TY - JOUR
T1 - Multiple-CT optimization of intensity-modulated proton therapy – Is it possible to eliminate adaptive planning?
AU - Wang, Xianliang
AU - Li, Heng
AU - Zhu, Xiaorong Ronald
AU - Hou, Qing
AU - Liao, Li
AU - Jiang, Bo
AU - Li, Yupeng
AU - Wang, Pei
AU - Lang, Jinyi
AU - Zhang, Xiaodong
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2018/7
Y1 - 2018/7
N2 - Background and purpose: We hypothesized that a plan's robustness to anatomical changes can be improved by optimizing with multiple CT scans of a patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plan could be developed to meet dose criteria on both planning and adaptive CT plans. Material and methods: Eight lung cancer patients who underwent adaptive IMPT were retrospectively selected. Each patient had two CTs: a primary planning CT (PCT) and an adaptive planning CT (ACT), and IMPT plans associated with the scans. PCT and ACT were then used in combination to optimize one plan (MCT plan). The doses to the target and organs at risk from the PCT plan, ACT plan, P-ACT plan (PCT plan calculated on ACT data), and MCT plans calculated on both CTs were compared. Results: The MCT plan maintained the D95% on both CTs (mean, 65.99 Gy on PCT and 66.02 Gy on ACT). Target dose coverage on ACT was significantly better with the MCT plan than with the P-ACT plan (p = 0.01). MCT plans had slightly higher lung V20 (0.6%, p = 0.02) than did PCT plans. The various plans showed no statistically significant difference in heart and spinal cord dose. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that an IMPT plan can meet the dose criteria on both PCT and ACT, and that MCT optimization can improve the plan's robustness to anatomical change.
AB - Background and purpose: We hypothesized that a plan's robustness to anatomical changes can be improved by optimizing with multiple CT scans of a patient. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plan could be developed to meet dose criteria on both planning and adaptive CT plans. Material and methods: Eight lung cancer patients who underwent adaptive IMPT were retrospectively selected. Each patient had two CTs: a primary planning CT (PCT) and an adaptive planning CT (ACT), and IMPT plans associated with the scans. PCT and ACT were then used in combination to optimize one plan (MCT plan). The doses to the target and organs at risk from the PCT plan, ACT plan, P-ACT plan (PCT plan calculated on ACT data), and MCT plans calculated on both CTs were compared. Results: The MCT plan maintained the D95% on both CTs (mean, 65.99 Gy on PCT and 66.02 Gy on ACT). Target dose coverage on ACT was significantly better with the MCT plan than with the P-ACT plan (p = 0.01). MCT plans had slightly higher lung V20 (0.6%, p = 0.02) than did PCT plans. The various plans showed no statistically significant difference in heart and spinal cord dose. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that an IMPT plan can meet the dose criteria on both PCT and ACT, and that MCT optimization can improve the plan's robustness to anatomical change.
KW - Adaptive planning
KW - Intensity-modulated proton therapy
KW - Multiple CT optimization
KW - Robust optimization
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031703819&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85031703819&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.09.032
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.09.032
M3 - Article
C2 - 29054378
AN - SCOPUS:85031703819
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 128
SP - 167
EP - 173
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
IS - 1
ER -