treatment outcomes. Int Wound J 2022; 20:499-507. [PMID: 35880316 PMCID: PMC9885453 DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13897] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2022] [Revised: 07/02/2022] [Accepted: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
A high incidence of severe acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) has been reported for cancer patients treated by proton beam therapy (PBT). This observational study investigated the prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of ARD among patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) treated with PBT. Fifty-seven patients with newly diagnosed NPC and treated with PBT were enrolled. ARD was recorded weekly based on the criteria of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 at treatment visits (1st to 7th weeks) and 1 week (8th week) and 1 month (11th week) after the completion of PBT. The maximum ARD grade was 1, 2, and 3 in 26 (45.6%), 24 (42.1%), and 7 (12.3%) of the patients, respectively. The peak incidence of grade 2 and 3 ARD was observed during the period of the 6th to 8th weeks. Treatment of ARD included topical corticosteroid alone in 24 (42.1%) patients, topical corticosteroid plus silver sulfadiazine in 33 (57.9%) patients, and non-adhering silicone dressing to cover severe skin wound area in 25 (43.8%) patients. In the 11th week, most grade 2 and 3 ARD had disappeared and 93.0% of the patients had ARD of grade 1 or lower. In the binary logistic regression model, we identified habitual smoking (odds ratio [OR]: 5.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-18.8, P = .012) and N2 to N3 nodal status (OR: 4.9, 95% CI: 1.6-15.4, P = .006) as independent predictors of grade 2 and 3 ARD. The results show ARD is a major concern for patients with NPC treated with PBT, especially those with habitual smoking or advanced nodal status. Topical corticosteroid, silver sulfadiazine, and non-adhering silicone dressing are effective for treating ARD induced by PBT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ko‐Chun Fang
- Department of EducationKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Chih‐Hung Lee
- Department of DermatologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Hui‐Ching Chuang
- Department of OtolaryngologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan,Department of MedicineChang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
| | - Tai‐Lin Huang
- Department of Hematology and OncologyKaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Chih‐Yen Chien
- Department of OtolaryngologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan,Department of MedicineChang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
| | - Wen‐Ling Tsai
- Department of Cosmetics and Fashion StylingCenter for Environmental Toxin and Emerging‐Contaminant Research, Cheng Shiu UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
| | - Fu‐Min Fang
- Department of MedicineChang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan,Department of Radiation OncologyKaohsiung Chang‐Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of MedicineKaohsiungTaiwan
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kim KN, Harton J, Mitra N, Lukens JN, Lin A, Amaniera I, Doucette A, Gabriel P, Baumann B, Metz J, Wojcieszynski A. Acute toxicity in patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy with proton versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy for nonmetastatic head and neck cancers. Head Neck 2022; 44:2386-2394. [PMID: 35822438 DOI: 10.1002/hed.27146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Revised: 06/10/2022] [Accepted: 06/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We evaluated if proton therapy is associated with decreased acute toxicities compared to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancers. METHODS We analyzed 580 patients with nonmetastatic head and neck cancers. Primary endpoint was any 90-day grade ≥3 toxicity, prospectively collected and graded per CTCAEv4. Modified Poisson regression models were used. RESULTS Ninety-five patients received proton and 485 IMRT. The proton group had more HPV-positive tumors (65.6 vs. 58.0%, p = 0.049), postoperative treatment (76.8 vs. 62.1%, p = 0.008), unilateral neck treatment (18.9 vs. 6.6%, p < 0.001) and significantly lower doses to organs-at-risk compared to IMRT group. Adjusted for patient and treatment characteristics, the proton group had decreased grade 2 dysgeusia (RR0.67, 95%CI 0.53-0.84, p = 0.004) and a trend toward lower grade ≥3 toxicities (RR0.60, 95%CI 0.41-0.88, p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS Proton therapy was associated with significantly reduced grade 2 dysgeusia and nonstatistically significant decrease in acute grade ≥3 toxicities compared to IMRT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristine N Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Joanna Harton
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Nandita Mitra
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - John N Lukens
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Alexander Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Isabella Amaniera
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Abigail Doucette
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Peter Gabriel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Brian Baumann
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine in Saint Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - James Metz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Andrzej Wojcieszynski
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Dosimetric Parameters Related to Acute Radiation Dermatitis of Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treated by Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy. J Pers Med 2022; 12:jpm12071095. [PMID: 35887590 PMCID: PMC9318665 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12071095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2022] [Revised: 06/25/2022] [Accepted: 06/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Growing patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) were treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT). However, a high probability of severe acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) was observed. The objective of the study is to investigate the dosimetric parameters related to ARD for NPC patients treated with IMPT. Methods: Sixty-two patients with newly diagnosed NPC were analyzed. The ARD was recorded based on the criteria of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Logistic regression model was performed to identify the clinical and dosimetric parameters related to ARD. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the performance of the models. Results: The maximum ARD grade was 1, 2, and 3 in 27 (43.5%), 26 (42.0%), and 9 (14.5%) of the patients, respectively. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) in average volume to skin 5 mm with the respective doses were observed in the range 54−62 Cobalt Gray Equivalent (CGE) for grade 2 and 3 versus grade 1 ARD. Smoking habit and N2-N3 status were identified as significant predictors to develop grade 2 and 3 ARD in clinical model, and V58CGE to skin 5 mm as an independent predictor in dosimetric model. After adding the variable of V58CGE to the metric incorporating two parameters of smoking habit and N status, the AUC value of the metric increases from 0.78 (0.66−0.90) to 0.82 (0.72−0.93). The most appropriate cut-off value of V58CGE to skin 5 mm as determined by ROC curve was 5.0 cm3, with a predicted probability of 54% to develop grade 2 and 3 ARD. Conclusion: The dosimetric parameter of V58CGE to skin 5 mm < 5.0 cm3 could be used as a constraint in treatment planning for NPC patients treated by IMPT.
Collapse
|
13
|
Nuyts S, Bollen H, Ng SP, Corry J, Eisbruch A, Mendenhall WM, Smee R, Strojan P, Ng WT, Ferlito A. Proton Therapy for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Early Clinical Experience and Current Challenges. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14112587. [PMID: 35681568 PMCID: PMC9179360 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14112587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2022] [Revised: 05/18/2022] [Accepted: 05/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Proton therapy is a promising type of radiation therapy used to destroy tumor cells. It has the potential to further improve the outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer since it allows to minimize the radiation dose to vital structures around the tumor, leading to less toxicity. This paper describes the current experience worldwide with proton therapy in head and neck cancer. Abstract Proton therapy (PT) is a promising development in radiation oncology, with the potential to further improve outcomes for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). By utilizing the finite range of protons, healthy tissue can be spared from beam exit doses that would otherwise be irradiated with photon-based treatments. Current evidence on PT for HNSCC is limited to comparative dosimetric analyses and retrospective single-institution series. As a consequence, the recognized indications for the reimbursement of PT remain scarce in most countries. Nevertheless, approximately 100 PT centers are in operation worldwide, and initial experiences for HNSCC are being reported. This review aims to summarize the results of the early clinical experience with PT for HNSCC and the challenges that are currently faced.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Nuyts
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
- Correspondence:
| | - Heleen Bollen
- Laboratory of Experimental Radiotherapy, Department of Oncology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium;
- Department of Oncology, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sweet Ping Ng
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia;
| | - June Corry
- Division of Medicine, Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent’s Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia;
| | - Avraham Eisbruch
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;
| | - William M Mendenhall
- Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32209, USA;
| | - Robert Smee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Prince of Wales Cancer Centre, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia;
| | - Primoz Strojan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institute of Oncology, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia;
| | - Wai Tong Ng
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China;
| | - Alfio Ferlito
- Coordinator of the International Head and Neck Scientific Group, 35125 Padua, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Choi WYL, Lai JWY, Yu ELM, Choy YH, Lam YN, Wong RKY, Cheng ACK. Induction chemotherapy followed by radical chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage IV non-metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: 11-Year Experience in a tertiary centre. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 66:853-865. [PMID: 35302281 DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13400] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2022] [Revised: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 02/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) with close proximity to critical organs at risk (OARs) is usually underdosed during radiotherapy in order to respect radiation constraints. N3 disease has high risk of distant metastasis. Induction chemotherapy (IC) provides advantages of sparing of OARs during subsequent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and early eradication of micrometastasis. However, factors predicting successes of IC in this patient group are not well-studied. METHODS 104 T4 or N3 NPC patients were retrospectively reviewed during 2007-2018. They were planned for IC followed by CCRT using intensity-modulated radiotherapy. RESULTS In the whole group, five-year failure-free survival (FFS), locoregional failure-free survival (LRFS), distant failure-free survival (DFFS) and overall survival (OS) were 40.9%, 45.7%, 46.9% and 53.6% respectively. Isolated marginal failure rate was 5% (4/80) among patients with primary tumours located close to critical OARs. Pre-IC gross tumour volume primary (GTVp) total volume > 110 cm3 correlated with worse five-year LRFS (OR 6.37, P = 0.008), DFFS (OR 8.89, P = 0.003) and OS (OR 50.12, P < 0.001). In the T4 subgroup, IC improved D100% GTVp from 61.39 Gy to 64.71 Gy (P < 0.001) and V100% GTVp from 98.78% to 99.28% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION Our study demonstrated improved dosimetric parameters and low isolated marginal failure rate. It supported the use of IC and CCRT for tumours located close to critical OARs. Further research is warranted to compare predictive roles of pre- and post-IC tumour volumes. For high-risk patients being defined by pre-IC volume or other prognostic models, treatment escalation should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ellen Lok Man Yu
- Clinical Research Centre, Kowloon West Cluster, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong, China
| | - Yiu Hei Choy
- Department of Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Hong Kong, China
| | - Ying Na Lam
- Department of Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Hong Kong, China
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Chan WL, Chow JCH, Xu ZY, Li J, Kwong WTG, Ng WT, Lee AWM. Management of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma in Elderly Patients. Front Oncol 2022; 12:810690. [PMID: 35178346 PMCID: PMC8844547 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.810690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2021] [Accepted: 01/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is one of the most difficult cancers in the head and neck region due to the complex geometry of the tumour and the surrounding critical organs. High-dose radical radiotherapy with or without concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy is the primary treatment modality. Around 10%–15% of NPC patients have their diagnosis at age after 70. The management of NPC in elderly patients is particularly challenging as they encompass a broad range of patient phenotypes and are often prone to treatment-related toxicities. Chronologic age alone is insufficient to decide on the management plan. Comprehensive geriatric assessment with evaluation on patients’ functional status, mental condition, estimated life expectancy, comorbidities, risks and benefits of the treatment, patients’ preference, and family support is essential. In addition, little data from randomized controlled trials are available to guide treatment decisions in elderly patients with NPC. In deciding which treatment strategy would be suitable for an individual elderly patient, we reviewed the literature and reviewed the analysis of primary studies, reviews, and guidelines on management of NPC. This review also summarises the current evidence for NPC management in elderly adults from early to late stage of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wing Lok Chan
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - James Chung Hang Chow
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH), Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Zhi-Yuan Xu
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Shenzhen Hospital, University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China
| | - Jishi Li
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Shenzhen Hospital, University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China
| | - Wing Tung Gobby Kwong
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Wai Tong Ng
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Anne W M Lee
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Post-Irradiation Sinus Mucosa Disease in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients Treated with Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14010225. [PMID: 35008389 PMCID: PMC8750360 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14010225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common treatment complication in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) after radiotherapy. In this study, we aimed to investigate the incidence and severity of CRS in NPC patients who underwent intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) by evaluating the sinus mucosa change in imaging studies, and we compared these patients with those who underwent volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). This was a retrospective case–control study in which 53 and 54 patients were treated with IMPT and VMAT, respectively. We noted that patients in the IMPT group had a significantly lower incidence and decreased severity of sinus mucosa abnormality than those with VMAT. Better and faster recovery of sinonasal function after radiotherapy in the IMPT group was also observed. IMPT techniques deposit the bulk of their radiation doses in highly confined areas, allowing lower exposure of non-target organs during irradiation, which results in more sinonasal mucosa being retained. Abstract In the past decade, patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) have been deemed candidates for proton radiotherapy, due to the large and comprehensive target volumes and the necessity for the retention of the surrounding healthy tissues. In this study, we aimed to compare the incidence and severity of post-irradiation sinusitis by detecting sinus mucosa diseases (SMDs) via the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of patients with NPC after intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). A total of 53 patients in the IMPT group and 54 patients in the VMAT group were enrolled in this study. There were significantly lower endoscopic scores and Lund–Mackay staging scores determined from MRI scans in the IMPT group during different follow-up periods. For the most vulnerable sinuses, the incidence and severity of SMD were the highest during the third post-radiotherapy month in both groups. These decreased steadily, and there was no significant increase in the incidence and severity of SMD during the second post-radiotherapy year in the IMPT group. Our data show that NPC patients with IMPT have a significantly lower incidence and decreased severity of SMD than those with VMAT. A better and faster recovery of sinonasal function after radiotherapy in the IMPT group was also observed.
Collapse
|
17
|
Hedrick SG, Petro S, Ward A, Morris B. Validation of automated complex head and neck treatment planning with pencil beam scanning proton therapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 23:e13510. [PMID: 34936205 PMCID: PMC8833278 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13510] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy offers dosimetric advantages for several treatment sites, including head and neck (H&N). However, to achieve the optimal target coverage and robustness, these plans can be complex and time consuming to develop and optimize. Automating the treatment planning process can ensure a high‐quality and standardized plan, reduce burden to the planner, and decrease time‐to‐treatment. We utilized in‐house scripting to automate a four‐field multi‐field optimization (MFO) H&N planning technique. Methods and materials Ten bilateral H&N patients were planned in RayStation v6 with a four‐field modified‐X beam configuration using MFO planning. Automation included creation of avoidance structures to control spot placement and development of standardized beams, PBS spot settings, robust optimization objectives, and patient‐specific predicted planning constraints. Each patient was planned both with and without automation to evaluate differences in planning time, perceived effort and plan quality, plan robustness, and OAR sparing. Results On average, scripted plans required 3.2 h, compared to 4.3 h without the script. There was no difference in target coverage or plan robustness with or without automation. Automation significantly reduced mean dose to the oral cavity, parotids, esophagus, trachea, and larynx. Perceived effort was scaled from 1 (minimum effort) to 100 (maximum effort), and automation reduced perceived effort by 42% (p < 0.05). Two non‐scripted plans required re‐planning due to errors. Conclusions Automation of this multi‐beam, the MFO proton planning process reduced planning time and improved OAR sparing compared to the same planning process without scripting. Scripting generation of complex structures and planning objectives reduced burden on the planner. With most current treatment planning software, this automation is simple to implement and can standardize quality of care across all treatment planners.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Scott Petro
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Alex Ward
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Bart Morris
- Provision CARES Proton Therapy Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Radiation Therapy for Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13246335. [PMID: 34944955 PMCID: PMC8699151 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13246335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2021] [Revised: 12/07/2021] [Accepted: 12/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Adenoid cystic carcinoma is a rare histology arising in the head and neck region that has a high propensity for perineural invasion. While surgical resection is the preferred primary treatment modality, adjuvant radiotherapy is often indicated to improve local control. For unresectable disease, definitive radiotherapy can be utilized. Given the predilection for perineural tumor spread, target volumes often must encompass relevant nerve pathways back to the base of skull. Treatment strategies for ACC must therefore balance the disease burden and risk of failure against the morbidity of treatment. Abstract Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck is an uncommon malignancy that can arise in the major or minor salivary glands. Perineural invasion (PNI) is an extremely frequent finding in cases of adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) that can be associated with significant patient morbidity and poor prognosis. By contrast, ACC rarely demonstrates lymphovascular space invasion thereby making PNI the major avenue for metastasis and a driver of treatment rationale and design. Radiotherapy is often utilized post-operatively to improve locoregional control or as a primary therapy in unresectable disease. Here we aim to review the role of radiotherapy in the management of this malignancy with a focus on target delineation and treatment regimens in the definitive, recurrent, and metastatic settings.
Collapse
|
19
|
Mohamed N, Lee A, Lee NY. Proton beam radiation therapy treatment for head and neck cancer. PRECISION RADIATION ONCOLOGY 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/pro6.1135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Nader Mohamed
- Department of Radiation Oncology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston TX USA
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Williams VM, Parvathaneni U, Laramore GE, Aljabab S, Wong TP, Liao JJ. Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Nasopharynx Cancer: 2-year Outcomes from a Single Institution. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:28-40. [PMID: 34722809 PMCID: PMC8489486 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00057.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2020] [Accepted: 02/22/2021] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Advances in radiotherapy have improved tumor control and reduced toxicity in the management of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Local failure remains a problem for some patients with advanced primary tumors, and toxicities are significant given the large treatment volume and tumor proximity to critical structures, even with modern photon-based radiotherapy. Proton therapy has unique dosimetric advantages, and recent technological advances now allow delivery of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT), which can potentially improve the therapeutic ratio in NPC. We report our 2-year clinical outcomes with IMPT for NPC. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed treatment records of patients with NPC treated with IMPT at our center. Demographics, dosimetry, tumor response, local regional control (LRC), distant metastasis, overall survival, and acute and late toxicity outcomes were reviewed. Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier method. Toxicity was graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). Results Twenty-six patients were treated from 2015 to 2020. Median age was 48 years (range, 19–73 years), 62% (n = 16) had T3-T4 disease, 92% (n = 24) were node positive, 92% (n = 24) had stage III-IV disease, and 69% (n = 18) had positive results for Epstein-Barr virus. Dose-painted pencil-beam IMPT was used. Most patients (85%; 22 of 26) were treated with 70 Gy(RBE) in 33 fractions once daily; 4 (15%) underwent hyperfractionated accelerated treatment twice daily. All received concurrent cisplatin chemotherapy; 7 (27%) also received induction chemotherapy. All patients (100%) completed the planned radiotherapy, and no acute or late grade 4 or 5 toxicities were observed. At median follow-up of 25 months (range, 4-60), there were 2 local regional failures (8%) and 3 distant metastases (12%). The Kaplan-Meier 2-year LRC, freedom from distant metastasis, and overall survival were 92%, 87%, and 85% respectively. Conclusion IMPT is feasible in locally advanced NPC with early outcomes demonstrating excellent LRC and favorable toxicity profile. Our data add to the growing body of evidence supporting the clinical use of IMPT for NPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vonetta M Williams
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - George E Laramore
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Saif Aljabab
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Tony P Wong
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jay J Liao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lin YH, Cheng JY, Huang BS, Luo SD, Lin WC, Chou SY, Juang PJ, Li SH, Huang EY, Wang YM. Significant Reduction in Vertebral Artery Dose by Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy: A Pilot Study for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. J Pers Med 2021; 11:jpm11080822. [PMID: 34442466 PMCID: PMC8400425 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11080822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2021] [Revised: 08/17/2021] [Accepted: 08/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) with the vertebral artery (VA)-sparing technique has been initially proposed in our institution. This pilot study was conducted to compare the dose to VAs between IMPT and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). A total of six patients with NPC treated by IMPT were enrolled in the study. Target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) were delineated, including 12 samples of right and left VAs, respectively, for each patient. Treatment planning by IMPT and dual-arc VMAT was carried out for comparison. The IMPT plan significantly reduced VA mean dose, V10, V20, V30, V40, and V50, compared to the VMAT plan in all 12 samples (p < 0.001). The average mean dose to VAs for IMPT was 35.2% (23.4–46.9%), which was less compared to VMAT (p < 0.001). Adequate dose coverage was achieved with both IMPT and VMAT plans for three different dose levels of target volumes for all patients. IMPT significantly reduces VA dose while maintaining adequate dose coverage of all target volumes. For patients with head and neck cancer who seek to preserve their blood flow to the brain in order to decrease late vascular and neurologic sequelae, IMPT should be considered. A prospective study with longer follow-up is ongoing to confirm our preliminary results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yun-Hsuan Lin
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
| | - Jen-Yu Cheng
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
| | - Bing-Shen Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan 33305, Taiwan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Chang Gung Hospital, Xiamen 361126, China
| | - Sheng-Dean Luo
- Department of Otolaryngology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan;
| | - Wei-Che Lin
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan;
| | - Shang-Yu Chou
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
| | - Pei-Jiuan Juang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
| | - Shen-Hao Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan 33305, Taiwan
| | - Eng-Yen Huang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Chang Gung Hospital, Xiamen 361126, China
- School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan 33302, Taiwan
| | - Yu-Ming Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton & Radiation Therapy Center, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 83301, Taiwan; (Y.-H.L.); (J.-Y.C.); (B.-S.H.); (S.-Y.C.); (P.-J.J.); (S.-H.L.); (E.-Y.H.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Chang Gung Hospital, Xiamen 361126, China
- School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan 33302, Taiwan
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +886-(7)-7317123 (ext. 7000); Fax: +886-(7)-7322813
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Chou YC, Fan KH, Lin CY, Hung TM, Huang BS, Chang KP, Kang CJ, Huang SF, Chang PH, Hsu CL, Wang HM, Hsieh JCH, Cheng AJ, Chang JTC. Intensity Modulated Proton Beam Therapy versus Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Patients with Nasopharyngeal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13143555. [PMID: 34298769 PMCID: PMC8307135 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13143555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Revised: 07/06/2021] [Accepted: 07/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: We compared the outcomes of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with IMPT and VMAT. (2) Methods: We performed a retrospective propensity score matching analysis (1:1) of patients treated with IMPT (years: 2016-2018) and VMAT (2014-2018). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to identify the independent predictors of survival. Binary toxicity endpoint analyses were performed using a Cox model and logistic regression. (3) Results: Eighty patients who received IMPT and VMAT were included. The median follow-up time was 24.1 months in the IMPT group. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not statistically different between the two groups but potentially better in IMPT group. In multivariate analysis, advanced N-stage and body weight loss (BWL; >7%) during radiotherapy were associated with decreased PFS. The IMPT group had significantly less requirement for nasogastric (NG) tube placement and BWL during treatment. The mean oral cavity dose was the only predictive factor in stepwise regression analysis, and IMPT required a significantly lower mean dose. However, IMPT increased the grade 3 radiation dermatitis. (4) Conclusions: IMPT is associated with reduced rates of NG tube insertion and BWL through reducing oral mean dose, potentially producing better oncologic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yung-Chih Chou
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New Taipei Municipal Tucheng Hospital, New Taipei City 236, Taiwan
| | - Kang-Hsing Fan
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, New Taipei Municipal Tucheng Hospital, New Taipei City 236, Taiwan
| | - Chien-Yu Lin
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
| | - Tsung-Min Hung
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
| | - Bing-Shen Huang
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
| | - Kai-Ping Chang
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (K.-P.C.); (C.-J.K.); (S.-F.H.); (P.-H.C.)
| | - Chung-Jan Kang
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (K.-P.C.); (C.-J.K.); (S.-F.H.); (P.-H.C.)
| | - Shiang-Fu Huang
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (K.-P.C.); (C.-J.K.); (S.-F.H.); (P.-H.C.)
| | - Po-Hung Chang
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (K.-P.C.); (C.-J.K.); (S.-F.H.); (P.-H.C.)
| | - Cheng-Lung Hsu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (C.-L.H.); (H.-M.W.); (J.C.-H.H.)
| | - Hung-Ming Wang
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (C.-L.H.); (H.-M.W.); (J.C.-H.H.)
| | - Jason Chia-Hsun Hsieh
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (C.-L.H.); (H.-M.W.); (J.C.-H.H.)
| | - Ann-Joy Cheng
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
- Department of Medical Biotechnology and Laboratory Science, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
| | - Joseph Tung-Chieh Chang
- Proton and Radiation Therapy Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan; (Y.-C.C.); (K.-H.F.); (C.-Y.L.); (T.-M.H.); (B.-S.H.); (A.-J.C.)
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Xiamen 361000, China
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +886-3-3281200 (ext. 7000); Fax: +886-3-3280797
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Thaker NG, Boyce-Fappiano D, Ning MS, Pasalic D, Guzman A, Smith G, Holliday EB, Incalcaterra J, Garden AS, Shaitelman SF, Gunn GB, Fuller CD, Blanchard P, Feeley TW, Kaplan RS, Frank SJ. Activity-Based Costing of Intensity-Modulated Proton versus Photon Therapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:374-382. [PMID: 34285963 PMCID: PMC8270081 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00042.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2020] [Accepted: 01/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In value-based health care delivery, radiation oncologists need to compare empiric costs of care delivery with advanced technologies, such as intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to compare the costs of delivering IMPT and IMRT in a case-matched pilot study of patients with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal (OPC) cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS We used clinicopathologic factors to match 25 patients with OPC who received IMPT in 2011-12 with 25 patients with OPC treated with IMRT in 2000-09. Process maps were created for each multidisciplinary clinical activity (including chemotherapy and ancillary services) from initial consultation through 1 month of follow-up. Resource costs and times were determined for each activity. Each patient-specific activity was linked with a process map and TDABC over the full cycle of care. All calculated costs were normalized to the lowest-cost IMRT patient. RESULTS TDABC costs for IMRT were 1.00 to 3.33 times that of the lowest-cost IMRT patient (mean ± SD: 1.65 ± 0.56), while costs for IMPT were 1.88 to 4.32 times that of the lowest-cost IMRT patient (2.58 ± 0.39) (P < .05). Although single-fraction costs were 2.79 times higher for IMPT than for IMRT (owing to higher equipment costs), average full cycle cost of IMPT was 1.53 times higher than IMRT, suggesting that the initial cost increase is partly mitigated by reductions in costs for other, non-RT supportive health care services. CONCLUSIONS In this matched sample, although IMPT was on average more costly than IMRT primarily owing to higher equipment costs, a subset of IMRT patients had similar costs to IMPT patients, owing to greater use of supportive care resources. Multidimensional patient outcomes and TDABC provide vital methodology for defining the value of radiation therapy modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil G. Thaker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
- Arizona Oncology, The US Oncology Network, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - David Boyce-Fappiano
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Matthew S. Ning
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Dario Pasalic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Alexis Guzman
- The Institute for Cancer Care Innovation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Grace Smith
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Emma B. Holliday
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - James Incalcaterra
- The Institute for Cancer Care Innovation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S. Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Simona F. Shaitelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - G. Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - C. David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Pierre Blanchard
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | | | - Steven J. Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Lin A, Chang JHC, Grover RS, Hoebers FJP, Parvathaneni U, Patel SH, Thariat J, Thomson DJ, Langendijk JA, Frank SJ. PTCOG Head and Neck Subcommittee Consensus Guidelines on Particle Therapy for the Management of Head and Neck Tumors. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:84-94. [PMID: 34285938 PMCID: PMC8270078 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00071.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2020] [Accepted: 10/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Radiation therapy is a standard modality in the treatment for cancers of the head and neck, but is associated with significant short- and long-term side effects. Proton therapy, with its unique physical characteristics, can deliver less dose to normal tissues, resulting in fewer side effects. Proton therapy is currently being used for the treatment of head and neck cancer, with increasing clinical evidence supporting its use. However, barriers to wider adoption include access, cost, and the need for higher-level evidence. Methods The clinical evidence for the use of proton therapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer are reviewed here, including indications, advantages, and challenges. Results The Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Head and Neck Subcommittee task group provides consensus guidelines for the use of proton therapy for head and neck cancer. Conclusion This report can be used as a guide for clinical use, to understand clinical trials, and to inform future research efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ryan S Grover
- University of California-San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Frank J P Hoebers
- Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Juliette Thariat
- Radiation Oncology Department, François Baclesse Center/ARCHADE, Normandy University, Caen, France
| | - David J Thomson
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Steven J Frank
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Lee A, Kitpanit S, Chilov M, Langendijk JA, Lu J, Lee NY. A Systematic Review of Proton Therapy for the Management of Nasopharyngeal Cancer. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:119-130. [PMID: 34285941 PMCID: PMC8270076 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00082.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2020] [Accepted: 11/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose With improved technology, more patients with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) are receiving definitive treatment with proton therapy, which allows greater sparing of dose to normal tissues without compromising efficacy. As there is no randomized data, the purpose of this study was to systematically review the available literature on proton therapy in this setting, focusing on the toxicity endpoints. Materials and Methods A systematic search using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was conducted in 5 databases: PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. A total of 491 studies were found on the topic of NPC and proton therapy. Following independent study selection by 2 investigators, 9 studies were found to have sufficient focus and relevance to be incorporated into the systematic review. Results All 9 studies were retrospective and examined only NPC patients except for one that also included paranasal sinus cancer. One study was a reirradiation study. Four studies used 3D or double scatter technique, while all others used intensity-modulated proton therapy. Oncologic outcomes were similar to intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) rates, with 2-year local and regional progression-free survival (LRFS) ranging from 84% to 100%, 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) ranging from 75% to 88.9%, and 2-year overall survival (OS) ranging from 88% to 95% in the up-front setting. Four comparison studies with IMRT found significantly lower feeding tube rates (20% versus 65%, P = .015; and 14% versus 85%, P < .001) with proton therapy as well as lower mucositis (G2 46% versus 70%, P = .019; and G3 11% versus 76%, P = .0002). All other acute and late effects were largely improved with proton therapy but not statistically significant. Conclusions NPC patients receiving proton therapy maintain good outcomes with improved toxicity profile, likely due to sparing of dose to normal structures. Prospective studies are ongoing to better quantify the magnitude.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Sarin Kitpanit
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Marina Chilov
- Medical Library, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Johannes A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Jiade Lu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai Proton and Heavy Ion Center, Shanghai Cancer Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Sherry AD, Pasalic D, Gunn GB, Fuller CD, Phan J, Rosenthal DI, Morrison WH, Sturgis EM, Gross ND, Gillison ML, Ferrarotto R, El-Naggar AK, Garden AS, Frank SJ. Proton Beam Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma of Unknown Primary: Toxicity and Quality of Life. Int J Part Ther 2021; 8:234-247. [PMID: 34285950 PMCID: PMC8270080 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00034.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 09/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Proton radiation therapy (PRT) may offer dosimetric and clinical benefit in the treatment of head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary (HNCUP). We sought to describe toxicity and quality of life (QOL) in patients with HNCUP treated with PRT. Patients and Methods Toxicity and QOL were prospectively tracked in patients with HNCUP from 2011 to 2019 after institutional review board approval. Patients received PRT to the mucosa of the nasopharynx, oropharynx, and bilateral cervical lymph nodes with sparing of the larynx and hypopharynx. Patient-reported outcomes were tracked with the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory–Head and Neck Module, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Head and Neck, the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory, and the Xerostomia-Related QOL Scale. Primary study endpoints were the incidence of grade ≥ 3 (G3) toxicity and QOL patterns. Results Fourteen patients (median follow-up, 2 years) were evaluated. Most patients presented with human papillomavirus–positive disease (n = 12, 86%). Rates of G3 oral mucositis, xerostomia, and dermatitis were 7% (n = 1), 21% (n = 3), and 36% (n = 5), respectively. None required a gastrostomy. During PRT, QOL was reduced relative to baseline and recovered shortly after PRT. At 2 years after PRT, the local regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival were 100% (among 7 patients at risk), 79% (among 6 patients at risk), and 90% (among 7 patients at risk), respectively. Conclusion Therefore, PRT for HNCUP was associated with highly favorable dosimetric and clinical outcomes, including minimal oral mucositis, xerostomia, and dysphagia. Toxicity and QOL may be superior with PRT compared with conventional radiation therapy and PRT maintains equivalent oncologic control. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate late effects and cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dario Pasalic
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - G Brandon Gunn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - C David Fuller
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jack Phan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - David I Rosenthal
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - William H Morrison
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Erich M Sturgis
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Neil D Gross
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Maura L Gillison
- Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Renata Ferrarotto
- Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adel K El-Naggar
- Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Adam S Garden
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Li X, Kitpanit S, Lee A, Mah D, Sine K, Sherman EJ, Dunn LA, Michel LS, Fetten J, Zakeri K, Yu Y, Chen L, Kang JJ, Gelblum DY, McBride SM, Tsai CJ, Riaz N, Lee NY. Toxicity Profiles and Survival Outcomes Among Patients With Nonmetastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treated With Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy vs Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2113205. [PMID: 34143193 PMCID: PMC8214161 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.13205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Patients with nonmetastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) are primarily treated by radiotherapy with curative intent with or without chemotherapy and often experience substantial treatment-related toxic effects even with modern radiation techniques, such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) may improve the toxicity profile; however, there is a paucity of data given the limited availability of IMPT in regions with endemic NPC. OBJECTIVE To compare toxic effects and oncologic outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic NPC when treated with IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cohort study included 77 patients with newly diagnosed nonmetastatic NPC who received curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT or IMRT at a tertiary academic cancer center from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019. Forty-eight patients with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-positive tumors were included in a 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis for survival outcomes. The end of the follow-up period was March 31, 2021. EXPOSURES IMPT vs IMRT with or without chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The main outcomes were the incidence of acute and chronic treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and oncologic outcomes, including locoregional failure-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS We identified 77 patients (25 [32.5%] women; 52 [67.5%] men; median [interquartile range] age, 48.7 [42.2-60.3] years), among whom 28 (36.4%) were treated with IMPT and 49 (63.6%) were treated with IMRT. Median (interquartile range) follow-up was 30.3 (17.9-41.5) months. On multivariable logistic regression analyses, IMPT was associated with lower likelihood of developing grade 2 or higher acute AEs compared with IMRT (odds ratio [OR], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.60; P = .01). Only 1 case (3.8%) of a chronic grade 3 or higher AE occurred in the IMPT group compared with 8 cases (16.3%) in the IMRT group (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-1.21; P = .15). Propensity score matching generated a balanced cohort of 48 patients (24 IMPT vs 24 IMRT) and found similar PFS in the IMPT and IMRT groups (2-year PFS, 95.7% [95% CI, 87.7%-100%] vs 76.7% [95% CI, 60.7%-97.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.07-1.47; P = .14). No locoregional recurrence or death was observed in the IMPT group from the matched cohort. Two-year LRFS was 100% (95% CI, 100%-100%) in the IMPT group and 86.2% (95% CI, 72.8%-100%) in the IMRT group (P = .08). Three-year OS was 100% (95% CI, 100%-100%) in the IMPT group and 94.1% (95% CI, 83.6%-100%) in the IMRT group (P = .42). Smoking history was the only clinical factor significantly associated with both poor LRFS (HR, 63.37; 95% CI, 3.25-1236.13; P = .006) and poor PFS (HR, 6.33; 95% CI, 1.16-34.57; P = .03) on multivariable analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this study, curative-intent radiotherapy with IMPT for nonmetastatic NPC was associated with significantly reduced acute toxicity burden in comparison with IMRT, with rare late complications and excellent oncologic outcomes, including 100% locoregional control at 2 years. Prospective trials are warranted to direct the optimal patient selection for IMPT as the primary radiotherapy modality for nonmetastatic NPC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xingzhe Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sarin Kitpanit
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Division of Radiation Oncology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Dennis Mah
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ
| | - Kevin Sine
- ProCure Proton Therapy Center, Somerset, NJ
| | - Eric J. Sherman
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Lara A. Dunn
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Loren S. Michel
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - James Fetten
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Kaveh Zakeri
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Yao Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Linda Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Jung Julie Kang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Daphna Y. Gelblum
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sean M. McBride
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Chiaojung J. Tsai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nadeem Riaz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Nancy Y. Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Poh SS, Soong YL, Sommat K, Lim CM, Fong KW, Tan TW, Chua ML, Wang FQ, Hu J, Wee JT. Retreatment in locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Current status and perspectives. Cancer Commun (Lond) 2021; 41:361-370. [PMID: 33955719 PMCID: PMC8118589 DOI: 10.1002/cac2.12159] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2021] [Revised: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 04/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Sharon Shuxian Poh
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Yoke Lim Soong
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Kiattisa Sommat
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Chwee Ming Lim
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608.,Surgery Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Kam Weng Fong
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Terence Wk Tan
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Melvin Lk Chua
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Fu Qiang Wang
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Jing Hu
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| | - Joseph Ts Wee
- Division of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 169610.,Oncology Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore, 169857
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Yasuda K, Minatogawa H, Dekura Y, Takao S, Tamura M, Tsushima N, Suzuki T, Kano S, Mizumachi T, Mori T, Nishioka K, Shido M, Katoh N, Taguchi H, Fujima N, Onimaru R, Yokota I, Kobashi K, Shimizu S, Homma A, Shirato H, Aoyama H. Analysis of acute-phase toxicities of intensity-modulated proton therapy using a model-based approach in pharyngeal cancer patients. JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH 2021; 62:329-337. [PMID: 33372202 PMCID: PMC7948838 DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rraa130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2020] [Revised: 11/09/2020] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
Pharyngeal cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using a model-based approach were retrospectively reviewed, and acute toxicities were analyzed. From June 2016 to March 2019, 15 pharyngeal (7 naso-, 5 oro- and 3 hypo-pharyngeal) cancer patients received IMPT with robust optimization. Simulation plans for IMPT and intensity-modulated X-ray therapy (IMXT) were generated before treatment. We also reviewed 127 pharyngeal cancer patients with IMXT in the same treatment period. In the simulation planning comparison, all of the normal-tissue complication probability values for dysphagia, dysgeusia, tube-feeding dependence and xerostomia were lower for IMPT than for IMXT in the 15 patients. After completing IMPT, 13 patients completed the evaluation, and 12 of these patients had a complete response. The proportions of patients who experienced grade 2 or worse acute toxicities in the IMPT and IMXT cohorts were 21.4 and 56.5% for dysphagia (P < 0.05), 46.7 and 76.3% for dysgeusia (P < 0.05), 73.3 and 62.8% for xerostomia (P = 0.43), 73.3 and 90.6% for mucositis (P = 0.08) and 66.7 and 76.4% for dermatitis (P = 0.42), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that IMPT was independently associated with a lower rate of grade 2 or worse dysphagia and dysgeusia. After propensity score matching, 12 pairs of IMPT and IMXT patients were selected. Dysphagia was also statistically lower in IMPT than in IMXT (P < 0.05). IMPT using a model-based approach may have clinical benefits for acute dysphagia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koichi Yasuda
- Corresponding author. Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital. North-15 West-7, Sapporo, 060-8638, Japan. Tel: (+81)11-706-5977; Fax: (+81)11-706-7876;
| | - Hideki Minatogawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Yasuhiro Dekura
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Seishin Takao
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Masaya Tamura
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Nayuta Tsushima
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Takayoshi Suzuki
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Satoshi Kano
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Takatsugu Mizumachi
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Takashi Mori
- Department of Oral Radiology, Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido University, North-13 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Kentaro Nishioka
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Motoyasu Shido
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Norio Katoh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Hiroshi Taguchi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Noriyuki Fujima
- Department of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Rikiya Onimaru
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Isao Yokota
- Department of Biostatistics, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Keiji Kobashi
- Department of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Shinichi Shimizu
- Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Akihiro Homma
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Hiroki Shirato
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Hidefumi Aoyama
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Lucky SS, Law M, Lui MH, Mong J, Shi J, Yu S, Yoon DK, Djeng SK, Wang J, Lim CM, Tan MH. Patient-Derived Nasopharyngeal Cancer Organoids for Disease Modeling and Radiation Dose Optimization. Front Oncol 2021; 11:622244. [PMID: 33732646 PMCID: PMC7959730 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.622244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2020] [Accepted: 01/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Effective radiation treatment (RT) for recurrent nasopharyngeal cancers (NPC), featuring an intrinsic hypoxic sub-volume, remains a clinical challenge. Lack of disease‐specific in-vitro models of NPC, together with difficulties in establishing patient derived xenograft (PDX) models, have further hindered development of personalized therapeutic options. Herein, we established two NPC organoid lines from recurrent NPC PDX models and further characterized and compared these models with original patient tumors using RNA sequencing analysis. Organoids were cultured in hypoxic conditions to examine the effects of hypoxia and radioresistance. These models were then utilized to determine the radiobiological parameters, such as α/β ratio and oxygen enhancement ratio (OER), characteristic to radiosensitive normoxic and radioresistant hypoxic NPC, using simple dose-survival data analytic tools. The results were further validated in-vitro and in-vivo, to determine the optimal boost dose and fractionation regimen required to achieve effective NPC tumor regression. Despite the differences in tumor microenvironment due to the lack of human stroma, RNA sequencing analysis revealed good correlation of NPC PDX and organoid models with patient tumors. Additionally, the established models also mimicked inter-tumoral heterogeneity. Hypoxic NPC organoids were highly radioresistant and had high α/β ratio compared to its normoxic counterparts. In-vitro and in-vivo fractionation studies showed that hypoxic NPC was less sensitive to RT fractionation scheme and required a large bolus dose or 1.4 times of the fractionated dose that was effective against normoxic cells in order to compensate for oxygen deficiency. This study is the first direct experimental evidence to predict optimal RT boost dose required to cause sufficient damage to recurrent hypoxic NPC tumor cells, which can be further used to develop dose-painting algorithms in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sasidharan Swarnalatha Lucky
- Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, Agency for Science Technology and Research (ASTAR), Singapore, Singapore
| | - Martin Law
- Proton Therapy Centre Pte Ltd., Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ming Hong Lui
- Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Jamie Mong
- Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, Agency for Science Technology and Research (ASTAR), Singapore, Singapore
| | - Junli Shi
- Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, Agency for Science Technology and Research (ASTAR), Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sidney Yu
- Proton Therapy Centre Pte Ltd., Singapore, Singapore
| | - Do Kun Yoon
- Proton Therapy Centre Pte Ltd., Singapore, Singapore
| | | | - Jiguang Wang
- Division of Life Science, Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Center for Systems Biology and Human Health and State Key Laboratory of Molecular Neuroscience, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Chwee Ming Lim
- Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, Agency for Science Technology and Research (ASTAR), Singapore, Singapore.,Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.,Department of Otolaryngology, National University Health System, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Min Han Tan
- Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, Agency for Science Technology and Research (ASTAR), Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Lee A, Chow JCH, Lee NY. Treatment Deescalation Strategies for Nasopharyngeal Cancer: A Review. JAMA Oncol 2020; 7:2774310. [PMID: 33355642 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Since the advent of modern radiotherapy techniques and incorporation of systemic chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal cancer, locoregional control has been excellent. However, the rate of treatment-related complications, many of which are irreversible, remains high. New approaches are being explored to determine whether the toxic effects of treatment can be relieved while maintaining disease control. This review presents the current state of deescalation strategies for nasopharyngeal cancer. OBSERVATIONS A review of the literature shows that deescalation approaches can be generally categorized into deescalating systemic therapy vs deescalating radiotherapy. This review discusses studies that have explored sparing chemotherapy in selected patients with stage II cancer as well as altering the chemotherapy scheduling, dosing, and agent from the current standard of care, cisplatin. Deescalating radiotherapy has involved decreasing the dose and the treatment volume. In many cases, these approaches are being guided by measuring Epstein-Barr virus DNA levels, which is a robust biomarker for screening, treatment monitoring, and surveillance. Ongoing work with various imaging modalities, such as fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and dynamic contrast-enhanced or diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging sequences, have shown promise as another biomarker to safely guide practitioners toward deescalation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Various strategies to deescalate treatment in nasopharyngeal cancer have been explored, and outcomes have remained excellent in most approaches. Patient selection remains key, and long-term outcomes and late complications are still to be determined. Continued investigation with prospective, multi-institutional studies are needed to better elucidate how treatment for nasopharyngeal carcinoma can best be individualized and deescalated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
- now with Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
| | - James C H Chow
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Li X, Lee A, Cohen MA, Sherman EJ, Lee NY. Past, present and future of proton therapy for head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol 2020; 110:104879. [PMID: 32650256 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2020.104879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Proton therapy has recently gained substantial momentum worldwide due to improved accessibility to the technology and sustained interests in its advantage of better tissue sparing compared to traditional photon radiation. Proton therapy in head and neck cancer has a unique advantage given the complex anatomy and proximity of targets to vital organs. As head and neck cancer patients are living longer due to epidemiological shifts and advances in treatment options, long-term toxicity from radiation treatment has become a major concern that may be better mitigated by proton therapy. With increased utilization of proton therapy, new proton centers breaking ground, and as excitement about the technology continue to increase, we aim to comprehensively review the evidence of proton therapy in major subsites within the head and neck, hoping to facilitate a greater understanding of the full risks and benefits of proton therapy for head and neck cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xingzhe Li
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Anna Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Marc A Cohen
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Eric J Sherman
- Department of Medical Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
| | - Nancy Y Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Shaikh F, Sodhi SK, Kale LM, Talib YA, Saleem HM. Implementation of meta-analysis approach, comparing conventional radiotherapy, and proton beam therapy treating head and neck cancer. J Cancer Res Ther 2020; 16:594-599. [PMID: 32719273 DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_111_19] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Radiation therapy is commonly used in the treatment of head and neck cancer in both the definitive and postoperative settings. Proton therapy, due to its intrinsic physical properties, has the ability to reduce the integral dose delivered to the patients while maintaining highly conformal target coverage. Materials and Methods .A literature search was performed on scientific databases, and Preferred Reporting Items for Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to compute results. Only original studies were selected. Selected studies were used to extract some proposed data for comparison, dosimetry, site, complications, and survival. Results Proton beam therapy technology can be used against the conventional radiotherapy and shows satisfactory results. Yet conventional therapy is not less advantageous considering the amount of work available for any cross interpretations. Conclusion Comparative preplanning could be beneficial considering multiple therapies for ruling out the best treatment outcomes that could be expected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Firdous Shaikh
- Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, CSMSS Dental College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
| | - Sonia Kaur Sodhi
- Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, CSMSS Dental College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
| | - Lata M Kale
- Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, CSMSS Dental College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
| | - Yusuf A Talib
- Department of Biotechnology, Dr. Rafiq Zakaria Campus, Maulana Azad College, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
| | - Huma Md Saleem
- Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, CSMSS Dental College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
[Proton therapy-a chance in the treatment of tumors of the head and neck and base of skull]. Radiologe 2020; 60:1058-1065. [PMID: 33025134 DOI: 10.1007/s00117-020-00762-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiotherapy (RT) is an integral part of the treatment of many tumors located in the vicinity of sensitive organs and structures, including tumors of the head and neck and base of skull in particular. Due to the risk of side effects associated with RT, the use of highly conformal RT techniques is favored. For many indications, proton therapy (PT) is therefore already part of the modern treatment standard. OBJECTIVE This article presents an overview of current indications for PT with emphasis on tumors in the head and neck region and the base of skull. Furthermore, a summary and discussion of relevant results and current developments are included. MATERIALS AND METHODS The work comprises an evaluation of relevant studies and an overview of current issues related to PT of tumors in the areas of the head, neck, and base of skull. RESULTS Overall, the studies on PT show promising results. In addition to dosimetric studies, clinical studies also point to advantages of PT, especially with regard to the reduction of side effects. DISCUSSION Currently, use of the model-based approach is being discussed. This is intended to identify those patients who benefit most from PT based on the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). PT for re-RT is also discussed.
Collapse
|
35
|
Timmermann B. [Proton therapy-a chance in the treatment of tumors of the head and neck and base of skull]. HNO 2020; 68:640-647. [PMID: 32780222 DOI: 10.1007/s00106-020-00915-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radiotherapy (RT) is an integral part of the treatment of many tumors located in the vicinity of sensitive organs and structures, including tumors of the head and neck and base of skull in particular. Due to the risk of side effects associated with RT, the use of highly conformal RT techniques is favored. For many indications, proton therapy (PT) is therefore already part of the modern treatment standard. OBJECTIVE This article presents an overview of current indications for PT with emphasis on tumors in the head and neck region and the base of skull. Furthermore, a summary and discussion of relevant results and current developments are included. MATERIALS AND METHODS The work comprises an evaluation of relevant studies and an overview of current issues related to PT of tumors in the areas of the head, neck, and base of skull. RESULTS Overall, the studies on PT show promising results. In addition to dosimetric studies, clinical studies also point to advantages of PT, especially with regard to the reduction of side effects. DISCUSSION Currently, use of the model-based approach is being discussed. This is intended to identify those patients who benefit most from PT based on the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). PT for re-RT is also discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beate Timmermann
- Klinik für Partikeltherapie, Westdeutsches Protonentherapiezentrum Essen, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Deutschland.
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Evans JD, Harper RH, Petersen M, Harmsen WS, Anand A, Hunzeker A, Deiter NC, Schultz H, Jethwa KR, Lester SC, Routman DM, Ma DJ, Garces YI, Neben-Wittich MA, Laack NN, Beltran CJ, Patel SH, McGee LA, Rwigema JCM, Mundy DW, Foote RL. The Importance of Verification CT-QA Scans in Patients Treated with IMPT for Head and Neck Cancers. Int J Part Ther 2020; 7:41-53. [PMID: 33094135 PMCID: PMC7574830 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-20-00006.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To understand how verification computed tomography-quality assurance (CT-QA) scans influenced clinical decision-making to replan patients with head and neck cancer and identify predictors for replanning to guide intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) clinical practice. Patients and Methods We performed a quality-improvement study by prospectively collecting data on 160 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer treated using spot-scanning IMPT who underwent weekly verification CT-QA scans. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine the cumulative probability of a replan by week. Predictors for replanning were determined with univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) Cox model hazard ratios (HRs). Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios (ORs). P < .05 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the 160 patients, 79 (49.4%) had verification CT-QA scans, which prompted a replan. The cumulative probability of a replan by week 1 was 13.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.82-18.9), week 2, 25.0% (95% CI, 18.0-31.4), week 3, 33.1% (95% CI, 25.4-40.0), week 4, 45.6% (95% CI, 37.3-52.8), and week 5 and 6, 49.4% (95% CI, 41.0-56.6). Predictors for replanning were sinonasal disease site (UVA: HR, 1.82, P = .04; MVA: HR, 3.64, P = .03), advanced stage disease (UVA: HR, 4.68, P < .01; MVA: HR, 3.10, P < .05), dose > 60 Gy equivalent (GyE; relative biologic effectiveness, 1.1) (UVA: HR, 1.99, P < .01; MVA: HR, 2.20, P < .01), primary disease (UVA: HR, 2.00 versus recurrent, P = .01; MVA: HR, 2.46, P = .01), concurrent chemotherapy (UVA: HR, 2.05, P < .01; MVA: not statistically significant [NS]), definitive intent treatment (UVA: HR, 1.70 versus adjuvant, P < .02; MVA: NS), bilateral neck treatment (UVA: HR, 2.07, P = .03; MVA: NS), and greater number of beams (5 beam UVA: HR, 5.55 versus 1 or 2 beams, P < .02; MVA: NS). Maximal weight change from baseline was associated with higher odds of a replan (≥3 kg: OR, 1.97, P = .04; ≥ 5 kg: OR, 2.13, P = .02). Conclusions Weekly verification CT-QA scans frequently influenced clinical decision-making to replan. Additional studies that evaluate the practice of monitoring IMPT-treated patients with weekly CT-QA scans and whether that improves clinical outcomes are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaden D Evans
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.,Department of Radiation Oncology and Precision Genomics, Intermountain Healthcare, Ogden, UT, USA
| | - Riley H Harper
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Molly Petersen
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - William S Harmsen
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Aman Anand
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Ashley Hunzeker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Noelle C Deiter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Heather Schultz
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Krishan R Jethwa
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.,Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale Comprehensive Cancer Center, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Scott C Lester
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - David M Routman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Daniel J Ma
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Yolanda I Garces
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | - Nadia N Laack
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Chris J Beltran
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Samir H Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Lisa A McGee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | | | - Daniel W Mundy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Robert L Foote
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Nenoff L, Matter M, Jarhall AG, Winterhalter C, Gorgisyan J, Josipovic M, Persson GF, Munck af Rosenschold P, Weber DC, Lomax AJ, Albertini F. Daily Adaptive Proton Therapy: Is it Appropriate to Use Analytical Dose Calculations for Plan Adaption? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 107:747-755. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.03.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2019] [Revised: 02/26/2020] [Accepted: 03/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
|
38
|
McDowell L, Corry J, Ringash J, Rischin D. Quality of Life, Toxicity and Unmet Needs in Nasopharyngeal Cancer Survivors. Front Oncol 2020; 10:930. [PMID: 32596155 PMCID: PMC7303258 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00930] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2020] [Accepted: 05/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Concerted research efforts over the last three decades have resulted in improved survival and outcomes for patients diagnosed with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). The evolution of radiotherapy techniques has facilitated improved dose delivery to target volumes while reducing dose to the surrounding normal tissue, improving both disease control and quality of life (QoL). In parallel, clinical trials focusing on determining the optimal systemic therapy to use in conjunction with radiotherapy have been largely successful, resulting in improved locoregional, and distant control. As a consequence, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) prior to definitive chemoradiotherapy has recently emerged as the preferred standard for patients with locally advanced NPC. Two of the major challenges in interpreting toxicity and QoL data from the published literature have been the reliance on: (1) clinician rather than patient reported outcomes; and (2) reporting statistical rather than clinical meaningful differences in measures. Despite the lower rates of toxicity that have been achieved with highly conformal radiotherapy techniques, survivors remain at moderate risk of persistent and long-lasting treatment effects, and the development of late radiation toxicities such as hearing loss, cranial neuropathies and cognitive impairment many years after successful treatment can herald a significant decline in QoL. Future approaches to reduce long-term toxicity will rely on: (1) identifying individual patients most likely to benefit from NACT; (2) development of response-adapted radiation strategies following NACT; and (3) anticipated further dose reductions to organs at risk with proton and particle therapy. With increasing numbers of survivors, many in the prime of their adult life, research to identify, and strategies to address the unmet needs of NPC survivors are required. This contemporary review will summarize our current knowledge of long-term toxicity, QoL and unmet needs of this survivorship group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lachlan McDowell
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - June Corry
- GenesisCare Radiation Oncology, Division Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Medicine St Vincent's, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Jolie Ringash
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre/University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Danny Rischin
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Alterio D, D’Ippolito E, Vischioni B, Fossati P, Gandini S, Bonora M, Ronchi S, Vitolo V, Mastella E, Magro G, Franco P, Ricardi U, Krengli M, Ivaldi G, Ferrari A, Fanetti G, Comi S, Tagliabue M, Verri E, Ricotti R, Ciardo D, Jereczek-Fossa BA, Valvo F, Orecchia R. Mixed-beam approach in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: IMRT followed by proton therapy boost versus IMRT-only. Evaluation of toxicity and efficacy. Acta Oncol 2020; 59:541-548. [PMID: 32090645 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2020.1730001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
Objective: To compare radiation-induced toxicity and dosimetry parameters in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal cancer (LANPC) treated with a mixed-beam (MB) approach (IMRT followed by proton therapy boost) with an historic cohort of patients treated with a full course of IMRT-only.Material and methods: Twenty-seven patients with LANPC treated with the MB approach were compared to a similar cohort of 17 patients treated with IMRT-only. The MB approach consisted in a first phase of IMRT up to 54-60 Gy followed by a second phase delivered with a proton therapy boost up to 70-74 Gy (RBE). The total dose for patients treated with IMRT-only was 69.96 Gy. Induction chemotherapy was administrated to 59 and 88% and concurrent chemoradiotherapy to 88 and 100% of the MB and IMRT-only patients, respectively. The worst toxicity occurring during the entire course of treatment (acute toxicity) and early-late toxicity were registered according to the Common Terminology Criteria Adverse Events V4.03.Results: The two cohorts were comparable. Patients treated with MB received a significantly higher median total dose to target volumes (p = .02). Acute grade 3 mucositis was found in 11 and 76% (p = .0002) of patients treated with MB and IMRT-only approach, respectively, while grade 2 xerostomia was found in 7 and 35% (p = .02) of patients treated with MB and IMRT-only, respectively. There was no statistical difference in late toxicity. Local progression-free survival (PFS) and progression-free survival curves were similar between the two cohorts of patients (p = .17 and p = .40, respectively). Local control rate was 96% and 81% for patients treated with MB approach and IMRT-only, respectively.Conclusions: Sequential MB approach for LANPC patients provides a significantly lower acute toxicity profile compared to full course of IMRT. There were no differences in early-late morbidities and disease-related outcomes (censored at two-years) but a longer follow-up is required to achieve conclusive results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Emma D’Ippolito
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Barbara Vischioni
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Piero Fossati
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Sara Gandini
- Department of Experimental Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Bonora
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Sara Ronchi
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Viviana Vitolo
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Edoardo Mastella
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Magro
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | | | - Umberto Ricardi
- Department of Oncology, Radiation Oncology, University of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Marco Krengli
- Department of Translational Medicine, Novara, University of Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli, Italy
| | - Giovanni Ivaldi
- Unit of Radiation Oncology, ICS Maugeri, IRCSS, Pavia, Italy
| | - Annamaria Ferrari
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppi Fanetti
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Comi
- Unit of Medical Physics, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Tagliabue
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Otorhinolaryngology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Elena Verri
- Department of Medical Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Rosalinda Ricotti
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Delia Ciardo
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiation Oncology, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Valvo
- Radiation Oncology Clinical Department, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- Scientific Direction, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
- Scientific Direction, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy, Pavia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Kim J, Park YK, Sharp G, Busse P, Winey B. Beam angle optimization using angular dependency of range variation assessed via water equivalent path length (WEPL) calculation for head and neck proton therapy. Phys Med 2019; 69:19-27. [PMID: 31812726 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.11.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2019] [Revised: 11/07/2019] [Accepted: 11/20/2019] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To investigate angular sensitivity of proton range variation due to anatomic change in patients and patient setup error via water equivalent path length (WEPL) calculations. METHODS Proton range was estimated by calculating WEPL to the distal edge of target volume using planning CT (pCT) and weekly scatter-corrected cone-beam CT (CBCT) images of 11 head and neck patients. Range variation was estimated as the difference between the distal WEPLs calculated on pCT and scatter-corrected CBCT (cCBCT). This WEPL analysis was performed every five degrees ipsilaterally to the target. Statistics of the distal WEPL difference were calculated over the distal area to compare between different beam angles. Physician-defined contours were used for the WEPL calculation on both pCT and cCBCT, not considering local deformation of target volume. It was also tested if a couch kick (10°) can mitigate the range variation due to anatomic change and patient setup error. RESULTS For most of the patients considered, median, 75% quantile, and 95% quantile of the distal WEPL difference were largest for posterior oblique angles, indicating a higher chance of overdosing normal tissues at distal edge with these angles. Using a couch kick resulted in decrease in the WEPL difference for some posterior oblique angles. CONCLUSIONS It was demonstrated that the WEPL change has angular dependency for the cohort of head and neck cancer patients. Selecting beam configuration robust to anatomic change in patient and patient setup error may improve the treatment outcome of head and neck proton therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jihun Kim
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Yang-Kyun Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, USA
| | - Gregory Sharp
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Paul Busse
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA
| | - Brian Winey
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Alterio D, Marvaso G, Ferrari A, Volpe S, Orecchia R, Jereczek-Fossa BA. Modern radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Semin Oncol 2019; 46:233-245. [PMID: 31378376 DOI: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2019.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 170] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2019] [Accepted: 07/15/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) plays a key role in curative-intent treatments for head and neck cancers. Its use is indicated as a sole therapy in early stage tumors or in combination with surgery or concurrent chemotherapy in advanced stages. Recent technologic advances have resulted in both improved oncologic results and expansion of the indications for RT in clinical practice. Despite this, RT administered to the head and neck region is still burdened by a high rate of acute and late side effects. Moreover, about 50% of patients with high-risk disease experience loco-regional recurrence within 3 years of follow-up. Therefore, in recent decades, efforts have been dedicated to optimize the cost/benefit ratio of RT in this subset of patients. The aim of the present review was to highlight modern concepts of RT for head and neck cancers considering both the technological advances that have been achieved and recent knowledge that has informed the biological interaction between radiation and both tumor and healthy tissues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Alterio
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Giulia Marvaso
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Annamaria Ferrari
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Volpe
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa
- Division of Radiotherapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Park SG, Ahn YC, Oh D, Noh JM, Ju SG, Kwon D, Jo K, Chung K, Chung E, Lee W, Park S. Early clinical outcomes of helical tomotherapy/intensity-modulated proton therapy combination in nasopharynx cancer. Cancer Sci 2019; 110:2867-2874. [PMID: 31237050 PMCID: PMC6726680 DOI: 10.1111/cas.14115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2019] [Revised: 06/17/2019] [Accepted: 06/22/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of combining helical tomotherapy (HT) and intensity‐modulated proton therapy (IMPT) in treating patients with nasopharynx cancer (NPC). From January 2016 to March 2018, 98 patients received definitive radiation therapy (RT) with concurrent chemotherapy (CCRT). Using simultaneous integrated boost and adaptive re‐plan, 3 different dose levels were prescribed: 68.4 Gy in 30 parts to gross tumor volume (GTV), 60 Gy in 30 parts to high‐risk clinical target volume (CTV), and 36 Gy in 18 parts to low‐risk CTV. In all patients, the initial 18 fractions were delivered by HT, and, after rival plan evaluation on the adaptive re‐plan, the later 12 fractions were delivered either by HT in 63 patients (64.3%, HT only) or IMPT in 35 patients (35.7%, HT/IMPT combination), respectively. Propensity‐score matching was conducted to control differences in patient characteristics. In all patients, grade ≥ 2 mucositis (69.8% vs 45.7%, P = .019) and grade ≥ 2 analgesic usage (54% vs 37.1%, P = .110) were found to be less frequent in HT/IMPT group. In matched patients, grade ≥ 2 mucositis were still less frequent numerically in HT/IMPT group (62.9% vs 45.7%, P = .150). In univariate analysis, stage IV disease and larger GTV volume were associated with increased grade ≥ 2 mucositis. There was no significant factor in multivariate analysis. With the median 14 month follow‐up, locoregional and distant failures occurred in 9 (9.2%) and 12 (12.2%) patients without difference by RT modality. In conclusion, comparable early oncologic outcomes with more favorable acute toxicity profiles were achievable by HT/IMPT combination in treating NPC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seung Gyu Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Department of Radiation Oncology, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea
| | - Yong Chan Ahn
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dongryul Oh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jae Myoung Noh
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sang Gyu Ju
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dongyeol Kwon
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kwanghyun Jo
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kwangzoo Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Eunah Chung
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Woojin Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seyjoon Park
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Beddok A, Feuvret L, Noël G, Bolle S, Deberne M, Mammar H, Chaze A, Le Tourneau C, Goudjil F, Zefkili S, Herman P, Dendale R, Calugaru V. Complément de dose de protons pour les cancers du nasopharynx localement évolués : une expérience de l’institut Curie. Cancer Radiother 2019; 23:304-311. [DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2019.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2018] [Revised: 12/21/2018] [Accepted: 01/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
|
44
|
Sasidharan BK, Aljabab S, Saini J, Wong T, Laramore G, Liao J, Parvathaneni U, Bowen SR. Clinical Monte Carlo versus Pencil Beam Treatment Planning in Nasopharyngeal Patients Receiving IMPT. Int J Part Ther 2019; 5:32-40. [PMID: 31773039 PMCID: PMC6871622 DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-18-00039.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2018] [Accepted: 03/07/2019] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Pencil beam (PB) analytical algorithms have been the standard of care for proton therapy dose calculations. The introduction of Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms may provide more robust and accurate planning and can improve therapeutic benefit. We conducted a dosimetric analysis to quantify the differences between MC and PB algorithms in the clinical setting of dose-painted nasopharyngeal cancer intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Plans of 14 patients treated with PB analytical algorithm optimized and calculated (PBPB) were retrospectively analyzed. The PBPB plans were recalculated using MC to generate PBMC plans and, finally, reoptimized and recalculated with MC to generate MCMC plans. The plans were compared across several dosimetric endpoints and correlated with documented toxicity. Robustness of the planning scenarios (PBPB, PBMC, MCMC) in the presence of setup and range uncertainties was compared. RESULTS A median decrease of up to 5 Gy (P < .05) was observed in coverage of planning target volume high-risk, intermediate-risk, and low-risk volumes when PB plans were recalculated using the MC algorithm. This loss in coverage was regained by reoptimizing with MC, albeit with a slightly higher dose to normal tissues but within the standard tolerance limits. The robustness of both PB and MC plans remained similar in the presence of setup and range uncertainties. The MC-calculated mean dose to the oral avoidance structure, along with changes in global maximum dose between PB and MC dosimetry, may be associated with acute toxicity-related events. CONCLUSION Retrospective analyses of plan dosimetry quantified a loss of coverage with PB that could be recovered under MC optimization. MC optimization should be performed for the complex dosimetry in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma before plan acceptance and should also be used in correlative studies of proton dosimetry with clinical endpoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Saif Aljabab
- Radiation Oncology, University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jatinder Saini
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Tony Wong
- Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - George Laramore
- Radiation Oncology, University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jay Liao
- Radiation Oncology, University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Upendra Parvathaneni
- Radiation Oncology, University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Proton Therapy Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Stephen R. Bowen
- Radiation Oncology and Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Beddok A, Feuvret L, Noel G, Bolle S, Deberne M, Mammar H, Chaze A, Le Tourneau C, Goudjil F, Zefkili S, Herman P, Dendale R, Calugaru V. Efficacy and toxicity of proton with photon radiation for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Acta Oncol 2019; 58:472-474. [PMID: 30669927 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2018.1543948] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Arnaud Beddok
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Proton Therapy Center, Curie Institute, Orsay, France
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Curie Institute, Paris, France
| | - Loïc Feuvret
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Proton Therapy Center, Curie Institute, Orsay, France
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Georges Noel
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Paul Strauss Center, Strasbourg, France
| | - Stéphanie Bolle
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France
| | - Mélanie Deberne
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Lyon Sud Hospital, Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Hamid Mammar
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Proton Therapy Center, Curie Institute, Orsay, France
| | | | | | - Farid Goudjil
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Proton Therapy Center, Curie Institute, Orsay, France
| | - Sophia Zefkili
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Curie Institute, Paris, France
| | - Philippe Herman
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Lariboisière Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Rémi Dendale
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Proton Therapy Center, Curie Institute, Orsay, France
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Curie Institute, Paris, France
| | - Valentin Calugaru
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Proton Therapy Center, Curie Institute, Orsay, France
- Department of Radiation Therapy, Curie Institute, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Perineural Invasion and Perineural Tumor Spread in Head and Neck Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019; 103:1109-1124. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.12.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2018] [Revised: 11/18/2018] [Accepted: 12/01/2018] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
|
47
|
Hu M, Jiang L, Cui X, Zhang J, Yu J. Proton beam therapy for cancer in the era of precision medicine. J Hematol Oncol 2018; 11:136. [PMID: 30541578 PMCID: PMC6290507 DOI: 10.1186/s13045-018-0683-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2018] [Accepted: 11/28/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Precision radiotherapy, which accurately delivers the dose on a tumor and confers little or no irradiation to the surrounding normal tissue and organs, results in maximum tumor control and decreases the toxicity to the utmost extent. Proton beam therapy (PBT) provides superior dose distributions and has a dosimetric advantage over photon beam therapy. Initially, the clinical practice and study of proton beam therapy focused on ocular tumor, skull base, paraspinal tumors (chondrosarcoma and chordoma), and unresectable sarcomas, which responded poorly when treated with photon radiotherapy. Then, it is widely regarded as an ideal mode for reirradiation and pediatrics due to reducing unwanted side effects by lessening the dose to normal tissue. During the past decade, the application of PBT has been rapidly increasing worldwide and gradually expanding for the treatment of various malignancies. However, to date, the role of PBT in clinical settings is still controversial, and there are considerable challenges in its application. We systematically review the latest advances of PBT and the challenges for patient treatment in the era of precision medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Man Hu
- Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, China
| | - Liyang Jiang
- Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China
- Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, China
| | - Xiangli Cui
- Province Key Laboratory of Medical Physics and Technology, Center of Medical Physics and Technology, Hefei Institutes of Physical Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei, Anhui, China
| | - Jianguang Zhang
- Departments of Radiation Oncology, Zibo Wanjie Cancer Hospital, Zibo, Shandong, China
| | - Jinming Yu
- Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, China.
- Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China.
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Shandong Province Key Laboratory of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, China.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) - The future of IMRT for head and neck cancer. Oral Oncol 2018; 88:66-74. [PMID: 30616799 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.11.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 93] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/01/2018] [Revised: 11/11/2018] [Accepted: 11/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Radiation therapy plays an integral role in the management of head and neck cancers (HNCs). While most HNC patients have historically been treated with photon-based radiation techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), there is a growing awareness of the potential clinical benefits of proton therapy over IMRT in the definitive, postoperative and reirradiation settings given the unique physical properties of protons. Intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT), also known as "pencil beam proton therapy," is a sophisticated mode of proton therapy that is analogous to IMRT and an active area of investigation in cancer care. Multifield optimization IMPT allows for high quality plans that can target superficially located HNCs as well as large neck volumes while significantly reducing integral doses. Several dosimetric studies have demonstrated the superiority of IMPT over IMRT to improve dose sparing of nearby organs such as the larynx, salivary glands, and esophagus. Evidence of the clinical translation of these dosimetric advantages has been demonstrated with documented toxicity reductions (such as decreased feeding tube dependency) after IMPT for patients with HNCs. While there are relative challenges to IMPT planning that exist today such as particle range uncertainties and high sensitivity to anatomical changes, ongoing investigations in image-guidance techniques and robust optimization methods are promising. A systematic approach towards utilizing IMPT and additional prospective studies are necessary in order to more accurately estimate the clinical benefit of IMPT over IMRT and passive proton therapy on a case-by-case basis for patients with sub-site specific HNCs.
Collapse
|
49
|
Delaney AR, Dong L, Mascia A, Zou W, Zhang Y, Yin L, Rosas S, Hrbacek J, Lomax AJ, Slotman BJ, Dahele M, Verbakel WFAR. Automated Knowledge-Based Intensity-Modulated Proton Planning: An International Multicenter Benchmarking Study. Cancers (Basel) 2018; 10:E420. [PMID: 30400263 PMCID: PMC6266684 DOI: 10.3390/cancers10110420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2018] [Revised: 10/12/2018] [Accepted: 10/29/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Radiotherapy treatment planning is increasingly automated and knowledge-based planning has been shown to match and sometimes improve upon manual clinical plans, with increased consistency and efficiency. In this study, we benchmarked a novel prototype knowledge-based intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) planning solution, against three international proton centers. Methods: A model library was constructed, comprising 50 head and neck cancer (HNC) manual IMPT plans from a single center. Three external-centers each provided seven manual benchmark IMPT plans. A knowledge-based plan (KBP) using a standard beam arrangement for each patient was compared with the benchmark plan on the basis of planning target volume (PTV) coverage and homogeneity and mean organ-at-risk (OAR) dose. Results: PTV coverage and homogeneity of KBPs and benchmark plans were comparable. KBP mean OAR dose was lower in 32/54, 45/48 and 38/53 OARs from center-A, -B and -C, with 23/32, 38/45 and 23/38 being >2 Gy improvements, respectively. In isolated cases the standard beam arrangement or an OAR not being included in the model or being contoured differently, led to higher individual KBP OAR doses. Generating a KBP typically required <10 min. Conclusions: A knowledge-based IMPT planning solution using a single-center model could efficiently generate plans of comparable quality to manual HNC IMPT plans from centers with differing planning aims. Occasional higher KBP OAR doses highlight the need for beam angle optimization and manual review of KBPs. The solution furthermore demonstrated the potential for robust optimization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander R Delaney
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Lei Dong
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
| | - Anthony Mascia
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman Street, Cincinnati, OH 45219, USA.
| | - Wei Zou
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
| | - Yongbin Zhang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman Street, Cincinnati, OH 45219, USA.
| | - Lingshu Yin
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
| | - Sara Rosas
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Radiotherapy, 5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
| | - Jan Hrbacek
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Radiotherapy, 5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
| | - Antony J Lomax
- Paul Scherrer Institute, Center for Proton Radiotherapy, 5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
| | - Ben J Slotman
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Max Dahele
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Wilko F A R Verbakel
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Nouveautés dans la prise en charge des carcinomes nasopharyngés. Cancer Radiother 2018; 22:492-495. [DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2018.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2018] [Accepted: 06/26/2018] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
|