Robustness of daily dose for each beam angle and accumulated dose for inter-fractional anatomical changes in passive carbon-ion radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer: Bone matching versus tumor matching.
Accumulated dose distribution
Carbon-ion radiotherapy
Inter-fractional anatomical change, robustness of beam angles
Pancreatic cancer
Journal
Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
ISSN: 1879-0887
Titre abrégé: Radiother Oncol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8407192
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
received:
18
10
2020
revised:
09
12
2020
accepted:
09
01
2021
pubmed:
31
1
2021
medline:
24
4
2021
entrez:
30
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to assess the robustness of accumulated dose distributions for inter-fractional changes in passive carbon-ion radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer. Ninety-five daily CT image sets acquired after the treatment of eight patients with pancreatic cancer were used in this prospective study. Dose distributions with treatment beam fields were recalculated for bone matching (BM) and tumor matching (TM) positions on all daily CT images, the accumulated doses being calculated using deformable image registration methods. The prescribed dose was 55.2 Gy (relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) in 12 fractions. Dose volume parameters of V95 (%) for CTV and GTV, and D2cc (Gy(RBE)) for the stomach and duodenum were evaluated. The medians (range) of CTV V95 (%) were 91.9 (86.1-100.0), 80.5 (56.1-90.6), and 86.4 (72.5-96.5) for the Plan, accumulated with BM and TM, respectively; GTV values (%) were 98.0 (85.7-100.0), 93.3 (65.7-99.9), and 96.2 (84.8-100.0), respectively. There were significant differences between all combinations apart from the Plan and TM for both targets. The values of stomach D2cc (Gy(RBE)) were 36.0 (16.9-43.4), 36.7 (17.9-45.0), and 35.2 (16.8-43.5), respectively; duodenum values (Gy(RBE)) were 25.2 (21.3-40.3), 30.1 (23.3-48.6), and 28.3 (20.4-50.6), respectively. There was a significant difference between the Plan and BM for duodenum only. TM is recommended over BM because it can achieve higher target dose coverage than BM. Nevertheless, it is not enough in some cases. Further technical improvements are necessary to improve the target dose coverage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33515667
pii: S0167-8140(21)00011-6
doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.01.011
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Carbon
7440-44-0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
85-92Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.