Impact of robust treatment planning on single- and multi-field optimized plans for proton beam therapy of unilateral head and neck target volumes

• Published in: Radiation oncology (London, England) Vol. 12; no. 1; pp. 190 - 10
• Main Authors: Cubillos-Mesías, Macarena, Baumann, Michael, Troost, Esther G C, Lohaus, Fabian, Löck, Steffen, Richter, Christian, Stützer, Kristin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 28.11.2017; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Adaptive radiation therapy; Algorithms; Analysis; CAT scans; Female; Head and neck cancer; Head and Neck Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Humans; Male; Medical research; Multi-field optimization; Organs at Risk - radiation effects; Prognosis; Proton therapy; Proton Therapy - methods; Proton Therapy - standards; Radiation (Physics); Radiotherapy; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - standards; Robust optimization; Single-field optimization; Multi-field optimization; Head and neck cancer; Robust optimization; Proton therapy; Single-field optimization; Adaptive radiation therapy
• ISSN: 1748-717X; 1748-717X
• DOI: 10.1186/s13014-017-0931-8

Proton beam therapy is promising for the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC), but it is sensitive to uncertainties in patient positioning and particle range. Studies have shown that the planning target volume (PTV) concept may not be sufficient to ensure robustness of the target coverage. A few planning studies have considered irradiation of unilateral HNC targets with protons, but they have only taken into account the dose on the nominal plan, without considering anatomy changes occurring during the treatment course. Four pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy plans were calculated for 8 HNC patients with unilateral target volumes: single-field (SFO) and multi-field optimized (MFO) plans, either using the PTV concept or clinical target volume (CTV)-based robust optimization. The dose was recalculated on computed tomography (CT) scans acquired during the treatment course. Doses to target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) were compared for the nominal plans, cumulative doses considering anatomical changes, and additional setup and range errors in each fraction. If required, the treatment plan was adapted, and the dose was compared with the non-adapted plan. All nominal plans fulfilled the clinical specifications for target coverage, but significantly higher doses on the ipsilateral parotid gland were found for both SFO approaches. MFO PTV-based plans had the lowest robustness against range and setup errors. During the treatment course, the influence of the anatomical variation on the dose has shown to be patient specific, mostly independent of the chosen planning approach. Nine plans in four patients required adaptation, which led to a significant improvement of the target coverage and a slight reduction in the OAR dose in comparison to the cumulative dose without adaptation. The use of robust MFO optimization is recommended for ensuring plan robustness and reduced doses in the ipsilateral parotid gland. Anatomical changes occurring during the treatment course might degrade the target coverage and increase the dose in the OARs, independent of the chosen planning approach. For some patients, a plan adaptation may be required.