International Journal of Particle Therapy (Mar 2021)

CBCT-Based Adaptive Assessment Workflow for Intensity Modulated Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer

  • De Ornelas Mariluz, PhD,
  • Yihang Xu, MS,
  • Kyle Padgett, PhD,
  • Ryder M. Schmidt, MS,
  • Michael Butkus, PhD,
  • Tejan Diwanji, MD,
  • Gus Luciani,
  • Jason Lambiase,
  • Stuart Samuels, MD, PhD,
  • Michael Samuels, MD,
  • Nesrin Dogan, PhD

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14338/IJPT-D-20-00056.1
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 7, no. 4
pp. 29 – 41

Abstract

Read online

Purpose: Anatomical changes and patient setup uncertainties during intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) of head and neck (HN) cancers demand frequent evaluation of delivered dose. This work investigated a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and deformable image registration based therapy workflow to demonstrate the feasibility of proton dose calculation on synthetic computed tomography (sCT) for adaptive IMPT treatment of HN cancer. Materials and Methods: Twenty-one patients with HN cancer were enrolled in this study, a retrospective institutional review board protocol. They had previously been treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy and had daily iterative CBCT. For each patient, robust optimization (RO) IMPT plans were generated using ±3 mm patient setup and ±3% proton range uncertainties. The sCTs were created and the weekly delivered dose was recalculated using an adaptive dose accumulation workflow in which the planning computed tomography (CT) was deformably registered to CBCTs and Hounsfield units transferred from the planning CT. Accumulated doses from ±3 mm/ ±3% RO-IMPT plans were evaluated using clinical dose-volume constraints for targets (clinical target volume, or CTV) and organs at risk. Results: Evaluation of weekly recalculated dose on sCTs showed that most of the patient plans maintained target dose coverage. The primary CTV remained covered by the V95 ≥ 95% (95% of the volume receiving more than 95% of the prescription dose) worst-case scenario for 84.5% of the weekly fractions. The oral cavity accumulated mean dose remained lower than the worst-case scenario for all patients. Parotid accumulated mean dose remained within the uncertainty bands for 18 of the 21 patients, and all were kept lower than RO-IMPT worst-case scenario for 88.7% and 84.5% for left and right parotids, respectively. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that RO-IMPT plans account for most setup and anatomical uncertainties, except for large weight-loss changes that need to be tracked throughout the treatment course. We showed that sCTs could be a powerful decision tool for adaptation of these cases in order to reduce workload when using repeat CTs.

Keywords